From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Wed Jan 1 00:29:00 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 00:29:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IMPORTANT] Forgery detection Message-ID: <199701010829.BAA10517@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> There's a rumor that Tim C[reep] Maypole sells his dead relatives as fertilizer as they constitute the best shit in California. _ {~} ( V-) Tim C[reep] Maypole '|Y|' _|||_ From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 1 00:31:35 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 00:31:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Timmy's Lost It: [Was Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701010832.BAA12165@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 12/31/96 at 10:54 AM, "Timothy C. May" said: ::As to our "reasonableness," I make little effort to hide the fact that ::I support strong cryptography because it means that the plague of ::democracy and "mob rule" can be turned back...I view crypto anarchy as ::an elitist development, one which the ubermensch will appreciate, but ::the masses will recoil in horror from. ::Fuck the herd. yes, and that is why there was a Robespierre and a Madam Defarge. do you wish to be the first to be strapped to the board? your elitism is crap; if you know it and persist, you are asking to lose the "war" with the Feds; if you don't know it, you're just ignorant. you are doing nothing except feeding your own ego in the hope of winning one battle and establishing that self-same elitism. either your "elite" stoop to the level of the 'herd' you so glibbly label 'Fuck the herd,' and enlist their support of *their* rights to free speech, or you might as well invite Bubba into your living room after the advance party has taken your much touted hardware and your clips of hollow points "for public safety." and what do you say to the most corrupt and despicable President in our history? "Fuck the herd?!" You and Bubba can hold hands, dancing around the room, jumping up at down, screaming "Fuck the herd!" "Fuck the herd!" welcome to the world of bubba and hillary. these statements do nothing but confirm you are riding a self-styled ego trip to be above the "herd" and flaunt your rights to a lethal weapon. I didn't fight in foreign wars for this crap from an 'American.' take a little yellow pill. a mother's little helper. then check in again for a little help; you've lost it. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMsogIL04kQrCC2kFAQFZswQAm3H/12VUQ4q2S6E5nmWvDwZ9LTdvJf7/ y1/0LJEgNMV9CB37Jc0e8pKrg/ax983cjbSUi1j9rLqqPgS7YolfB1rcHaCQeuXB yVznc4H7DF4JXIoJGNISF5po8ucXYcZ3l3PtetAzzoJxiszk8G3RJZVSYLOXWpbP 9AJ+Dq4YKZw= =dTHR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jwest at eskimo.com Wed Jan 1 00:53:24 1997 From: jwest at eskimo.com (John H West) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 00:53:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Bulk Mailing Software In-Reply-To: <199701010213.VAA00550@alberta.sallynet.com> Message-ID: <32CA2608.5326@eskimo.com> Jorge Hernandez wrote: > > Mailloop is bulk mailing software that will revolutionize how > people advertise on the internet. > > See what all the fuss is about: > > http://www.mailloop.com So, by my subscribing to cypherpunks, I can forsee what my e-mailbox will contain in the future ... "Mailpoop" john -- /************************************************/ /***** DARE: To Keep the CIA off Drugs *****/ /************************************************/ From new at valley-internet.com Wed Jan 1 01:14:33 1997 From: new at valley-internet.com (Kerrie Mercel) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 01:14:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Submit to over 500 urls" Message-ID: <199701010810.AAA25028@web1.valley-internet.com> Hi Do you know about the fully automatic submission program which will link your Web Pages to over 500 Search Engines & Directories? You Can Download the Program and have a FREE TRIAL at: http://www.freegoodies.com/wizard/submit.htm it's great mate! Happy New Year Kessa From roy at sendai.scytale.com Wed Jan 1 01:34:45 1997 From: roy at sendai.scytale.com (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 01:34:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anonymous Post Control In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <970101.015042.9V6.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In list.cypherpunks, ph at netcom.com writes: > It would be nice if toad.com would verify signatures and insert a > header into the messages with the PGP User Id of every poster. > Then it would be very easy for many people to filter the messages > using widely available off-the-shelf mail software. I can see the utility, but it means a lot more CPU cycles burned on toad. It also brings up the age-old clearsign verification spectre. (does anyone have that figure for the percentage of clearsigned posts that verify as good?) > (I volunteer to adapt majordomo for this task if it seems like > a good idea.) In general, I think it's a good extension for majordomo. It may not get used on this list, but it makes new tools available for future lists. Has anyone looked at using Cryptix-extended perl and their PGP lib? I haven't got the Cryptix extensions to build on my linux box yet. - -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy at scytale.com "There are two major products that came out of Berkeley: LSD and UNIX. This is no coincidence." -- glen.turner at itd.adelaide.edu.au (Glen Turner) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMsoZjBvikii9febJAQEcowP+P5neSnmIwk7kembbYw92xhTtc9FYGUHT GMtTE+G+xP4EXyAx5wUvQ60lfDeQC1IrS7vOmhm7m1UwUPWiA+x5ZPRDrZJtGz74 MsKp53/rAC6Pgg8JAH9dOr71N9SUs1PfDjrz39W8Bx3na9o2xTGcbpIIgYSDnbsk qQXiPmfDUAA= =zZHA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jamie at comet.net Wed Jan 1 02:04:39 1997 From: jamie at comet.net (jamie dyer) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 02:04:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks Message-ID: A stopgap measure.... Perhaps an X-header that changes weekly, monthly, whatever. Is there a way to configure the list software to reject a message that doesn't have the X-header? This won't stop all spam, but it'd put a damper on a bunch of it. A lot of spammers don't even know what an X-header is (though a lot do), much less how to put one in a message. Lists are one of the last havens from spam, and though spam seems to be the grafitti and billboards of the future, I don't feel particularly amenable to having to waste time hitting the "D" key. jamie ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ jamie at comet.net | Comet.Net | Send empty message | Charlottesville, Va. | to pgpkey at comet.net | (804)295-2407 | for pgp public key. | http://www.comet.net | "Information wants to be $1.98." -I dunno who said it. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From liz at nym.alias.net Wed Jan 1 03:25:58 1997 From: liz at nym.alias.net (Liz Taylor) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 03:25:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: premail. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19970101112548.22952.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) wrote: > At 9:27 PM -0800 12/30/96, Anonymous wrote: > >A scenario: > > > >1) The spooks put a bug (named Eve) on the link between > >kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu and the Internet. > > (2) Nomenclature quibble: It would have to be Mallory, not Eve. Eve can > only listen. Mallory is a lot more dangerous because he can > alter/delete/insert messages as well as listen. My mistake. Long time since I read Applied Cryptography, and that too only partially. > > (1) Protection against this scenario is what the signatures on the key are for. Unfortunately, premail doesn't check the signatures. The only signatures that pgp can recognize and verify are the self signatures (easy to spoof). Note that even if the public keys of other signatories are included in the pubring (unlike now), it will still be easy to spoof the signatures if one can alter the pubring. The only safe way is to have a public key generated by Raph included in the premail distribution and then sign the pubring.pgp file at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu, and/or its individual keys with it. Here are three experments, all of which I did. The results are eye-opening. 1) Run premail with +debug=rv . pgp will warn about not being able to verify signatures. 2) Do a pgp -kvv ~/.premail/pubring.pgp. You will see that all signatures are either self-signatures or are unverifiable by pgp. 3) Do the following (lines starting with % are C shell commands. Lines starting with # are comments. Don't enter them directly.) % mkdir /tmp/k % setenv PGPPATH /tmp/k % cp ~/.premail/pubring.pgp /tmp/k # Remove exon's key % pgp -kr remailer at remailer.nl.com /tmp/k/pubring.pgp # Make a new key for exon. # When pgp prompts for user-id enter # Senator Exon # You may want to specify the lowest key size, 384, for convenience, and # an easy passphrase such as `exon'. % pgp -kg # Make a mail file. % cat > /tmp/k/mail < The idea of distributing tokens by clever and complicated schemes seems interesting as a thought-experiment, but I wouldn't want to have to study the fine art of "cypherpunk posting technique" in order to insert my rare comments into a discussion thread. Charging posting fees is also interesting, but as already discussed, has many weaknesses. An easy solution would be to grant unlimited posting rights to anyone with more than one month's membership in the list. This idea could be called "the endorsement scheme." If anyone wishes to make an anonymous post, their submission would go into a "general pool" along with all the submissions from non-members and people who have subscribed for less than one month. The "general pool" would be a webpage somewhere which has on the screen an "Approve" button which would bring up a "Username/Passowrd" box. Anyone with more than three months membership in the list could apporove messages from the general pool. If the senior member (_any_ _one_ senior member) feels that a post in the general pool is worth sending on to the full list, then the message gets general distribution, date- and time-stamped: "Determined by --your_name_here-- (not the author) to be of possible interest to at least one member of the list." (no problem ... Vulis could still approve his "Huge Cajones Remailer" and his "Suck_My_Big_Juicy_Cock" postings, and none of us will ever figure out where they're coming from) Senior members would never be in any way reprimanded for any item that they forwarded, unless through some "call-for-votes" type of action their item-inclusion privileges were curtailed (that'll never happen). No one can "disapprove" or otherwise block any message from forwarding to the list. The principle to be followed for which items to approve would be "essentially everything." The idea is to strive to not block postings, but to leave "herbal remedy" ads hanging unendorsed. Maybe the unendorsed posts could expire if unendorsed after 72 hours -- of course, the item would be immediately removed from the general pool when it received an endorsement and went to the list. We have to be careful to not cause any legal liability to fall onto an endorser for approving an item (eg, source-code) which is later determined to be, eg, an ITAR violation, a copyright violation, etc. The endorsement must have an effective disclaimer. john From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jan 1 06:09:27 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 06:09:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: FinCEN reports from GAO Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970101140512.006ac2a8@pop.pipeline.com> The GAO reports Woody cites(*) and others are available online at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces160.shtml Here's a list on money laundering reports, and one which reports on the burgeoning federal law enforcement agencies. (*) Money Laundering: Progress Report on Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (Letter Report, 11/08/93, GAO/GGD-94-30). Money Laundering: Characteristics of Currency Transaction Reports Filed in Calendar Year 1992 (Fact Sheet, 11/10/93, GAO/GGD-94-45FS). Money Laundering: U.S. Efforts To Fight It Are Threatened By Currency Smuggling (Chapter Report, 03/09/94, GAO/GGD-94-73). Money Laundering: The Volume of Currency Transaction Reports Filed Can and Should Be Reduced (Testimony, 03/15/94, GAO/T-GGD-94-113). (*) Money Laundering: Needed Improvements for Reporting Suspicious Transactions Are Planned (Chapter Report, 05/30/95, GAO/GGD-95-156). Money Laundering: Stakeholders View Recordkeeping Requirements for Cashier's Checks as Sufficient (Letter Report, 07/28/95, GAO/GGD-95-189). Money Laundering: Rapid Growth of Casinos Makes Them Vulnerable (Letter Report, 01/04/96, GAO/GGD-96-28). Counterfeit U.S. Currency Abroad: Observations on Counterfeiting and U.S. Deterrence Efforts (Testimony, 02/27/96, GAO/T-GGD-96-82). Money Laundering: U.S. Efforts to Combat Money Laundering Overseas (Testimony, 02/28/96, GAO/T-GGD-96-84). Money Laundering: A Framework for Understanding U.S. Efforts Overseas (Letter Report, 05/24/96, GAO/GGD-96-105). ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Federal Law Enforcement: Investigative Authority and Personnel at 13 Agencies (Letter Report, 09/30/96, GAO/GGD-96-154). [Excerpt] Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on the 13 federal agencies with the largest number of law enforcement investigative personnel. ATF - Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms DS - Bureau of Diplomatic Security CPDF - Central Personnel Data File DEA - Drug Enforcement Administration FBI - Federal Bureau of Investigation INS - Immigration and Naturalization Service IRS - Internal Revenue Service NCIS - Naval Criminal Investigative Service NPS - National Park Service OPM - U.S. Office of Personnel Management GAO found that: (1) 10 agencies employ over 90 percent of federal law enforcement investigative personnel and 3 agencies have 700 or more such personnel; (2) these agencies investigate criminal violations including organized crime, bank fraud, civil right violations, illegal immigration, violations of mail integrity and security, custom, drug trafficking, and money laundering violations, income tax violations, and passport and visa fraud; (3) the agencies derive their investigative authority primarily from statutory laws which are implemented through executive orders, agency regulations, and interagency agreements; (4) the 13 agencies employed about 42,800 law enforcement investigative personnel at the end of fiscal year (FY) 1995 and, except at the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), 100 percent of the personnel could execute search warrants, make arrests, and carry firearms; (5) there was a 19 percent overall increase in investigative personnel between 1987 and 1995; and (6) the change in the number of law enforcement investigative personnel ranged from an increase of about 66 percent at INS to a decrease of about 14 percent at the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 09:40:16 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 09:40:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <32C9CAAE.497B@gte.net> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > Peter Hendrickson wrote: > > At 1:01 PM 12/31/1996, Z.B. wrote: > > >On Tue, 31 Dec 1996, Dale Thorn wrote: > > >> ...I will *not* install and run PGP. > > > People who don't like using PGP, or can't use it, or won't use it, > > do not belong on this list. > > So who died and made you the king? That's a very good question, Dale... Have you seen any traffic from the stupid cocksucker John Gilmore after the recent allegation that he died from AIDS??? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 09:40:21 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 09:40:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Timmy's Lost It: [Was Extremism in the defense of liberty is no v In-Reply-To: <199701010832.BAA12165@infowest.com> Message-ID: "Attila T. Hun" writes: > ::As to our "reasonableness," I make little effort to hide the fact that > ::I support strong cryptography because it means that the plague of > ::democracy and "mob rule" can be turned back...I view crypto anarchy as > ::an elitist development, one which the ubermensch will appreciate, but > ::the masses will recoil in horror from. > > ::Fuck the herd. > > yes, and that is why there was a Robespierre and a Madam > Defarge. do you wish to be the first to be strapped to the board? > > your elitism is crap; if you know it and persist, you are asking > to lose the "war" with the Feds; if you don't know it, you're just > ignorant. you are doing nothing except feeding your own ego in the > hope of winning one battle and establishing that self-same elitism. > > either your "elite" stoop to the level of the 'herd' you so > glibbly label 'Fuck the herd,' and enlist their support of *their* > rights to free speech, or you might as well invite Bubba into your > living room after the advance party has taken your much touted > hardware and your clips of hollow points "for public safety." and > what do you say to the most corrupt and despicable President in our > history? "Fuck the herd?!" > > You and Bubba can hold hands, dancing around the room, jumping > up at down, screaming "Fuck the herd!" "Fuck the herd!" "Cypher punks'" opposition to free speech is another good example of their elitist attitude. They only want freedom to express the ideas they agree with. Not only is the notion of supporting freedom to express idea they don't like totally alien to "cypher punks"; they actively seek to promote censorship. Indeed the only crypto-relevant thread on this mailing list in many weeks was a "pseudo-crypto" discussion of protocols to suppress free speech and to limit the expression to views approved by the cocksucker John Gilmore. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 09:40:23 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 09:40:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Cypher punks" display arrogance and stupidity in the new year In-Reply-To: Message-ID: jamie at comet.net (jamie dyer) writes: > Perhaps an X-header that changes weekly, monthly, whatever. > Is there a way to configure the list software to reject a message > that doesn't have the X-header? This won't stop all spam, but it'd > put a damper on a bunch of it. A lot of spammers don't even know > what an X-header is (though a lot do), much less how to put one > in a message. Dr. Grubor has suggested that homosexuals be required to identify themselves in their e-mail headers. Certainly, cocksucker John Gilmore is free to set up his private mailing list so that only submissions with "X-Homosexual: YES" or "X-Sexual-Preferences: GAY" get distributed. Problem is, if we get the repeat of the recent mail loop attack, when the ASALA/Earthweb terrorist Ray "Arsenic" Arachelian was re-submiting to the mailing list the articles that were already distributed with most of the headers intact, the "X-Gay: YES" header would also be intact on Arachelian's spam. Ray is truly despicable. You can complain about Ray's forgery, spam, libel, and other net-abuse to his bosses at Earthweb, LLC: Jack Hidary , Murray Hidary , and Nova Spivack . I'm also amused by Jamie's suggestion that most people don't know what an X-header is. It reminds me how I made a typo in the word 'group' and some asshole "cypher punk" went into a long rant about how he knows how to use the grep utility under Unix, and I allegedly don't even know what grep is. First, the punks should consider themselves lucky that the owners of the equipment they play with pay them salaries for messing around with software so user-unfriendly that some arrogant punk needs to be paid to administer it (and the punk is sometimes a convicted felon, like Randall Schwartz). Second, I happen to know what grep is (I teach Unix courses occasionally), and I don't consider this a sign of great intelligence. By the way, 'grep' stands for 'g[globa]/r[egular ]e[xpression]/p[rint]. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 09:40:29 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 09:40:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <32CA4ECF.3FAC@eskimo.com> Message-ID: It's remarkable how "cypher punks'" only interest in cryptography seems to be in making up lame pseudo-crypto censorship protocols. John H West writes: > grant unlimited posting rights to > anyone with more than one month's membership in the list. > This idea could be called "the endorsement scheme." > > If anyone wishes to make an anonymous post, their submission > would go into a "general pool" along with all the submissions > from non-members and people who have subscribed for less than > one month. The "general pool" would be a webpage somewhere > which has on the screen an "Approve" button which would bring > up a "Username/Passowrd" box. > > Anyone with more than three months membership in the list > could apporove messages from the general pool. If the senior > member (_any_ _one_ senior member) feels that a post in the > general pool is worth sending on to the full list, then the > message gets general distribution, date- and time-stamped: > > "Determined by --your_name_here-- (not the author) > to be of possible interest to at least one member > of the list." (no problem ... Vulis could still > approve his "Huge Cajones Remailer" and his > "Suck_My_Big_Juicy_Cock" postings, and none of us > will ever figure out where they're coming from) > > Senior members would never be in any way reprimanded for any item > that they forwarded, unless through some "call-for-votes" type of > action their item-inclusion privileges were curtailed (that'll > never happen). No one can "disapprove" or otherwise block any > message from forwarding to the list. Yeah, sure. Remember - I'm not a "list member" because the cocksucker John Gilmore didn't like the contents of my submissions, so he unsubscribed me, and further instructed majordomo to play dead when it sees a request from me. This list is already much more censored than what you describe by the asshole censor John "I like to suck big dicks" Gilmore. It also has no credibility. It's a laughing stock for the media. But if your proposal is implemented, I'm sure some honorable person(s) would try to thwart censorship by approving submissions that socksucker John Gilmore doesn't like, and would find their ability to approve curtailed very soon. You're also forgetting about the approver's liability. This mailing list has seen a lot of racist garbage about "crazy Russians" and the "colored race" from scum like Timmy May and Ray Arachelian. This is what happened to one such vile racist in California (I don't know whether he's a "cypher punk"): ] E-MAIL SENDER INDICTED ] Irvine, Calif. [November 14, 1996] (AP) -- A former ] college student was indicted on 10 federal hate-crime ] charges for allegedly sending computer messages threatening ] to kill Asian students. ] According to federal prosecutors, Wednesday's grand jury ] indictment of Richard Machado, 19, of Irvine marks the first ] time the government has prosecuted an alleged federal hate ] crime committed in cyberspace. . . . ] [...] ] Machado could spend up to a decade in jail and face up to ] a $1 million fine if convicted. ] [...] ] The grand jury accused Machado of sending a threatening ] electronic message to about 60 University of California, ] Irvine, students on Sept. 20. ] [...] --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 09:42:04 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr. Dimitri Vulis) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 09:42:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Old Russian Orthography In-Reply-To: <199701011453.XAA01748@tsuji.yt.cache.waseda.ac.jp> Message-ID: <5g4uZD68w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Dr Yoshimasa Tsuji writes: > Hello friends, a Happy New Year to you all. Thank you! And a Happy New Year to you too. > Incidentally, I wonder how one can transliterate oldish Russian alphabets? > I am sure fita should be "th", but as to dotted i and jat', I haven't got > the faintest idea. I remember seeing an old Library of Congress transliteration table where jat' was transliterated as e with some accent, and dotted i was an i with some accent. I took a quick look on my shelf and can't find it now. (LOC is not a good scheme, since one can't always recover the original from it. :-) The U.S.G. Printing Office manual seems to suggest that one translates into the new orthography before transliterating (fita to f, dotted i and izhitsa to i, yat' to e or yo). This may lead to an occasional problem: suppose you have an index alphabetized according to the old rules: ib.. ik... (regular i) ia... ie... (dotted i before another vowel) If you fold dotted i into i, you'll be looking for 'ia' before 'ib'. Ditto for yat', which came much later than e in the collating sequence. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 11:40:42 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 11:40:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fed's blew it this time. In-Reply-To: <199701010641.XAA09965@infowest.com> Message-ID: <056uZD74w165w@bwalk.dm.com> "Attila T. Hun" writes: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > In <219sZD42w165w at bwalk.dm.com>, on 12/31/96 > at 11:59 AM, dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said: > > ::> Timothy C. May wrote: > ::> > > ::> > Your message is the equivalent of that brain-damaged ebonite's > ::> > "Why can't we all just get along?" > ::> > ::> Tim, > ::> Have you 'coined a phrase' here? > ::> Perhaps future generations, reading of the exploits of the > ::> 'Ebonites', will recognize your contribution to the language. > ::> Have you seen _Mars Attacks_ where Jack Nicholson, playing the > ::> president, says just that? > > ::have you noticed that a lot of recent popular movies either portray > ::the U.S.G. as a bunch of crooks and criminals, or make fun of killing > ::them all (e.g. Mars Attacks). This would have been unthinkable 20 > ::years ago. > > 20 years ago, the Vietnam protests were just dying down. the > movie industry which has been one of the more vocal anti-war > centers (except in making violent war movies which make money) was > still somewhat respectful of the USG. Was the media industry really anti-war, or just anti-Nixon? When Lyndon Johnson sent the troops to 'Nam, the media first supported him. When Nixon got elected, against the media's wishes, the media attacked him over everything he was doing, including the war, just like they attacked Reagan and Bush. I'm usure if Nixon had pulled out completely in '69, the media would have been pro-war. They're whores, like Declan McCulough. Bombing the hell out of North Viet Nam targets was evil, but effective. But: compare the way USD is portrayed in _Apocalypse Now & _Deer Hunter (a monolythic machine servings some sinister purpose and killing the natives; white people are safe; the rogue gets terminated by USG itself) with the way it's portrayed in _Rambo and _Red Dawn (gubmint abandons the pow's*, abandons the locals; useless, but barely evil, and it's not clear how far up the evil goes) and with the way it's been portrayed in this year's movies: _Courage Under Fire (a bunch of criminals trying to cover up their fuckup, all the way to the top); _Ransom (the main villain is a NYC cop, other cops are useless; it's not Federales, but close enough); _Eraser ("rogue" WitSec, the cops are the enemies); _Professional (the top villain works for the DEA). Pop movies reflect the attitudes of the audience they're made for. Dr. Grubor is a Viet Nam vet. I have great respect for him. *) Klinton's being paid by the Indonesians to "normalize" relation with VC, incorporated by reference. > Other than the liberals who give Bubba a birthday party > --probably more for their own publicity (except Barbra), most > everybody is getting fed up with the government and beginning to > realize the USG not only over governs, but the public is also > beginning to understand the usurpation of power, and the basic > unconstitutionality of the regulatory agencies. > > Utah is as good an example as any; they have never been > Fed supportive (even if it was Republican), but the church mandate > is to support the government --however, they are quickly swinging > to a large majority which not only does not like the Federal > government, but who are also actively stating the government is > illegal-- and the church is silent. > > The other Intermountain states have been just plain independent > minded, but tolerated the Feds. Not any more. Idaho and eastern > Washington are not a safe place for the Feds. Montana makes no > bones about it; Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico are vocal. And AZ > is as pissed as they come over the MJ pronouncement "--what do you > mean the Feds are telling us our vote is worthless and our States' > Rights don't mean pig shit." Nobody particularly cares about the > MJ, it's the pure and simple emphasis on States' Rights and the > Voters' Rights to self-determination and the 10th Amendment. > > Analysis of California attitudes is even more revealing; the > statement the DEA would pull prescription permits from doctors > prescribing maryjane in AZ and CA has stirred a firestorm which > will only get larger. Is that why the criminal Usenet Cabal is interfering with the propagation of sci.med.cannabis and other MJ-related Usenet newsgroups? > The people spoke and the Feds said: "Fuck You!" > > The question then is, how long before the Eastern whimps and > liberal tit suckers wake up and realize they too are about to lose > the option of being liberal tit suckers? > > Of all things, MJ may be the last straw (going up in smoke > ); now, if the press will get off their sensationalism on the > CDA and talk about what it is we are really fighting --free speech > as a whole, Thomas Jefferson might wake up one day soon and say: > "Alright! but it took you stupid bastards more than the 20 years > to have a little revolution to teach Washington who the government > serves!" I have little regard for Thomas Jefferson and rest of the "founding fathers" gang. Their revolution replaced one bunch of oppressors with another; no wonder it was followed by Shay's (sp?) Rebellion (whose farmer leaders were sentenced to hang for treason; later commuted); and Alien and Sedition Acts. > Maybe Bubba needs a little more cocaine so he gets "brave" > enough to call in UN troops to quell a riot... then WE watch the > fun. Some of you sissies might even lift your hardware and watch > your first melon explode. After the first one, it's easy. > > For the first time a civilized nation has full gun > registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more > efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the > future. > --Adolf Hitler (1935) > > Is Adolf's future here again? I had a great-grandfather named Adolf. The Communists killed him. > 46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, > sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting > firearms. ...Consider the following statement: > > I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist > confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government. > > --The USMC Combat Arms Survey > > The same survey had questions of obeying commands from UN officers, > and obeying commands from UN officers on US territory, and against > US citizens. Anybody who wants a copy of the whole survey, send > me email. > > This was not somebody's master thesis; on some special > operations bases it was given by a major, others a light bird, etc. > all SEALS and USMC spec-op groups were given the "test" --the > younger men were >85% compliant; the reuppers and lifers were real > low on compliance (~15%). Our PC and revisionist history has built > the generation they want: functionally illiterate "world-oriented" > cannon fodder. How does one brainwash a brainless "cypher punk"? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From sls123 at prodigy.net Wed Jan 1 12:55:03 1997 From: sls123 at prodigy.net (sls123 at prodigy.net) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 12:55:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Let you know Message-ID: <199701012040.PAA24498@mail1y-int.prodigy.net> Please forgive me for this e-mail, but I felt I just had to let more people know about this and get in on the ground floor! The program I am involved in incorporates "Spillover". Spillover is probably one of the best ideas ever developed for network marketing. Here's why: Anyone I sponsor after you, will probably be placed under you. You then earn commissions on these new people as if you had signed them up! Why? The way the program works I am trying to fill my downline and I can only have so many people on each level. After a given level is full, anyone else I sponsor "spills over" to the next level. This is where they start getting placed under you. So you see, it doesn't matter if you sign them up or I do, in the end the result is the same. ******************************* * Djgroup/Streamline * * will place 2 people under * * you automatically!!! * ******************************* I just signed up Monday and I already have 2 members in my downline, just from SPILLOVER! I didn't do anything! The program just started, in fact it has less than 550 members. This IS the ground floor! The company is advertising in several major print publications next month! I have been in several MLM's and I can finally say; "This is the one I've been looking for!" If you know what it's like to lose sleep because your so exited, email me NOW! Don't miss this opportunity, email me for more details. I will give you my URL (webpage) for more information. Thanks Sonya From frantz at netcom.com Wed Jan 1 13:43:09 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 13:43:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: <9612302254.AA00731@cow.net> Message-ID: At 10:54 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote: >Our focus is more radical. We are effectively a cyber-militia, fulfilling >Jefferson's recommendation that a revolution happen every 20 years. > >(Funny, there hasn't been one in more than 200 years. ... I would say that the street action which effectively eliminated legally mandated racial segregation about 25 years ago qualifies as a revolution. People certainly put their bodies, and occasionally their lives, on the line for it. It didn't happen because the political powers that be decided to do it. It happened because people mobbed in the streets and made it happen. The same argument applies to the actions which forced the withdrawal from Vietnam. With the end of the cold war, and the ensuing reduction in need for the entrenched national security establishment, we may be ripe for another one. I personally hope our government will continue to show that it is civilized by keeping the blood shed to a minimum. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Wed Jan 1 13:43:31 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 13:43:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internal Passports In-Reply-To: <199612311859.MAA01032@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: At 11:02 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote: >There have been several reports cited here recently about changes in the SS >laws to make the SS number more of an ID number. ... > >And concerns about "identity theft" when such a simple thing as an SS >number is the key to so many records, rights, etc. I don't see how you can have the SS number be both a public ID number and a secret password. Perhaps you could have it be one, but not both. It seems to me that parts of our society are trying have it be a password and parts a public ID number. (Perhaps the same parts?) Doing both just won't work. (Using SS as a password is subject to all the stealing and replay attacks that make passwords a really bad idea for secure identification.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Wed Jan 1 13:45:16 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 13:45:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: There seems to some confusion about what I actually proposed. (I never seem to be able to write clearly the first time.) Let me describe in more detail my currently preferred token distribution system. First some definitions: Majordomo - The rule based administrator for the list List administrator - The rule maker. Also does the things majordomo can't. poster - someone who wants to post a message to the list list member - those who receive the list. Token distribution works like this: A poster desiring a token sends a request to majordomo and includes a public key. This request can be sent thru a remailer chain. Majordomo generates a token (think of it as a secret key), encyphers it with the public key, and posts it to the list. Note that the poster does not have to be subscribed to the list. The token can be recovered from the archives or from a reflector list. (Thanks to Tim May for the suggestion of this method of distribution.) Now we have given poster an anonymous token. Since tokens are good forever, true anonymity requires a new token for each post. Otherwise the poster only has a pseudonym. I consider this feature an advantage. Since tokens are good forever, majordomo will only give out a limited number per day. I suggest four. This limit will somewhat protect against the attack Ray Arachelian pointed out of having one abusive user collect 10,000,000 tokens. It is important to recognize the class of problems I am trying to solve. While I would like to solve the sporadic "make money fast" spam problem, I agree with Tim that, at today's levels, it is only an annoyance. I also agree that the drivel that comes from some of our more prolific posters is best handled by filtering by the list members themselves. (I currently have 3 of them going directly to the trash. Perhaps aga should get kickbacks from Qualcomm. He managed to sell a copy of EudoraPro.) The problem I am really concerned with is denial of service attacks via flooding. With 1000 list members, each message to the list requires a lot of resources to handle compared with the ones it requires to send. This fact gives an attacker a bit advantage. Tokens are designed to enable majordomo to recognize the source of messages and provide lower performance reception to those who are sending a lot of messages. This technique is similar to the technique used by the Whitehouse mail system to limit flooding attacks. (And the idea came from a description of that system posted here some months ago.) Tokens would also give the list administrator a tool to discourage certain posters. If John Gillmore wanted to make it hard for Dimitri to post, he could cancel Dimitri's token. Dimitri could get another one (under a different name if Majordomo's instructions prevented it from giving him one), but John could continue the cancel the new ones. (N.B. There is no evidence that John actually wanted to keep Dimitri from posting. This example is only a hypothetical.) Sandy suggests gateways (i.e. distributed moderators) to preserve anonymity. While I don't think they are needed to preserve anonymity, they will be useful for those who can't or won't encrypt their posts. It is important to note here that anyone with a token can act as a gateway. I was trying to make only small changes in the dynamics of the list. As such, the market based solutions are more radical than I was willing to consider. I would like to see a market based system in actual use, but perhaps elsewhere. The idea seems better fitted to Robert Hettinga's e$pam list. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Wed Jan 1 13:59:04 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 13:59:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: new restrictions in EAR (over ITAR) Message-ID: <199701011833.SAA01599@server.test.net> (from "http://jya.com/bxa123096.txt") : a. ``Software'' specially designed or modified for the : ``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of equipment or ``software'' : controlled by 5A002, 5B002 or 5D002. : b. ``Software'' specially designed or modified to support : ``technology'' controlled by 5E002. large integer libraries? (modexp functions?) : c. Specific ``software'' as follows: : c.1. ``Software'' having the characteristics, or performing or : simulating the functions of the equipment controlled by 5A002 or 5B002; : c.2. ``Software'' to certify ``software'' controlled by 5D002.c.1; this one (I presume) is addressed at people like microsoft with CAPI certifications, you can't export the signing software : c.3. ``Software'' designed or modified to protect against malicious : computer damage, e.g., viruses; - Virus scanning software? (Winn Schwartau's info warfare hype is rubbing off on the spooks) Makes one wonder, if it's purportedly in the national security interests to bar the export of virus scanners (of any quality), logically it's also in the national security interests for the NSA to write and distribute virii. - Programs which checksum themselves as a crude check against viruses/modification? (some _operating systems_ qualify on this basis) - md5file from rfc1321? (rfc1321 is the MD5 rfc, md5file checksums files with md5, useful for checking what's changed)? - firewalls! (whoops there goes a few more million in US trade) Madness, Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Message-ID: On Wed, 1 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > jamie at comet.net (jamie dyer) writes: > > > Perhaps an X-header that changes weekly, monthly, whatever. > > Is there a way to configure the list software to reject a message > > that doesn't have the X-header? This won't stop all spam, but it'd > > put a damper on a bunch of it. A lot of spammers don't even know > > what an X-header is (though a lot do), much less how to put one > > in a message. > > Dr. Grubor has suggested that homosexuals be required to identify themselves > in their e-mail headers. Certainly, cocksucker John Gilmore is free to set > up his private mailing list so that only submissions with "X-Homosexual: YES" > or "X-Sexual-Preferences: GAY" get distributed. Problem is, if we get the > repeat of the recent mail loop attack, when the ASALA/Earthweb terrorist Ray > "Arsenic" Arachelian was re-submiting to the mailing list the articles > that were already distributed with most of the headers intact, the "X-Gay: YES" > header would also be intact on Arachelian's spam. Ray is truly despicable. > You can complain about Ray's forgery, spam, libel, and other net-abuse to > his bosses at Earthweb, LLC: Jack Hidary , Murray Hidary > , and Nova Spivack . > Is John Gilmore an admitted Gay, or does he try and cover it up? > I'm also amused by Jamie's suggestion that most people don't know what > an X-header is. It reminds me how I made a typo in the word 'group' and > some asshole "cypher punk" went into a long rant about how he knows how > to use the grep utility under Unix, and I allegedly don't even know what > grep is. First, the punks should consider themselves lucky that the owners > of the equipment they play with pay them salaries for messing around with > software so user-unfriendly that some arrogant punk needs to be paid to > administer it (and the punk is sometimes a convicted felon, like Randall > Schwartz). Second, I happen to know what grep is (I teach Unix courses > occasionally), and I don't consider this a sign of great intelligence. > > By the way, 'grep' stands for 'g[globa]/r[egular ]e[xpression]/p[rint]. > Ah yes Professor, but then there is Egrep with the pipe and Fgrep without the pipe. How about explaining the difference between the use of those buggers? From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Wed Jan 1 14:01:09 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 14:01:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: benefits of EAR (not)? Message-ID: <199701011823.SAA01596@server.test.net> Reading through "http://jya.com/bxa123096.txt": > 1. This interim rule has been determined to be significant for > purposes of E.O. 12866. A cost benefit analysis has been prepared and > is available upon request by contacting James A. Lewis at (202) 482- > 0092. Anyone availed themselves of this offer of a CBA for EAR? Just curious as to what the supposed benefits are :-) Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Message-ID: <199701012217.QAB22537@bluestem.prairienet.org> On 31 Dec 96, snow rambled thusly about Re: Internal Passports... > In Illinois, you merely have to request they not put it on the > card, I don't remember having that option, but I was barely sixteen at the time. > supposedly in Missouri you don't have to have in put on the card if > you have a "religious objection", but I'd bet if you bitch loud > enough at the DMV office, you can get out of it. Not even that bad. When I went in there (just a few months ago) the clerk asked nicely if I wouldn't mind having my SSN used as my ID/ Drivers Licence number. (I wisely chose to say, "why yes, I would mind." and was assigned a pseudorandom number.) dave From carrollw at cadvision.com Wed Jan 1 14:20:49 1997 From: carrollw at cadvision.com (carrollw at cadvision.com) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 14:20:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Join Us "Special Conference Call" Message-ID: <199701012132.OAA34926@huey.cadvision.com> Hello opportunity seeker, For most people, finding the RIGHT opportunity that provides the FREEDOM and the right CASH flow to earn a living working from HOME is a DREAM at best. Team 2000 has joined a company that has all the INGREDIENTS for this wish to be fulfilled and I extend a very CORDIAL invitation for you to join our Team 2000 TOLL FREE conference CALL on: THURSDAY Evening, January 2, 1997 You are invited to a Special Toll Free Conference Call with ... 1. The President of Idea Concepts, Ken Hampshire 2. The Co-founder of Idea Concepts, Steve Miles 3. Other key leaders of Idea Concepts 4. The Team 2000 Leaders 5. Most importantly: YOU Hear about the products, compensation plan and exciting late breaking news on this call! Please, write this number down now and put it on your calendar for Thursday night, January 2, 1997. At the appropriate time for you,(in your time zone) call 1-800-556-3844 9:30 pm Eastern Standard Time 8:30 pm Central Standard Time 7:30 pm Mountain Standard Time 6:30 pm Pacific Standard Time You may call in 2-3 minutes before the actual time. If you call in too soon you will get a busy signal, so just keep dialing back in. Your questions will be answered Thursday night on the TOLL-FREE Conference Call. In the meantime you may wish to review information on our website and follow the links: http://www.ideaconcepts.com Best Regards for a Healthy, Happy and Prosperous New Year! Wayne J Carroll Team 2000 - Leader From aga at dhp.com Wed Jan 1 14:24:11 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 14:24:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fed's blew it this time. In-Reply-To: <056uZD74w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 1 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > "Attila T. Hun" writes: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > > In <219sZD42w165w at bwalk.dm.com>, on 12/31/96 > > at 11:59 AM, dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said: > > > > ::> Timothy C. May wrote: > > ::> > > > ::> > Your message is the equivalent of that brain-damaged ebonite's > > ::> > "Why can't we all just get along?" > > ::> > > ::> Tim, > > ::> Have you 'coined a phrase' here? > > ::> Perhaps future generations, reading of the exploits of the > > ::> 'Ebonites', will recognize your contribution to the language. > > ::> Have you seen _Mars Attacks_ where Jack Nicholson, playing the > > ::> president, says just that? > > > > ::have you noticed that a lot of recent popular movies either portray > > ::the U.S.G. as a bunch of crooks and criminals, or make fun of killing > > ::them all (e.g. Mars Attacks). This would have been unthinkable 20 > > ::years ago. > > > > 20 years ago, the Vietnam protests were just dying down. the > > movie industry which has been one of the more vocal anti-war > > centers (except in making violent war movies which make money) was > > still somewhat respectful of the USG. > > Was the media industry really anti-war, or just anti-Nixon? When Lyndon > Johnson sent the troops to 'Nam, the media first supported him. When Nixon got > elected, against the media's wishes, the media attacked him over everything he > was doing, including the war, just like they attacked Reagan and Bush. I'm > usure if Nixon had pulled out completely in '69, the media would have been > pro-war. They're whores, like Declan McCulough. > > Bombing the hell out of North Viet Nam targets was evil, but effective. But: > compare the way USD is portrayed in _Apocalypse Now & _Deer Hunter (a > monolythic machine servings some sinister purpose and killing the natives; > white people are safe; the rogue gets terminated by USG itself) with the way > it's portrayed in _Rambo and _Red Dawn (gubmint abandons the pow's*, abandons > the locals; useless, but barely evil, and it's not clear how far up the evil > goes) and with the way it's been portrayed in this year's movies: _Courage > Under Fire (a bunch of criminals trying to cover up their fuckup, all the way > to the top); _Ransom (the main villain is a NYC cop, other cops are useless; > it's not Federales, but close enough); _Eraser ("rogue" WitSec, the cops are > the enemies); _Professional (the top villain works for the DEA). Pop movies > reflect the attitudes of the audience they're made for. And none of those movies were anywhere near the real thing. > > Dr. Grubor is a Viet Nam vet. I have great respect for him. > > *) Klinton's being paid by the Indonesians to "normalize" relation with VC, > incorporated by reference. > > > Other than the liberals who give Bubba a birthday party > > --probably more for their own publicity (except Barbra), most > > everybody is getting fed up with the government and beginning to > > realize the USG not only over governs, but the public is also > > beginning to understand the usurpation of power, and the basic > > unconstitutionality of the regulatory agencies. > > > > Utah is as good an example as any; they have never been > > Fed supportive (even if it was Republican), but the church mandate > > is to support the government --however, they are quickly swinging > > to a large majority which not only does not like the Federal > > government, but who are also actively stating the government is > > illegal-- and the church is silent. > > > > The other Intermountain states have been just plain independent > > minded, but tolerated the Feds. Not any more. Idaho and eastern > > Washington are not a safe place for the Feds. Montana makes no > > bones about it; Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico are vocal. And AZ > > is as pissed as they come over the MJ pronouncement "--what do you > > mean the Feds are telling us our vote is worthless and our States' > > Rights don't mean pig shit." Nobody particularly cares about the > > MJ, it's the pure and simple emphasis on States' Rights and the > > Voters' Rights to self-determination and the 10th Amendment. > > That is correct, and the Feds are going to get their asses kicked in Court when they try to prosecute any Medical Doctors. The States have the right to grant medical licenses, and the Feds have nothing they should be involved with at all. > > Analysis of California attitudes is even more revealing; the > > statement the DEA would pull prescription permits from doctors > > prescribing maryjane in AZ and CA has stirred a firestorm which > > will only get larger. > > Is that why the criminal Usenet Cabal is interfering with the propagation > of sci.med.cannabis and other MJ-related Usenet newsgroups? > Yes, that is probably so. And now the cabal is trying to interfere with the new misc.legal.criminal newsgroup for medical cannabis discussions. There is a big class action lawsuit now being prepared by that Philadelphia Lawyer right now. > > The people spoke and the Feds said: "Fuck You!" > > > > The question then is, how long before the Eastern whimps and > > liberal tit suckers wake up and realize they too are about to lose > > the option of being liberal tit suckers? > > We must realize that things like gun laws and drug laws and medical licensing, etc. are PURELY under the Jurisdiction of the States, and that the Feds must keep their fucking noses out of State business. > > Of all things, MJ may be the last straw (going up in smoke > > ); now, if the press will get off their sensationalism on the > > CDA and talk about what it is we are really fighting --free speech > > as a whole, Thomas Jefferson might wake up one day soon and say: > > "Alright! but it took you stupid bastards more than the 20 years > > to have a little revolution to teach Washington who the government > > serves!" > > I have little regard for Thomas Jefferson and rest of the "founding fathers" > gang. Their revolution replaced one bunch of oppressors with another; no > wonder it was followed by Shay's (sp?) Rebellion (whose farmer leaders were > sentenced to hang for treason; later commuted); and Alien and Sedition Acts. > > > Maybe Bubba needs a little more cocaine so he gets "brave" > > enough to call in UN troops to quell a riot... then WE watch the > > fun. Some of you sissies might even lift your hardware and watch > > your first melon explode. After the first one, it's easy. > > > > For the first time a civilized nation has full gun > > registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more > > efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the > > future. > > --Adolf Hitler (1935) > > > > Is Adolf's future here again? > > I had a great-grandfather named Adolf. The Communists killed him. > > > 46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, > > sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting > > firearms. ...Consider the following statement: > > > > I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist > > confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government. > > > > --The USMC Combat Arms Survey > > And this guy would end up dead. The VFW and the American Legion have more firearms than he does, and the only way you will take my guns away is to kill all of us first. > > The same survey had questions of obeying commands from UN officers, > > and obeying commands from UN officers on US territory, and against > > US citizens. Anybody who wants a copy of the whole survey, send > > me email. > > > > This was not somebody's master thesis; on some special > > operations bases it was given by a major, others a light bird, etc. > > all SEALS and USMC spec-op groups were given the "test" --the > > younger men were >85% compliant; the reuppers and lifers were real > > low on compliance (~15%). Our PC and revisionist history has built > > the generation they want: functionally illiterate "world-oriented" > > cannon fodder. > > How does one brainwash a brainless "cypher punk"? > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > From lucifer at dhp.com Wed Jan 1 14:25:53 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 14:25:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anonymous Post Control In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701012225.RAA17460@dhp.com> ph at netcom.com (Peter Hendrickson) writes: > It's hard to filter anonymous posters. I want to see what a few > of them have to say so I can't filter on the remailers. > > If anonymous posters PGP sign their posts, it is still hard to filter > using a lame filter software such as that which comes to Eudora. Anonymous users willing to PGP sign their posts could just use a service like nym.alias.net (mailto:help at nym.alias.net), which even allows pseudonyms to advertise their PGP keys via finger (slightly better than the PGP key servers). When people post anonymously rather than pseudonymously, it is generally because they don't want a blatant link between all of their posts (though obviously analysis of writing style is still possible). From snow at smoke.suba.com Wed Jan 1 15:02:25 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 15:02:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fed's blew it this time. In-Reply-To: <056uZD74w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <199701012317.RAA02230@smoke.suba.com> The Flamemeister said: > "Attila T. Hun" writes: >> 20 years ago, the Vietnam protests were just dying down. the >> movie industry which has been one of the more vocal anti-war >> centers (except in making violent war movies which make money) was >> still somewhat respectful of the USG. >Was the media industry really anti-war, or just anti-Nixon? When Lyndon >Johnson sent the troops to 'Nam, the media first supported him. When Nixon got >elected, against the media's wishes, the media attacked him over everything he >was doing, including the war, just like they attacked Reagan and Bush. I'm >usure if Nixon had pulled out completely in '69, the media would have been >pro-war. They're whores, like Declan McCulough. The movie industry is not the same thing as the media. Observe the following: ------------------------------------------------- | | | Media ______________ | | |movie | | | | industry | | | |______________| | |_________________________________________________| > Dr. Grubor is a Viet Nam vet. I have great respect for him. What did he do there? Media Relations? That would explain a lot of things. From travlpls at netside.com Wed Jan 1 15:25:19 1997 From: travlpls at netside.com (travlpls at netside.com) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 15:25:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Travel Discounts Message-ID: <199701012319.SAA28234@ccs.netside.com> Fuck_God_Up_The_Ass, How would you like to save 65% on all your leisure and business travel? Save at thousands of fine hotels, resorts and condos, all around the world. Also, save on airfare, cruises, car and RV rentals, special attractions and MUCH MUCH more!! That's just the tip of the iceberg! For a limited time only, we are offering a golf package which includes 50% off green fees at over 2,000 golf facilities. This travel package will pay for itself the first time you use it!! *START SAVING NOW!! SIMPLY HIT REPLY AND TYPE "DISCOUNTS"* From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 15:30:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 15:30:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fed's blew it this time. In-Reply-To: <199701012317.RAA02230@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: snow writes: > > "Attila T. Hun" writes: > >> 20 years ago, the Vietnam protests were just dying down. the > >> movie industry which has been one of the more vocal anti-war > >> centers (except in making violent war movies which make money) was > >> still somewhat respectful of the USG. > >Was the media industry really anti-war, or just anti-Nixon? When Lyndon > >Johnson sent the troops to 'Nam, the media first supported him. When Nixon g > >elected, against the media's wishes, the media attacked him over everything > >was doing, including the war, just like they attacked Reagan and Bush. I'm > >usure if Nixon had pulled out completely in '69, the media would have been > >pro-war. They're whores, like Declan McCulough. > > The movie industry is not the same thing as the media. Observe the > following: > ------------------------------------------------- > | | > | Media ______________ | > | |movie | | > | | industry | | > | |______________| | > |_________________________________________________| Nice ASCII art, Pedro. Are you the one contributing the 2 ASCII pictures of Timmy Mayonaise / day? Here's a Simpsons picture for you: |\/\/\/| | | | | | (o)(o) C _) | ,___| |___/ / \ / \ . . . | | | ._|\/ \/ \--. | | | \ / |__|-----| (o)(o) <_. UUUU |____C / \ ____)--( \ | ()() \____/---' | | /^^^^^^\ | | / \ \ Here's another: (#####) (#########) (##########) (##########) (##########) __&__ (##########) / \ (##########) | | (##########) | | (#########) | (o)(o) (o)(o)(##) C .---_) C (##) | |.===| /__, (##) | \__/ \ (#) /__ \ | | / \ \ ooooo | | \ _/ \_ | | \ /' `\ ( \ \ / / / \ \ \ \ / /`\_`\_ )\ > / \ \ )/ / ( |/ / / \ \ | / | . ,,/ ( \\\\` / / / \ \ /"" ( `#' ) \ |* | | | ( /\ \ ` | ' | | \ \ | | | ) ) (,) ( | ) | / | | | ( |__ | | | ( |___; | | | (__--___; /'/'/' "'"" Stop jerking off and look at your own picture. Try to concentrate when you read the next paragraph. I know it's hard for a "cypher punk" to think abstractly, but if you try real hard, and think about it for a long time, you might get it. THE MOVIE INDUSTRY, THE ADVERTIZING INDUSTRY, THE NEWSPAPER PUBLISHING INDUSTRY, THE MUSIC INDUSTRY, THE MAGAZINE PUBLISHING INDUSTRY, THE BROADCAST RADIO INDUSTRY, THE CABLE TV INDUSTRY, ETC, ARE ALL PARTS OF THE (ALWAYS HIGHLY CONCENTRATED) MEDIA INDUSTRY. IF THE RICH MOTHERFUCKERS WHO OWN THE BIG MEDIA COMPANIES HAPPEN TO BE PRO-MCGOVERN AND ANTI-WAR, THEN THE WHOLE MEDIA INDUSTRY BECOMES PRO-MCGOVERN AND ANTI-WAR, AND THE PARTS OF THE WHOLE (LIKE THE MOVIE INDUSTRY IN YOUR PICTURE ABOVE) TOO BECOME PRO-MCGOVERN AND ANTI-WAR. Hmm... Is it too much to expect a "cypher punk" to understand that a part of the whole sometimes inherits some of the properties of the whole? Probably. > > Dr. Grubor is a Viet Nam vet. I have great respect for him. > > What did he do there? Media Relations? That would explain a lot of things Dr. Grubor invented the whole Internet while in Viet Nam. You better show some gratitude, punk. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 16:40:12 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 16:40:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Let you know In-Reply-To: <199701012040.PAA24498@mail1y-int.prodigy.net> Message-ID: sls123 at prodigy.net writes: > The program just started, in fact it has less than 550 members. This > IS the ground floor! The company is advertising in several major > print publications next month! I have been in several MLM's and I can > finally say; "This is the one I've been looking for!" If you know > what it's like to lose sleep because your so exited, email me NOW! Has anyone else noticed the similarities between PGP and MLM? Here you recruit people to use PGP and sign their keys, and they sign the keys of the people they recruit. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 17:00:11 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 17:00:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Bill Frantz writes: > There seems to some confusion about what I actually proposed. (I never > seem to be able to write clearly the first time.) Let me describe in more > detail my currently preferred token distribution system. ... There's no confusion. You propose even more censorship than there is now. > Since tokens are good forever, majordomo will only give out a limited > number per day. I suggest four. This limit will somewhat protect against > the attack Ray Arachelian pointed out of having one abusive user collect > 10,000,000 tokens. Ray "Arsenic" Arachelian of ASALA/Earthweb is a lying piece of shit, like the rest of the "cypher punks". You can complain about Ray Arachelian's libel, spam, forgery, and other net-abuse to the owners of Earthweb, LLC - the Web designer employing Ray as an associate network administrator - Jack Hidary , Murray Hidary , and Nova Spivack . > have 3 of them going directly to the trash. Perhaps aga should get > kickbacks from Qualcomm. He managed to sell a copy of EudoraPro.) Qualcomm fired Kent Paul Dolan, so they're not all that bad. > Tokens would also give the list administrator a tool to discourage certain > posters. If John Gillmore wanted to make it hard for Dimitri to post, he > could cancel Dimitri's token. Dimitri could get another one (under a > different name if Majordomo's instructions prevented it from giving him > one), but John could continue the cancel the new ones. I'm sure the cocksucker John Gilmore would masturbate every time he did that. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 1 19:25:59 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 19:25:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: <9612302254.AA00731@cow.net> Message-ID: <32CB2A77.218F@gte.net> Bill Frantz wrote: > At 10:54 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote:[snip] > I would say that the street action which effectively eliminated legally > mandated racial segregation about 25 years ago qualifies as a revolution. > People certainly put their bodies, and occasionally their lives, on the > line for it. It didn't happen because the political powers that be decided > to do it. It happened because people mobbed in the streets and made it > happen. The same argument applies to the actions which forced the withdrawal > from Vietnam. With the end of the cold war, and the ensuing reduction in > need for the entrenched national security establishment, we may be ripe > for another one. I personally hope our government will continue to show > that it is civilized by keeping the blood shed to a minimum. I'll tell you exactly what they'll show. They are a *lot* more hardened to civil unrest than they were at Kent State, etc. This time, as in the late 1970's, the leaders, organizers, and other influential people will be removed, one way or the other. Dissidents will be allowed, as long as (like Chomsky) they're not a real threat. From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 1 19:34:40 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 19:34:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anonymous Post Control In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701020330.VAA16622@manifold.algebra.com> Peter Hendrickson wrote: > > It's hard to filter anonymous posters. I want to see what a few > of them have to say so I can't filter on the remailers. > > If anonymous posters PGP sign their posts, it is still hard to filter > using a lame filter software such as that which comes to Eudora. > > It would be nice if toad.com would verify signatures and insert a > header into the messages with the PGP User Id of every poster. > Then it would be very easy for many people to filter the messages > using widely available off-the-shelf mail software. > > (I volunteer to adapt majordomo for this task if it seems like > a good idea.) That's what my moderation bot, STUMP, does. The purpose of that was not so much to help readers work with their killfiles, but rather to protect pseudonymous posters from forgeries involving their names, and let them build reputations. - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 1 19:35:25 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 19:35:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CB2CA9.5E43@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Dale Thorn writes: > > Peter Hendrickson wrote: > > > At 1:01 PM 12/31/1996, Z.B. wrote: > > > >On Tue, 31 Dec 1996, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > >> ...I will *not* install and run PGP. > > > People who don't like using PGP, or can't use it, or won't use it, > > > do not belong on this list. > > So who died and made you the king? > That's a very good question, Dale... Have you seen any traffic from the stupid > cocksucker John Gilmore after the recent allegation that he died from AIDS??? I can only imagine what Gilmore's response would be, say, in person. Something on the order of "I can neither confirm nor deny". (Just a guess). From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 1 19:40:57 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 19:40:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: premail. In-Reply-To: <199612310718.BAA02863@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32CB2EEC.6596@disposable.com> Big Moma wrote: > > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) wrote:[...] > > Maybe remailer operators should asks someone reputable to sign their > > remailers' keys so that the users can easily verify the signatures. > > Yes, that is one part of it. Another part is that Raph should > include a public PGP key in the premail program and then sign both the > remailer-list and the pubring at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu with it. Those resources are automatically generated by programs running on a machine of unverified security on the Internet. A PGP signature doesn't mean much in such a situation. -rich From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 1 19:42:45 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 19:42:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ebonite Notes from All Over In-Reply-To: <199612312313.QAA09275@web.azstarnet.com> Message-ID: <199701020339.VAA16675@manifold.algebra.com> i find all four not funny at all drose at AZStarNet.com wrote: > > 1. J. Jackson apparently now finds "ebonics" to be a "Goot Thang"(SM): _S.F. > Examiner_ reporter Venise (sic) Wagner headlines in the paper's Web site > today that "Jackson backs Oakland 'ebonics.' Rights leader switches position > after hearing about program in detail." Says Jackson: "The first message the > came out was that the district was going to make black language equitable > (sic) as another language. That is not the idea." Is Mr. Jackson speaking > in Ebonics? > > 2. From "A Brief History of Plastics": "Ebonite (TM) is produced by heating > natural rubber with about 10% by weight of sulpher. This is about five time > more sulpher than would be used in conventional vulcanisation. The material > is hard, black and tough and bears a striking resemblance to the hardwood, > ebony--hence its name. The main use for ebonite in the early 1800s was in > piano keys." > > 3. Although Ebonite International sponsors the Professional Bowling > Association's "Ebonite Classic" tournament, the Official ABC/WIBC Ruling on > Ball Cleaners, as at 9/12/96, has ruled that their 1-and-2-Step Reactive > Resin Ball Cleaners "cannot be used during ABC/WIBC sanctioned competition > because it would be in violation of Rule 19." But take heart: the American > Bowling Conference Equipment Specifications Department has decided that > "these products are allowed before or after league and/or tournament sessions." > > 4. What's the difference between a bowling ball and a black woman? If > you're really, really hungry, you can always eat the bowling ball. > > N.B. I personally find #4 above to be racist, sick, and not very "funny" at all. > - Igor. From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 1 19:45:21 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 19:45:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internal Passports In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CB2FEE.24D3@disposable.com> Timothy C. May wrote: [...] > And concerns about "identity theft" when such a simple thing as an SS > number is the key to so many records, rights, etc. All you have to do is take a stroll down any street the last week of December, reading SSNs off the labels on the tax forms in everyone's mailbox. -rich From nobody at replay.com Wed Jan 1 20:17:04 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 20:17:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701020416.FAA05470@basement.replay.com> Bill Frantz writes: [snip lots of good ideas about token distribution] A very good scheme, but why not give each subscriber a token when s/he subscribes? Something along the lines of: - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Welcome to Cypherpunks. Your unique token is: 0A553FC1771623109504522E31C07F44 This token must appear either as the first line of the message body or in an X-Token: header for any mail you send to the list. Any messages sent to the list address without this information will be discarded. Your token is initially good for postings per day. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Generate a token thus: Let X be some known information like the From: line of a subscriber's message. Let T be some unique information for each subscriber, like the exact time that Majordomo processed the subscribe request. Let F be the contents of some (non-changing) file on the machine running Majordomo (a "secrets" file). Use a hash function H(X+T+F) to generate your token. Store the token, the unique information (time, in my example) and the number of posts allowed per day in a file you can use to validate user requests. Every time a user sends mail to the list address, Majordomo checks for a token. If there's a valid one, it strips it out and distributes the message. Otherwise it throws it away. This way no one else sees which token was used to post a message. Alice posts all the time using her real name. She just sticks her token in the first line of her post. Majordomo sees it, validates it, and strips it out before passing the message along. It decrements Alice's remaining message count for the day. Bob wants to post something anonymously. His token isn't associated with his user ID -- the only thing Majordomo knows about it is that it's in the token file and it's flagged as active. He sends the message through the remailer network with his token in it, and Majordomo validates it, strips it out, and passes the message to the subscribers, decrementing the number of messages Bob has remaining for that day. Charlie wants to unsubscribe from the list. He sends an unsubscribe message to majordomo with his token in it. Majordomo uses the known information (his "From:" line in my example), plus the time it kept from when his token was generated and the secrets file to validate his request. If it matches up, he's unsubscribed and his token's invalidated; if not, he's warned that someone else tried to unsubscribe him. (In order to allow people whose tokens have been invalidated to unsubscribe, don't make sure the token is valid -- just that it matches up with the user.) Mallory wants to spam the list. He subscribes and gets a token, which he uses to forward commercial announcements to the list. The list manager checks the logs to see which token was used, and reduces its posting limit or invalidates it. Mallory is no longer allowed to post, unless his token is reinstated (or he unsubscribes and resubscribes). Majordomo also has to keep track of how many posts have been associated with a token in any give day, but that seems like a small problem. Users could appeal to the list admin if they wanted a higher limit than the default. Keeping the number fairly low also discourages protracted flamewars somewhat. This isn't an extremely "hard" mechanism (I know it's still vulnerable to eavesdropping attacks), but it'd preserve the ability to post anonymously and make it tougher for spammers to decrease the S/N. Abusers would have to unsubscribe and resubscribe repeatedly to get new tokens, which would make them easier for the list admin to track down. Thoughts? From mrosen at peganet.com Wed Jan 1 20:22:48 1997 From: mrosen at peganet.com (Mark Rosen) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 20:22:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Kremlin v1.04 Message-ID: <199701020422.XAA29384@mercury.peganet.com> I'm sure you all remember my program, Very Good Privacy, and have been waiting for the release of the new version with bated breath. Well, it's finally here! Only, after being contacted by PGP, Inc. regarding a possible trademark violation, I've changed its name to Kremlin. Remember: it's like an iron curtain for your data. The new version still uses the same algorithms. The algorithms can be grouped into three categories: ASCII and Vigenere, which give little security, but are extremely fast, DES, NewDES, and Safer SK-128, which will protect against all but the most well-funded adversaries, and Blowfish, IDEA, and RC4, which are perhaps the most secure algorithms available today. The key-size of the algorithms ranges from 64-bits (actually 56-bits) in DES to 128-bits in IDEA, NewDES, and Safer SK-128, and infinite length in ASCII, Blowfish (up to 448-bits), RC4, and Vigenere. If the "Hash Passkey" option is checked, then the passkeys are hashed with a 64-bit per-source file salt using SHA1 to form a 160-bit passkey; extra bits not used by the fixed-length algorithms are discarded. Without the "Hash Passkey" option checked, the passkey is only XORed with the salt and retains its original size. If the "Encrypt Headers" option is checked, then the filename and file size of the files are encrypted, giving an attacker no information about the source files. Once the files have been encrypted, you have the option of securely deleting them by overwriting them a user-definable number of times with random data; the most secure encryption algorithm in the world is useless if the plaintext is left unsecured on the hard drive. All of this is done through one simple dialog box. To launch Kremlin, just drag a file or directory (or a combination of files or directories) onto the Encrypt icon on the Windows 95 desktop. To decrypt a file, just double-click on it and enter the passkey; no unwieldy tabbed dialog boxes or file directory navigation boxes. Plus, as a added bonus, anyone who orders 10 or more copies of Kremlin will receive a can of Spam (TM) for free! For more information on Kremlin, e-mail mrosen at peganet.com To download Kremlin, go to: http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/2690 From ijlnotes at joblocator.com Wed Jan 1 20:36:09 1997 From: ijlnotes at joblocator.com (IJLNotes) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 20:36:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: IJLNotes is a Computerized Automated Messaging Center Message-ID: <19970102043713006.AAA51@d00472.mco.bellsouth.net> What is IJLNotes? http://www.joblocator.com/ijlnotes/ Need help tracking your day, week or month ? IJLNotes is a unique Computerized Automated Messaging Center. Min. Hardware/Software Requirements Windows 3.1 , '95 or NT 386 or faster 4 MBs RAM Check out the screen shots on our web page http://www.joblocator.com/ijlnews/i5.gif http://www.joblocator.com/ijlnews/i6.gif Full working demo until Feb 10, '97 From bizman at mwt.net Wed Jan 1 20:52:16 1997 From: bizman at mwt.net (bizman at mwt.net) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 20:52:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cash-Grabber-Reversal !!! Message-ID: <199701020451.WAA12633@westbyserver.westby.mwt.net> Some time ago....you shared an email message with me. I'm not going to tell you to quit doing what your doing but... I will share something that may help and compliment your current offer. Yours FREE! I will send you a copy of my "Reversal Letter" that has made over $1.098.00 last month. Use this powerful letter to anyone who sends you a offer via direct mail. The "Reversal Letter" is sent snail mail only, If you would like to get a copy of this "money-grabbing...cash producing letter" email me your snail mail address. If you are working a Primary MLM or business opportunity...feel free to let us know, The Reversal Letter is sent to people who send you their offers. Powerful! Thank You! From frantz at netcom.com Wed Jan 1 20:54:20 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 20:54:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <199612312306.RAA00569@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: I guess from reading Scott McGuire's message I should have described the posting procedure as well as the token issuing procedure. Here is what you do to post: Poster writes the post and include the token in the required place (wherever that turns out to be). Poster encrypt the message with the list's secret key and sends it to the list. Majordomo decrypts the message, checks the token, and if the token check passes, sends the plaintext of the message to the list members. Important points: (1) You do not need a secret key to post. This feature allows you to post from machines where you don't want to store your secret key ring. (2) List members do not need PGP, only posters. (3) People who want to post who can't due to local policy (e.g. no PGP) have choices: (a) Get a real ISP and machine and become a first class citizen. (b) Send the post to someone who can post via private mail, explain the situation and ask to have it posted. The principle reason for using PGP for posting is to protect the token from theft. I don't know a single-message, one-way protocol where a person can show possession of a token without reveling it. If there is such a protocol, then PGP is no longer required. David Molnar asks: >In any case, what bogeyman are we worried about, anyway? Pseudonyms? This >list is already full of 'em. That's nothing new. Forged messages? If you >trust anything you read on the Internet...well.. Privacy? It's a public >mailing list, and one which I have long respected for its tradition of >openness and inclusion. > The bogeyman is flooding attack which make the list server effectivity unavailable. I have tried to preserve all the features he lists. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 1 20:58:43 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 20:58:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: stupid remailer-ignorant stud3nt caught by NY polic3 Message-ID: <199701020409.WAA16955@manifold.algebra.com> http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/national/psychopaths-educ.html Potential Killer or Just Disturbed? Psych Class Seeks Distinction By KAREN W. ARENSON NEW YORK -- The 20-year-old man with a Mohawk haircut, multicolored pigtails, tattooed arms and rings on every finger was an engineering student at a New York college when he sent e-mail to a public official threatening to torture him and rape his young daughter. The FBI arrested the student a few days later as he sat in his pajamas eating breakfast. Late last year, the case landed on the desk of Dr. Naftali Berrill, a forensic psychologist who had conducted court-ordered examinations of Joel Rifkin, the serial killer, and Colin Ferguson, the Long Island Rail Road killer. Now, Berrill is using the e-mail case in the class he teaches at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in Manhattan. The class is part of the college's fastest-growing area of study: forensic psychology. Six years ago there were 96 students in the masters program; now there are 271. "There is a fascination with this stuff," said Berrill, who assigns movies like "Klute," "Silence of the Lambs" and "Psycho" as homework, along with articles in scientific journals. "Popular culture has gone nuts with the idea of taking someone who has committed a crime and profiling the person, thinking about why he did it, what is behind it." The goal on a recent day was to get his students to judge whether the tattooed man was fit to stand trial, whether he was legally responsible for his behavior, or whether he might be considered legally insane, and whether he is in need of treatment. Berrill had evaluated the man and knew the court's ruling, but he wasn't about to tell his students until the exercise was over. "How should the young man be handled?" he asked the students. "Is he really dangerous or is he only sick? Is prison appropriate or does he need medical treatment?" First, the students wanted more information. They did not have the young man to question, so they began firing questions at their professor. Did the young man have prior problems with the law? Berrill shook his head no. Any history of psychological problems? Berrill reported that the young man had "apparently always been an odd duck, a person who felt separated from the group and who capitalized on his oddness." Since his arrest, he says he has had fleeting ideas of killing himself. How did he behave when arrested? He spoke quietly and his speech was fluent, articulate and terse. His reaction was more surprise than remorse. Any other unusual behavior? He used to have fantasies of protecting people beset by attackers. Sometimes he sensed the taste of chocolate, even when he had none in his mouth. Sometimes he walked around New York City with knives strapped to his chest and arms. For half an hour, the psychological sleuthing continued: What kind of family history did he have? He was the last of several children in an Irish-American working-class family, and he had brothers who had been arrested for drug use. Was he overprotected and coddled? The young man had said he was well cared for, but it was difficult to learn whether there was true affection. Finally, the students were ready to lay out their theories. The young man showed signs of a narcissistic personality disorder or a histrionic personality disorder, some said. He might have sent the e-mail message just to get attention, adding the rape threat for shock value but not really as something he intended to carry out. One group thought the student himself had been abused. And some saw his threats as reflections of his own sexual inadequacy. Some students suggested blood tests and psychological tests to see if he was depressed. For many students, the analysis was better than an evening in front of the television set. "I love it," said Adrienne Higgins, a former florist who returned to college and hopes to go on for a Ph.D. in neuropsychology. Eva Norvind, who has a master's degree in health education and counsels sexual deviants, calls the class one of her most challenging. Some students go on to earn doctoral degrees in psychology and begin a practice. Others go to law school, and still others go into social service or police work. But Berrill estimates that about a third of the students take the class to indulge in their own fascination with crime. Berrill got to the heart of the question: "If you were in law enforcement, is he a dangerous person?" Most class members nodded yes. The most telling piece of evidence, said one student, was "the fact that he was walking around the city, like an armed bomb waiting to go off." And the dissenters? "He needs help. I am very concerned about the homicidal and suicidal thoughts." Another commented, "In terms of being dangerous, he has no history. His use of e-mail shows a fear of social contact, and that doesn't fit the character type of a killer." Berrill was pleased. He had one more question: Does the young man have a shot at the insanity defense? No, most students said. "He was aware of everything he was doing," said one. "But he would be helpful to an attorney." Berrill beamed. In his view, the class had captured the important elements. "If I were asked by a judge," he told them, "I would say he is dangerous. Always err on the conservative side. He is in need of mental health services. But incarceration? No. He is not psychologically equipped to deal with real criminals or psychopaths." The court concurred. Earlier this year, a judge put the young man on probation and directed him to seek psychological counseling. - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 1 21:00:25 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 21:00:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Cypher punks" display arrogance and stupidity in the new year In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <8wyVZD83w165w@bwalk.dm.com> aga writes: > > You can complain about Ray's forgery, spam, libel, and other net-abuse to > > his bosses at Earthweb, LLC: Jack Hidary , Murray Hidary, > > , and Nova Spivack . > > Is John Gilmore an admitted Gay, or does he try and cover it up? The way Peter "INN Saboteur" Burger tries to cover up his sexual perversions? Much of the time on the Internet, when some asshole pulls plugs and tries to silence dissent, he turns out to be Gay. In particular, King John Lack-Clue Gilmore, the Supreme and Absolute 12" Ruler of the "cypher punks", is an effeminate, limp-wristed, self-admitted and -exposed cocksucking bitch. I had lunch with Gilmore once. He slurps rather disgustingly when he eats. I suppose he slurps the same way when he sucks big dicks in San Francisco. > > By the way, 'grep' stands for 'g[globa]/r[egular ]e[xpression]/p[rint]. > > Ah yes Professor, but then there is Egrep with the pipe > and Fgrep without the pipe. How about explaining the difference > between the use of those buggers? fgrep runs faster because it doesn't deal with regular expressions like *. If you're searching for a fixed string ('aga' rather than 'a.*a'), it can save you a few milliseconds. egrep understand slightly more complicated regular expressions that regular grep. E.g. egrep "xy?z" file will match xyz and xz, but not xyyz (zero or one occurrences). Here's a neat trick: if you want to list a file with line numbers, try: grep -n "^" file Of course this is too technical for the "cypher punks". By the way the word "bugger" comes from the "Bulgaria". In the Middle Ages, many denizens of the Balkans were in sect that advocated anal intercourse as a means of birth control. Armenians too are stereotyped in both Russian and Turkish cultures as a nation of perverts, always ready to bend over for one another or to fellate a farm animal. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 1 21:34:34 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 21:34:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: <9612302254.AA00731@cow.net> Message-ID: <32CB494C.48AD@disposable.com> All I can tell you is brother, you'll have to wait. -rich From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 1 22:26:41 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 22:26:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Cypher punks" display arrogance and stupidity in the new year In-Reply-To: <8wyVZD83w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <199701020620.AAA17713@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Here's a neat trick: if you want to list a file with line numbers, try: > > grep -n "^" file cat -n works faster. > Of course this is too technical for the "cypher punks". - Igor. From abbee at ritsec1.com.eg Wed Jan 1 22:41:08 1997 From: abbee at ritsec1.com.eg (ABB Electrical Engineering) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 22:41:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: <32CB2A77.218F@gte.net> Message-ID: Again, can anyone tell me how I can stop receiving this mail. I have to stay off for a month and I am afraid I will not be able to read it. Thanks & Happy New Year On Wed, 1 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Bill Frantz wrote: > > At 10:54 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote:[snip] > > I would say that the street action which effectively eliminated legally > > mandated racial segregation about 25 years ago qualifies as a revolution. > > People certainly put their bodies, and occasionally their lives, on the > > line for it. It didn't happen because the political powers that be decided > > to do it. It happened because people mobbed in the streets and made it > > happen. The same argument applies to the actions which forced the withdrawal > > from Vietnam. With the end of the cold war, and the ensuing reduction in > > need for the entrenched national security establishment, we may be ripe > > for another one. I personally hope our government will continue to show > > that it is civilized by keeping the blood shed to a minimum. > > I'll tell you exactly what they'll show. They are a *lot* more hardened > to civil unrest than they were at Kent State, etc. This time, as in the > late 1970's, the leaders, organizers, and other influential people will > be removed, one way or the other. Dissidents will be allowed, as long > as (like Chomsky) they're not a real threat. > > From haystack at cow.net Wed Jan 1 22:53:56 1997 From: haystack at cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 22:53:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks Message-ID: <9701020637.AA04024@cow.net> So, we had a spike of spam attack around Christmas, primarily using the mechanism of subscribing the cypherpunks list to other mailing lists. Now, everybody is off designing methods to limit postings to the list. You know what this reminds me of? The enthusiasm displayed by the the current US government administration to get bills passed that would curtail even more rights of its citizens in the wake of the TWA flight 800 crash. Cypherpunks, you have met the enemy and it is you. From nobody at replay.com Thu Jan 2 00:10:16 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 00:10:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: One-time pads Message-ID: <199701020810.JAA21429@basement.replay.com> The arrival of warm weather is heralded by the pig shit (or whatever kind of shit Intel swines have for brains) getting soft in Timmy C[rook] Mayhem's mini-cranium and the resulting green slime seeping through his cocaine- and syphilis- damaged nose and onto his keyboard. o_, o <\__, v|> Timmy C[rook] Mayhem | < \ From jai at aloha.com Thu Jan 2 00:15:58 1997 From: jai at aloha.com (Dr. Jai Maharaj) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 00:15:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Cypher punks" display arrogance and stupidity in the new year In-Reply-To: <8wyVZD83w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 1 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ... Much of the time on the Internet, when some asshole pulls > plugs and tries to silence dissent, he turns out to be Gay.... How true! The pattern seems to applt to most of the censors operating from the sewer known as lava.net . Jai Maharaj Om Shanti From gbroiles at netbox.com Thu Jan 2 01:23:47 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 01:23:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crypto reg clarification from Commerce Department Message-ID: <199701020923.BAA28031@netbox.com> Lucky Green wrote: >I just got of the phone with Bruce Kutz, Export Policy Analyst, Office of >Strategic Trade and Foreign Policy Controls. (202) 482-0092. He seems to be >the contact person for the new regs. Well done, Lucky. This is what's needed to kick off a lot of commentary during the next 45-days. Backed by research, to be sure. The outpouring of such commentary on the full EAR from May 1995 to March 1996 shaped the final document, and that process is an excellent case study for how to affect the final form of the latest crypto regs. It's worth perusing the full EAR in the Federal Register: March 25, 1996 (Volume 61, Number 58), Pages 12713 et seq. for 325 pages (well over a 2.5MB -- it's also on our site, see URL below). Here's the portion of the EAR that Lucky and Kutz discussed: [Page 12805] Sec. 744.6 Restrictions on certain activities of U.S. persons. (a) General prohibitions--(1) Activities related to exports. (i) No U.S. person as defined in paragraph (c) of this section may, without a license from BXA, export, reexport, or transfer to or in any country other country, any item where that person knows that such item: (A) Will be used in the design, development, production, or use of nuclear explosive devices in or by a country listed in Country Group D:2 (see Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR). (B) Will be used in the design, development, production, or use of missiles in or by a country listed in Country Group D:4 (see Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR); or (C) Will be used in the design, development, production, stockpiling, or use of chemical or biological weapons in or by a country listed in Country Group D:3 (see Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR). (ii) No U.S. person shall, without a license from BXA, knowingly support an export, reexport, or transfer that does not have a license as required by this section. Support means any action, including financing, transportation, and freight forwarding, by which a person facilitates an export, reexport, or transfer without being the actual exporter or reexporter. (2) Other activities unrelated to exports. No U.S. person shall, without a license from BXA: (i) Perform any contract, service, or employment that the U.S. person knows will directly assist in the design, development, production, or use of missiles in or by a country listed in Country Group D:4 (see Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR); or (ii) Perform any contract, service, or employment that the U.S. person knows directly will directly assist in the design, development, production, stockpiling, or use of chemical or biological weapons in or by a country listed in Country Group D:3 (see Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR). (3) Whole plant requirement. No U.S. person shall, without a license from BXA, participate in the design, construction, export, or reexport of a whole plant to make chemical weapons precursors identified in ECCN 1C350, in countries other than those listed in Country Group A:3 (Australia Group) (See Supplement No. 1 to part 740 of the EAR). (b) Additional prohibitions on U.S. persons informed by BXA. BXA may inform U.S. persons, either individually or through amendment to the EAR, that a license is required because an activity could involve the types of participation and support described in paragraph (a) of this section anywhere in the world. Specific notice is to be given only by, or at the direction of, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Administration. When such notice is provided orally, it will be followed by a written notice within two working days signed by the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Export Administration. However, the absence of any such notification does not excuse the exporter from compliance with the license requirements of paragraph (a) of this section. (c) Definition of U.S. person. For purposes of this section, the term U.S. person includes: (1) Any individual who is a citizen of the United States, a permanent resident alien of the United States, or a protected individual as defined by 8 U.S.C. 1324b(a)(3); (2) Any juridical person organized under the laws of the United States or any jurisdiction within the United States, including foreign branches; and (3) Any person in the United States. (d) Exceptions. No License Exceptions apply to the prohibitions described in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. (e) License review standards. Applications to engage in activities otherwise prohibited by this section will be denied if the activities would make a material contribution to the design, development, production, stockpiling, or use of chemical or biological weapons, or of missiles. ----- The EAR covers all kinds of exports, so encryption and cryptography provisions are found by searching. The Federal Register published it in seven 50 page chunks, and is available at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aces140.html Enter the search term: "Page 12713" (with quotes; repeat six times in sequence). We've combined the seven parts for searching: http://jya.com/ear032596.txt (2,570K) From liz at nym.alias.net Thu Jan 2 01:26:22 1997 From: liz at nym.alias.net (Liz Taylor) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 01:26:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: premail. In-Reply-To: <199612310718.BAA02863@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <19970102092611.13841.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) wrote: > Big Moma wrote: > > > > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) wrote:[...] > > > Maybe remailer operators should asks someone reputable to sign their > > > remailers' keys so that the users can easily verify the signatures. > > > > Yes, that is one part of it. Another part is that Raph should > > include a public PGP key in the premail program and then sign both the > > remailer-list and the pubring at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu with it. > > Those resources are automatically generated by programs running on a > machine of unverified security on the Internet. A PGP signature doesn't > mean much in such a situation. Agreed. Considering that the remailer chains were designed to withstand such sofisticated attacks as traffic analysis, it is too bad the tool which most people probably use to access the remailers is vulnerable to a simple spoofing attack such as this. I just realized that the spooks do not really need multiple Mallories. If they want to wiretap a particular person, a Mallory on his/her Internet link is all that is needed. This Mallory can spoof both the incoming pubring.pgp and the outgoing encrypted mail. I suggest that if the `cypherpunks write code' motto has still any value, we discuss ways to eliminate this vulnerability from premail. Maybe we should take the discussion to cryptography, or coderpunks, or even premail-dev? From bigdaddy at shell.skylink.net Thu Jan 2 02:05:54 1997 From: bigdaddy at shell.skylink.net (David Molnar) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 02:05:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: subliminal channels and software failure modes Message-ID: Just a thought I had the other day. Probably unconciously plagarized, but bear with me. What about using subliminal channels as a tool to signal software failure? That is, suppose we define some kind of condition in which the software could continue to work, but should not. In addition, simple cessation of function is not possible, or not advisable. For examples, all that comes to mind off the top of my head is "stolen" software...though perhaps one might use subliminal channels for diagnostic equipment if competitors are assumed to be listening in? When such a condition is met, the software modifies its output (which should be signed w/something which has a nice, big subliminal channel...SHA?) to signal the condition and the particulars. After modifying itself to produce the altered output, it deletes the code responsible for the modification. Unless caught in the act, or compared to a legitimate copy, the application appears no different than before. I was thinking in terms of crypto (or other) software that attempts to personalize itself to a particular machine. If someone steals the HD or grabs the keys and program, their output will be 'tainted', alerting legitimate users to the theft. Hardware disconnected from its normal environment might use such a channel to indicate its 'stolen' or 'temporarily down - come fix' status. This is security through obscurity...the chances of it working are about the chance that no one notices the change or finds the code responsible. I suppose the software industry (and the pirates) will be too happy to provide examples of many attempts to use such schemes. For this reason, I would only ask if it makes sense for limited distributions of software or hardware products. Is this kind of system already in use? Any ideas on making it more applicable to general distribution, or has this already been tried and discarded? David Molnar From iolkos at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 2 02:39:45 1997 From: iolkos at ix.netcom.com (iolkos at ix.netcom.com) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 02:39:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to Reach The Most People Message-ID: Targeted E-Mail Lists Will Get Your Message Out You probably have a special offer to make to many people over the internet. At ATS Publishers, Inc., we maintain a database of over 450 groups of e-mail addresses sorted according to the groups' demographic, psychographic, geographic, benefits-sought, and individual description. If you have a book, product, announcement, or service to advertise in a specific area, your greatest response rates will come from targeting these niche lists. You must have these addresses, as you will save money while no longer mailing your sales message to unqualified prospects. We absolutely guarantee your success with these lists. Here is a small sample: Opportunity Seekers, General Business, Sports (all), Entrepreneurship, Fitness & Exercise, Accountants, Health, Lawyers & Legal, Nutrition, Single Moms, Fashion, Outdoors, Dresswear, Computers, Math & Sciences (all), Finance, Investing, Fishing, Hunting, Hunting Dogs, Financial Markets, Race Boats, Wealth, Taxes, Languages, Millionaires, Divorced Parents, Gay & Lesbian, Kids, Teenagers, Adults, Seniors, Racial-Ethnic-Cultural (all), Criminal, Pornography, Shopaholics, Alcoholics, Virgins, Politics, Overweight, Paranormal, Psychology, Literature, Technical, Painters & Artists, Doctors & Medicine, Religion & Atheism, Government, Taxation, Food and Beverages, Wines & Spirits, Restaurants, Working Women, Geographical U.S., Sex, Physically Challenged Persons, Drugs, Hippies, Music and Musicians, Firearms, Militias, Students, AIDS, Disorders, Child & Baby Care, Feminists, Body Painting & Piercing, Massage, Activists, Homeowners, Real Estate, Automotive, Health Care, Insurance, Edu! cation, Infertility, Architects, Dating, Love, Telecommunications, Hardware & Tools, Homes & Gardening, S&M, Housekeeping, Spirits & Wines, Home Business, Star Trekkies, Athletes, Authors, Store Owners, Job Hunters, Photography, Plants, and another 350 groups targeted even further... If you do not see your group in these listings, don't worry! Even if they are not in our database, we will create one for you within 24 hours. Here's how to order: Write us a brief description of the groups you want to target. We will then ship you, in diskette form, a listing of the 10,000 most targeted prospects for your product. These are people who have PROVEN beyond any doubt that they are interested in the service you are offering. Each e-mail listing of 10,000 names costs only $19.95. And although $19.95 is our minimum order, you may buy in odd lots also, say, 15,000. Each additional name after 10,000 costs only 1/10th of a cent; in this 15,000 name case, you would pay only $24.95! For 20,000 names,you would pay $19.95 plus an extra $10 (10,000 X 10 cents) All orders are shipped via 2-3 day priority mail, and come with a 30-day No Questions Asked Money Back Guarantee. Mail your check or M.O., in the amount of $19.95 plus any additional charges, along with your groups' description, to: ATS Publishers, Inc. 3811 Ditmars Blvd. Astoria, NY 11105 Tel: (718) 274-9060 If the line is busy, keep trying! We're trying to keep up with the enormous demand, since Thursday the 26th, our first mailing. Thank you so much for your time. From rah at shipwright.com Thu Jan 2 03:38:21 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 03:38:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: E-Cash IPO! PCweek Mag! Message-ID: I'm sure they'll be hearing from Digicash, BV's trademark folks on this one... Cheers, Bob Hettinga --- begin forwarded text From: latham at softcell.net To: Date: Thu, 02 Jan 1997 02:11:04 PST Subject: E-Cash IPO! PCweek Mag! E-Cash IPO! 625,000 shares - $1.60 per share As seen in PCweek online magazine: http://www.pcweek.com/news/0826/27email.html "E-commerce startup offers digital cash to each user who retrieves advertising e-mail from its web site. Digital currency units can be converted into US dollars, Japanese yen, Swiss francs, and German marks." Millennium Interactive Technologies, developer of the first ever system of advertiser funded digital cash system. (DCU) is offering 625,000 common shares directly to the public. The offering price is $1.60 per share. Qualified investors can obtain a printed copy of the offering prospectus, demo disk, and additional info on how you can earn digital cash for looking at e-mail by sending reply to: mailto:latham at softcell.net --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From boursy at earthlink.net Thu Jan 2 04:00:27 1997 From: boursy at earthlink.net (Stephen Boursy) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 04:00:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Cypher punks" display arrogance and stupidity in the new year In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CBA432.5EED@earthlink.net> Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote: > > On Wed, 1 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >> ... Much of the time on the Internet, when some asshole pulls >> plugs and tries to silence dissent, he turns out to be Gay.... > > How true! The pattern seems to applt to most of the censors > operating from the sewer known as lava.net . > > Jai Maharaj > Om Shanti Well--I could care less about their sexual preference but what I do care about it proper justice/vengence. When someone pulls a users plug for anything short of system cracking they need to be dealt with in such a way offline that the rest of the would be censors are afraid to go to bed at night. Quite seriously--and I believe we should move that discussion to one of the secure lists and perhaps even raise a bit of money to make a very striking example of a plug puller--I personally despise them in a manner that cannot even be put into words. Steve From master at internexus.net Thu Jan 2 04:57:47 1997 From: master at internexus.net (Laszlo Vecsey) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 04:57:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: anonymous <-> anonymous; dcnets Message-ID: Can someone point me towards a mailing list or two that is dedicated to the discussion and development of dcnets? Thank you! - Lester - A recent study has found that concentrating on difficult off-screen objects, such as the faces of loved ones, causes eye strain in computer scientists. Researchers into the phenomenon cite the added concentration needed to "make sense" of such unnatural three dimensional objects. - From camcc at abraxis.com Thu Jan 2 05:47:25 1997 From: camcc at abraxis.com (Alec) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 05:47:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970102084815.006ab364@smtp1.abraxis.com> At 09:28 AM 12/31/96 -0800, you wrote: : :So in order to post here, I hafta install and run PGP? Well, people :were looking for the perfect formula to deny service to guys like me, :and guess what? You found it! I will *not* install and run PGP. Fill me in. Why do you choose not to install and run PGP? Cordially, Alec PGP Fingerprint: Type bits/keyID Date User ID pub 1024/41207EE5 1996/04/08 Alec McCrackin Key fingerprint = 09 13 E1 CB B3 0C 88 D9 D7 D4 10 F0 06 7D DF 31 From camcc at abraxis.com Thu Jan 2 05:53:18 1997 From: camcc at abraxis.com (Alec) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 05:53:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Would you be interested in SPAM? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970102085415.0069c7dc@smtp1.abraxis.com> At 12:51 AM 1/1/97 GMT, you wrote: To cypherpunks at toad.com :You can save a substantial amount of money on your next Florida :Vacation and receive an adult pass to Universal Studios. : No adults here, Spamboy. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 2 06:02:22 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 06:02:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Cypher punks" display arrogance and stupidity in the new year In-Reply-To: <199701020620.AAA17713@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Here's a neat trick: if you want to list a file with line numbers, try: > > > > grep -n "^" file > > cat -n works faster. Did you time it? > > Of course this is too technical for the "cypher punks". > > - Igor. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 2 06:04:03 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 06:04:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ABB Electrical Engineering writes: > Again, can anyone tell me how I can stop receiving this mail. I have to > stay off for a month and I am afraid I will not be able to read it. Is .eg in Egypt? > Thanks & Happy New Year Happy New Year to you too. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 2 07:18:25 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 07:18:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970102084815.006ab364@smtp1.abraxis.com> Message-ID: <32CBD170.622C@gte.net> Alec wrote: > At 09:28 AM 12/31/96 -0800, you wrote: > :So in order to post here, I hafta install and run PGP? Well, people > :were looking for the perfect formula to deny service to guys like me, > :and guess what? You found it! I will *not* install and run PGP. > Fill me in. Why do you choose not to install and run PGP? The only "software" I have newer than 1989 is Win95 and Netscape. I only run these on one computer, to make net and email access easier. My other computers run straight MS-DOS. I had UNIX in 1986 on a portable HP computer, but HP dropped support for it (what else is new). If I had the time to do it, and I could get a concise written spec of how to interface with whatever I need to, I'd write my own O/S and datacomm software. So I make compromises where necessary for expediency. PGP to me is not necessary (I can encrypt without it), but I do recognize its proliteriat values. From adam at homeport.org Thu Jan 2 07:28:15 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 07:28:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701021523.KAA14949@homeport.org> Timothy C. May wrote: | >The cypherpunks have virtually no force at all. If the battle is | >moved to that arena, the cypherpunks (and everybody else) lose big | >time. If the cypherpunks manage to pull off some sort of "extreme | >step", those who aren't shot while resisting arrest will go to prison. | >Worst of all, most people will applaud the action. "Extreme steps" | >legitimize the radical proposals of the Clipper crowd. | | I gave up on trying to "appear reasonable" long ago. Take it or leave it. | | "Extreme step" doesn't mean doing anything that is traceable to a | particular person, and certainly doesn't mean doing militia-type things to | physical buildings or the criminals who work in them. | | Rather, pushing for things like violating the ITARs, which we do. (Bill | Frantz noted, tongue in cheek I think, that Cypherpunks do not adovacate | breaking such laws. Well, this is of course absurd. Our whole focus on | steganography, on remailers, on carrying CD-ROMs out of the country, etc., | is basically advocating various circumventions of USG laws.) | | Gilmore's SWAN (getting machine-to-machine links widely encrypted) is | another "extreme step." | | As to our "reasonableness," I make little effort to hide the fact that I | support strong cryptography because it means that the plague of democracy | and "mob rule" can be turned back...I view crypto anarchy as an elitist | development, one which the ubermensch will appreciate, but the masses will | recoil in horror from. | | Fuck the herd. Crypto anarchy is not an elitist development, nor is 'equalizing.' The privacy and tax avoidance features of crypto anarchy are already available to the very wealthy, as Unicorn can doubtless explain. They are not available to the moderately wealthy, nor are they easy to take advantage of. I'll declare victory the day McSwitzerland starts advertising for business in the pages of Newsweak. Cheap, easy, universal access to the techniques of tax avoidance, binding contracts with escrowed bonds in jurisdictions with unemasculated contract law mean that things available only to the very rich are available to anyone who chooses to use them. Tim sees this as eliteness, since those who gain will be self selected. I see it as a democritization of privacy, one the 'masses' will be glad to be involved with, if its presented properly. (See 'The Great Simoleon Caper' for more on proper presentation.) Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 2 07:38:39 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 07:38:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Cypher punks" display arrogance and stupidity in the new year In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701021534.JAA20818@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > Here's a neat trick: if you want to list a file with line numbers, try: > > > > > > grep -n "^" file > > > > cat -n works faster. > > Did you time it? > Yes, I wrote a prog that quickly prints a specified number of lines (see below). Then I piped the output of that program to cat -n and grep, respectively, and here's what I got: manifold::~/tmp==>./a.out 1000000 | /usr/bin/time cat -n > /dev/null 1.32user 0.05system 0:01.62elapsed 84%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (46major+17minor)pagefaults 0swaps manifold::~/tmp==>./a.out 1000000 | /usr/bin/time grep -n '^' > /dev/null 19.75user 0.04system 0:20.71elapsed 95%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k 0inputs+0outputs (88major+26minor)pagefaults 0swaps The difference is about fifteen times. - Igor. #include main( int argc, char *argv[] ) { int n = atoi( argv[1] ); for( ; n; n-- ) putchar( '\n' ); } From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jan 2 07:43:41 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 07:43:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: FIPS for AES Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970102153923.006bfbf0@pop.pipeline.com> Federal Register: January 2, 1997, Pages 93-94. Announcing Development of a FIPS for Advanced Encryption Standard Agency: NIST Notice; Request for comments. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary: A process to develop a FIPS for Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) incorporating an Advanced Encryption Algorithm (AEA) is being initiated by the NIST. It is intended that the AES will specify an unclassified, publicly disclosed encryption algorithm capable of protecting sensitive government information well into the next century. [Described as a successor for DES by 1998.] ----- http://jya.com/aes010297.txt (8K) From alzheimer at juno.com Thu Jan 2 08:08:58 1997 From: alzheimer at juno.com (Ronald Raygun Remailer) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 08:08:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Copyright violations Message-ID: <19970102.100832.12295.0.alzheimer@juno.com> Happy New Year. Associated Press: Monday, December 23, 1996 Three Credit Card Firms Seek To Promote Internet Shopping Three credit card companies on Monday announced an agreement on chip card standards in an effort to promote shopping on the Internet. Europay International, MasterCard International and Visa International said in a statement that they'll integrate in chip bank cards a technology developed for safe electronic payments. The agreement is based on the Europay-MasterCard-Visa specification, which established the financial industry's first global chip card payment infrastructure, and on MasterCard and Visa's Secure Electronic Transactions specification for magnetic stripe-based card transactions. Guido Heyns, director of 'smart card' development at Europay International, said in the statement that the Belgium-based company believes chip cards are the most secure and consumer-friendly solution for making payments on the Internet. Steve Mott, senior vice president of MasterCard International, agreed. 'Consumers and merchants want to conduct transactions over the Internet in a safe manner. By integrating chip and electronic commerce technologies, we are offering them the opportunity to do so as quickly and practically as possible.' An open comment period on the new standard will begin in the third quarter of 1997, according to the statement. American Banker: Monday, December 23, 1996 As the Technology Advances, Security Debate Still Rages By JEFFREY KUTLER In one of the more startling public statements by a banker in 1996, Citicorp chairman John Reed said it would take two generations -- 50 to 70 years -- for on-line electronic banking to gain full public acceptance. Taken out of context, his remarks to a Treasury Department conference on electronic money sounded like an invitation to complacency, or a dose of disinformation from one of the world's more aggressive purveyors of electronic financial services. But Mr. Reed chose his words carefully, citing a lesson learned from his 30-plus years at Citicorp: Banking markets, and society generally, take time to change. He seemed to suggest that high-technology advocates can become so enthralled with the elegance of their systems and convinced of their viability that they overlook the most common of all constraints: consumer behavior. "Privacy and security are at the top of the list" of consumers' concerns, the Citicorp chief executive said. "They won't deal with anyone who doesn't give them assurance." While "some early innovators will be your electronic banking customers," he said, "the average consumer is not there yet and isn't going to be there" for some time. "This is not a question of economics or efficiency. It is a question of trust. The consumer will have to trust you. The Internet is fundamentally flawed in that regard." Essentially alone among the major U.S. banking organizations, Citicorp has been openly wary of Internet security and refrained from joining the rush to interactive banking and monetary transactions via the World Wide Web. Mr. Reed and his senior technology officer, Colin Crook, have publicly expressed interest in and enthusiasm for the Web but not yet for transactional purposes. When Mr. Reed was asked during the Treasury conference in September when Citi would offer Internet banking, he replied, "Not until it's secure." "There is no absolute security," said Mr. Crook, perhaps the only banker raising concerns about an "information warfare" attack on the banking system. "It is a risk management issue." The Citibankers contend the risks of cyberspace are fundamentally different from those in other payment systems, and have yet to be addressed. "Security will be more demanding than even the government itself is used to," Mr. Crook said at the Treasury meeting serves more customers via personal computer than any other, through conventional dial-up connections and with software it developed more than a decade ago. Citibank also has placed a bet on a digital currency for on-line transactions, the invention of one of its own vice presidents, Sholom Rosen. The bank claims it will be more secure than competing alternatives like Cybercash Inc.'s Cybercoins, Digicash Inc.'s Ecash, and the Mondex smart-card-based system. Putting considerable prestige and intellectual firepower behind its cautionary principles, and behind the notion that the issuing of electronic currency should be reserved for regulated financial institutions, Citicorp has kept alive a debate that is likely to resound for months if not years in public policy circles, with effects not just on the battle for technical and competitive superiority but on the very consumer behavior Mr. Reed is trying to gauge. Consider some recent twists and turns: The U.S. government continues to struggle toward a policy on data encryption, the technology crucial to on-line transaction security, that would be agreeable to the high-tech community while addressing national security and law enforcement concerns. A May 1996 report by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences -- Citicorp participated in and vocally endorsed the study -- criticized the government for being backward with its restrictions on encryption, particularly regarding its export. (See related article on page 14A.) Hewlett-Packard Co. in November announced its International Cryptography Framework, the first "strong encryption" method to get U.S. export clearance. While the framework is adaptable to various and changing government policies, it did not fully resolve the controversial issue of access to encryption keys. An information security team at the National Security Agency produced a monograph (excerpted at left) critical of the degree of anonymity built into Digicash's Ecash. The NSA, of course, is part of the establishment attacked in the National Research Council report. Digicash and Mondex, which is being taken over by MasterCard International, continually trade charges about their degrees of anonymity and security. Both sell anonymity of payments as a necessary analogue to cash. In that Digicash's anonymity appears more absolute, it may raise more governmental concerns. But Digicash, the brainchild of the renowned cryptologist David Chaum, accuses Mondex of not being "true electronic cash." First Virtual Holdings Inc., an Internet payment pioneer, does not trust Web security; its transaction data flow instead over private E-mail. By contrast, Cybercash Inc. chairman William Melton is so confident of the available technology that he tells bankers: "Security is essentially done. Just tell your customers, 'Don't worry, we'll take care of it.' " (He is more worried about privacy as a political flashpoint.) Enter the central banks of the Group of 10 industrialized countries, the constituents of the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland. This august global regulatory body has signed off on a moderate, largely laissez-faire approach to the electronic evolution of money. A task force empaneled by the G-10's payment and settlement systems committee, which is headed by Federal Reserve Bank of New York president William McDonough, spelled out its conclusions in a 64-page booklet, "Security of Electronic Money," dated August 1996. The task force was generally impressed by existing security capabilities, particularly those incorporating hardware components like smart cards. The report took the eight-member task force less than a year to complete. Chairman Israel Sendrovic, the New York Fed's executive vice president of automation and systems services, asserts that this was no rush to judgment. He personally did due diligence on all of what he calls "the usual suspects" -- the electronic money schemes not mentioned by name in his report (but presumably in this article). In a recent interview, Mr. Sendrovic stressed that there are no absolutes. "There is no such thing as one secure measure," he said. "It's a combination of measures, and the combination of measures changes the risk management of an attack." His measured response to a lot of questions - pertaining to money laundering or the market potential of electronic currency and how it is to be regulated -- was, "It depends." He did say, in response to the recent flurry of questions about smart card security emanating from Bellcore and other research laboratories, that the cards were advertised as "tamper-resistant, not tamper- proof." Mr. Sendrovic said his panel has disbanded, satisfied with its work and having gotten positive feedback. "Then again, it didn't break new ground," he said. "Remember, it was designed not for the cognoscenti but for the Group of 10 governors. "We stay in close touch and follow these things," he said of the task force, adding that it may have cause to renew its inquiry in a year or two. Though the task force acknowledged "comprehensive security risk assessments of the entire system" are still lacking, it said they are within reach. And its words lacked the alarm or urgency of, say, the Citicorp contingent. Sholom Rosen, inventor of Citibank's Electronic Monetary System, characterized the risks as "very high" and not yet fully analyzed. Digital cash gains legitimacy when it is interchangeable with other forms of money, he said, but its interactions with those systems -- how an attack on one mechanism would affect others -- must be studied. And he said he believes the answers do not lie in technology alone but in the fundamentals of the "three pillars of security" -- prevention, detection, and containment. Where Mr. Rosen sees enormous hazard, Mr. Sendrovic retains faith in barriers to entry, as might be expected of someone who has worked with the dependable Fed Wire for many years. To be legitimate, electronic money "has to be cleared," he said. "At some point it has to get into the payment system." Is "the payment system" at risk of infection from the new forms of money? Based on what we know so far, it depends. ABA Banking Journal, 12/96 SMART CARDS POSE TAX PROBLEM FOR MERCHANTS A consensus is emerging that the success of smart cards hinges at least as much on merchants accepting them as on consumer acceptance. Increased tax liability is one reason for merchants' muted enthusiasm -- besides the fact that merchants are the only ones so far being asked to pay for using smart cards."There's a resistance to forms of payment besides cash," said Bruce Brittain, whose firm Brittain Associates, Inc., polled merchants that participated in the smart card test during the 1996 Summer Olympics in Atlanta. Some merchants admitted to understating their cash receipts so as to reduce their tax burden, he said. (Smart cards leave an electronic audit trail by recording deductions in card value each time merchandise is purchased.) On the flip side, franchisors may push for the adoption of smart cards in their stores, since some Atlanta operators told Brittain, "We want to collect more fees from our franchisees." (The franchisor's cut of the receipts will be reduced if the franchisee understates his receipts.) Other sources said they heard the same thing. The wish to under report receipts may pose a greater obstacle to smart cards when they undergo their next major test in New York City next year, because more "Mom and Pop" stores will be participating, Mr. Brittain said. From adam at homeport.org Thu Jan 2 08:39:57 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 08:39:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: benefits of EAR (not)? In-Reply-To: <199701011823.SAA01596@server.test.net> Message-ID: <199701021635.LAA15145@homeport.org> Adam Back wrote: | Reading through "http://jya.com/bxa123096.txt": | | > 1. This interim rule has been determined to be significant for | > purposes of E.O. 12866. A cost benefit analysis has been prepared and | > is available upon request by contacting James A. Lewis at (202) 482- | > 0092. | | Anyone availed themselves of this offer of a CBA for EAR? Just | curious as to what the supposed benefits are :-) I called that number, was told I needed to talk to Bruce Kutz, 202 482 4439, who offered to fax it to me, but since I'll be pretty busy I had him snail mail it. Easier to read that way. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From Chipper at cris.com Thu Jan 2 10:09:22 1997 From: Chipper at cris.com (Clinton Weiss) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 10:09:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: benefits of EAR (not)? In-Reply-To: <199701021635.LAA15145@homeport.org> Message-ID: get me the hell off this damn list From lucifer at dhp.com Thu Jan 2 11:25:13 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 11:25:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: NoneOne-time pads Message-ID: <199701021924.OAA19621@dhp.com> Tim May is just a poor excuse for an unschooled, retarded thug. /''' c-OO Tim May \ - From hal at rain.org Thu Jan 2 11:44:22 1997 From: hal at rain.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 11:44:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks Message-ID: <199701021834.KAA07300@crypt.hfinney.com> I think this is an interesting theoretical discussion, although it's not clear whether it is actually a good idea to try implementing this. From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) > A very good scheme, but why not give each subscriber a token when s/he > subscribes? Something along the lines of: > > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Welcome to Cypherpunks. > > Your unique token is: 0A553FC1771623109504522E31C07F44 > > This token must appear either as the first line of the message body or in an > X-Token: header for any mail you send to the list. Any messages sent to the > list > address without this information will be discarded. > [...] > Bob wants to post something anonymously. His token isn't associated with his > user ID -- the only thing Majordomo knows about it is that it's in the token > file and it's flagged as active. He sends the message through the remailer > network with his token in it, and Majordomo validates it, strips it out, and > passes the message to the subscribers, decrementing the number of messages Bob > has remaining for that day. This requires Bob to trust the server to keep his identity secret. Although you _say_ that majordomo didn't associate the token with the userid, how does Bob know that? Certainly majordomo did, when Bob subscribed, see the association between the userid and the token. Now he has to trust that it has been forgotten. Even if it has, what about eavesdroppers on the list channel? What about the operator on the machine, who is peeking at what majordomo is doing? This mechanism will not provide enough anonymity for most posters. An alternative similar to what I proposed earlier is for majordomo to provide a blinded token, one which it doesn't see. This would be used specifically for anonymous postings. It does have the problem that it allows linking postings by the same pseudonymous nym - all will have the same token. But maybe we want to encourage that. (The full proposal I made involved use-once tokens, just like online digital cash, so that there would be no linkage and it would allow real anonymity.) > Mallory wants to spam the list. He subscribes and gets a token, which he > uses to > forward commercial announcements to the list. The list manager checks the logs > to see which token was used, and reduces its posting limit or invalidates it. > Mallory is no longer allowed to post, unless his token is reinstated (or he > unsubscribes and resubscribes). This unsubscribe/resubscribe issue has been mentioned before as a problem. I am not too concerned with it, for a few reasons. First, it may not be too difficult to recognize that it is happening. If the same user name is used we can prevent issuing new tokens on an unsubscribe/resubscribe cycle. If different user names are used but common domain names (an attack which many people could mount) we could recognize that with somewhat more difficulty, and mark those domains as special. Most people would have trouble getting lots of different accounts with different domain names. Eric Hughes maxim, "all crypto is economics", applies here. We can easily make it much more difficult for flooding attacks to occur. Hal From haystack at cow.net Thu Jan 2 12:23:45 1997 From: haystack at cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 12:23:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: New crypto regs outlaw financing non-US development Message-ID: <9701022007.AA11140@cow.net> At 31 Dec 1996 22:32:38 -0500 (Lucky Green) wrote: > At 01:05 PM 12/31/96 -0800, Ian Goldberg wrote: > > > >But it _specifically_ restricts virus-checkers (and, also, it would seem, > >backup programs, but that could be stretching it): > > > >ECCN 5D002.c.3: > ># ``Software'' designed or modified to protect against malicious > ># computer damage, e.g., viruses > > My mistake. I overlooked this paragraph. I thought it had not made it into > the final version. Virus checkers, programs like Tripwire, and all firewall > products are export controlled under the new regs. Regardless if the > program uses crypto or not. > How long before the United Police States of America bans the export of medicines and medical technology because it can be a defense against biological warfare? From daw at cs.berkeley.edu Thu Jan 2 13:42:28 1997 From: daw at cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 13:42:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: New crypto regulations In-Reply-To: <32cc13c3.83442324@kdn0.attnet.or.jp> Message-ID: <5ah9ub$7th@joseph.cs.berkeley.edu> In article <199612301517.KAA01543 at pdj2-ra.F-REMOTE.CWRU.Edu>, Peter D. Junger wrote: > > : Does this mean that if a journal published an article on some strong > : non-key escrow encryption algorithm that included source code, it > : could not later offer that same article on a CD-ROM collection? or > : provide that same source code online? > > That is exactly what the new regulations seem to provide. An interesting > question is what is the status of all those issues of Byte and Dr. > Dobb's that do have cryptopraphic source code and that are currently > available on the net. Or are there any such articles? > Here's one. Ian Goldberg and I wrote a Dr. Dobb's Journal article on Netscape's insecure random number generation. It contained a few short snippets of code that described how Netsape's PRNG seeding process worked. I believe that they may fall under the category of 'cryptographic source code'. And...guess what... DDJ in fact published the article online at http://www.ddj.com/ddj/1996/1996.01/wagner.htm Here's a citation: Ian Goldberg and David Wagner. "Randomness and the Netscape Browser". Dr. Dobb's Journal, January 1996. From gbroiles at netbox.com Thu Jan 2 14:40:56 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 14:40:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: New rules for Internet sales to CA buyers Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970102144026.0069bc00@mail.io.com> The following subsection of California Business & Professions Code section 17538 took effect 1/1/97 and may be of interest to people following state attempts to regulate net sales: [...] (d) A vendor conducting business through the Internet or any other electronic means of communication shall do all of the following when the transaction involves a buyer located in California: (1) Before accepting any payment or processing any debit or credit charge or funds transfer, the vendor shall disclose to the buyer in writing or by electronic means of communication, such as E-mail or an on-screen notice, the vendor's return and refund policy, the legal name under which the business is conducted and, except as provided in paragraph (3), the complete street address from which the business is actually conducted. (2) If the disclosure of the vendor's legal name and address information required by this subdivision is made by on-screen notice, all of the following shall apply: (A) The disclosure of the legal name and address information shall appear on any of the following: (i) the first screen displayed when the vendor's electronic site is accessed, (ii) on the screen on which goods or services are first offered, (iii) on the screen on which a buyer may place the order for goods or services or (iv) on the screen on which the buyer may enter payment information, such as a credit card account number. The communication of that disclosure shall not be structured to be smaller or less legible than the text of the offer of the goods or services. (B) The disclosure of the legal name and address information shall be accompanied by an adjacent statement describing how the buyer may receive the information at the buyer's E-mail address. The vendor shall provide the disclosure information to the buyer at the buyer's E-mail address within five days of receiving the buyer's request. (C) Until the vendor complies with subdivision (a) in connection with all buyers of the vendor's goods or services, the vendor shall make available to a buyer and any person or entity who may enforce this section pursuant to Section 17535 on-screen access to the information required to be disclosed under this subdivision. (3) The complete street address need not be disclosed as required by paragraph (1) if the vendor utilizes a private mailbox receiving service and all of the following conditions are met: (A) the vendor satisfies the conditions described in paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) of Section 17538.5, (B) the vendor discloses the actual street address of the private mailbox receiving service in the manner prescribed by this subdivision for the disclosure of the vendor's actual street address, and (C) the vendor and the private mailbox receiving service comply with all of the requirements of subdivisions (c) to (f), inclusive, of Section 17538.5. --- Legislative history can be found at -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. From cybersource at pwrnet.com Thu Jan 2 15:03:05 1997 From: cybersource at pwrnet.com (cybersource at pwrnet.com) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:03:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: it's back up again Message-ID: <199701022302.SAA08734@mail.pwrnet.com> Hi, I just wanted to take a moment and let some of the folks with whom we've participated in online discussion on the Usenet boards know that our website if finally back up! Please feel free to visit us there. Have a great New Year! The Downline Experience http://lifequest.net/tronix/ 1-800-678-5522 ext 8056 "Timing is everything... but positioning is critical!" (Larry Thompson -- Mentor to the Millionaires 1996) From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 2 18:40:15 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:40:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: benefits of EAR (not)? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Clinton Weiss writes: > get me the hell off this damn list You have to send "unsubscrive" a few hundred times to gnu at toad.com. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From rcgraves at disposable.com Thu Jan 2 18:47:53 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 18:47:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CC72FD.7F5B@disposable.com> Timothy C. May wrote: > > I'll continue to be radical in my views. Nothing wrong with extremism > in the defense of liberty, as some wise men said. Barry Goldwater describes the person who said that as a stupid, selfish kid. I believe those are his exact words; he did lunch at my dorm in Spring 1991. He had a book out at the time. Some people mellow with age. Others go the other way. -rich From rcgraves at disposable.com Thu Jan 2 19:14:28 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 19:14:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: <9612302254.AA00731@cow.net> Message-ID: <32CC7934.279B@disposable.com> Bill Frantz wrote: > > At 10:54 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote: > >Our focus is more radical. We are effectively a cyber-militia, > >fulfilling Jefferson's recommendation that a revolution happen > >every 20 years. > > > >(Funny, there hasn't been one in more than 200 years. ... > > I would say that the street action which effectively eliminated > legally mandated racial segregation about 25 years ago qualifies as > a revolution. People certainly put their bodies, and occasionally > their lives, on the line for it. It didn't happen because the > political powers that be decided to do it. It happened because > people mobbed in the streets and made it happen. Cryptoanarchy, as envisioned here, is not about people mobbing in the streets. It's fundamentally about insulating oneself from the mobs in the streets. When Tim says he's an elitist, he means it, though of course we may disagree on who is allowed to be part of our "elite." I wouldn't exclude people who find the most extreme "satire" in the "ebonics" threads, for example. However, revolutions tend to have unintended consequences. The noblemen who drafted the Magna Carta never thought it would become a broad statement of rights. The slaveholders who signed the Declaration of Independence never thought it would be used against them. If crypto becomes ubiquitous worldwide, I doubt Tim May's ilk will enjoy the result. In the short term, it's a defense that preserves the distribution of wealth and privilege, but in the long run, we'll see that eroded. There is something to Vulis's latest rants -- his "facts" are all lies, of course, but there's something there. Lies, evasions, and deception give temporary advantage, but eventually they come back home to roost. Sometimes it takes generations. The things that last are the ideas that make people mob in the streets, not the things that enable them to hide at home. -rich From nobody at replay.com Thu Jan 2 19:25:21 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 19:25:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <199701021834.KAA07300@crypt.hfinney.com> Message-ID: <199701030325.EAA00372@basement.replay.com> Hal Finney writes: >I think this is an interesting theoretical discussion, although it's >not clear whether it is actually a good idea to try implementing this. Yeah, I just floated it as a trial balloon of sorts. It seemed like a way to "harden" the list somewhat without forcing users to go to full encryption. I had a few extra brain cells to burn off yesterday. Your points are entirely correct, though: you have to trust the list admin, and you have to have some faith in the Majordomo software not to retain your ID once it generates your token. The usual eavesdropping concerns remain as well. [snip] >An alternative similar to what I proposed earlier is for majordomo to >provide a blinded token, one which it doesn't see. This would be used >specifically for anonymous postings. In your scheme, I presume one would get a blinded token (in an encrypted message) when subscribing, and postings from non-subscribers would be checked for a valid token? (Please correct me if I'm wrong. . .) > It does have the problem that it >allows linking postings by the same pseudonymous nym - all will have the >same token. But maybe we want to encourage that. Probably not the worst thing in the world. >(The full proposal I made involved use-once tokens, just like online >digital cash, so that there would be no linkage and it would allow >real anonymity.) Hmm, an interesting tie-in. Maybe one could "buy" tokens to post anonymously? It'd give new meaning to the phrase "putting your money where your mouth is." :-) Thanks for the feedback! (returning to lurk mode now. . .) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 2 20:06:52 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 20:06:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: OCR and Machine Readable Text Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970103040624.005b2228@popd.ix.netcom.com> It's really embarassing to have to pay salaries of "public employees" who can't come up with better arguments than the paper/magnetic/OCR nonsense but don't have the guts to stop trying and admit they've wrong. Does the President still make $200K/year salary? You'd think he'd either read what he signs or tell his employees to only ask him to sign at least half-way credible stuff. The old regulations used to pretend that foreigners were too dumb to implement computer programs from algorithms; now they're pretending that foreigners are too dumb to type.* People used to say we have the best politicians money can buy, but you ought to be able to buy better politicians than that. At 10:31 AM 12/30/96 -0800, Tim May wrote: >And not only is OCR able these days to handle general fonts easily enough, >but almost all printed code is in fixed-width fonts, i.e., non-proportional >fonts. This makes OCR easy. The basic difference between "easily OCRed source code" and "not easily OCRed source code" is pretty much limited to two things 1) Half-decent print quality (black on white in Courier at 300dpi should do....) As Tim says, this stuff is child's play. Back when OCRs were $10,000 machines with cutting-edge 68010 processors, reading Courier was pretty easy but it helped to put in checksums; these days you don't really need that. (It also didn't like wet-process 240-dpi laser printing or faxes, but modern OCR software can generally deal with good-quality faxes and 2) Bound pages vs. loose pages (printing with perforated pages or selling the source code in loose-leaf might count as an "attractive nuisance" :-), but a band-saw can solve that problem for the OCR user unless it's printed on Tyvek or something silly :-) In the Karn case, the Feds made the silly argument that the floppy disk version had the files neatly separated, while the paper version split files between pages and had page numbers at the bottoms of the pages that weren't part of the source code. Even the $10K 68010 wonderbox could handle page headers/footers and margins, and modern software can do decent translations into different word processor formats. >For just the amount of money we've spent (in our consulting fees) on >discussing just this issue of OCRing, the entire content of the MIT PGP >source code book AND Schneier's AC could have been manually inputted by >Barbadans or Botswanas, or probably even by Europeans. There's one German university that OCRed the MIT PGP source code book. The PGP folks passed out copies of their new 3.0 Pre-Alpha and an update at a recent Cypherpunks meeting. See http://www.pgp.com/newsroom/sourcebook.cgi for ordering informaiton. It's been donated to some local libraries, such as San Jose CA, and I hope they'll send it to the Library of Congress and various non-US university and other public libraries - the recent rules change clarifying that it's ok to export source code should make this much easier. [* OK, it's not really possible to type or proofread perl code accurately :-) More to the point, OCRs aren't always real good about `backquotes' and other little blotchy marks that some languages use, and even humans don't always get them right.] # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 2 20:08:32 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 20:08:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Onion Routing" Pipenet-like project at NRL Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970103040628.005e622c@popd.ix.netcom.com> http://www.itd.nrl.navy.mil/ITD/5540/projects/onion-routing/overview.html Michael G. Reed, Paul F. Syverson, and David M. Goldschlag have a bunch of papers on the Naval Research Laboratory Information Technology Division web site about Onion Routing, a pipenet-like anonymous communication system that sets up chains of encrypted IP tunnels between servers. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 2 20:11:25 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 20:11:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <199701021834.KAA07300@crypt.hfinney.com> Message-ID: <9wqXZD12w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Hal Finney writes: > This requires Bob to trust the server to keep his identity secret. > Although you _say_ that majordomo didn't associate the token with > the userid, how does Bob know that? Certainly majordomo did, when > Bob subscribed, see the association between the userid and the token. > Now he has to trust that it has been forgotten. Even if it has, what > about eavesdroppers on the list channel? What about the operator on the > machine, who is peeking at what majordomo is doing? This mechanism will > not provide enough anonymity for most posters. If the majordomo operator is the lying cocksucker John Gilmore, then he definitely should not be trusted. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 2 20:12:05 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 20:12:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: New crypto regs outlaw financing non-US development In-Reply-To: <9701022007.AA11140@cow.net> Message-ID: Bovine Remailer writes: > At 31 Dec 1996 22:32:38 -0500 (Lucky Green) wrote: > > At 01:05 PM 12/31/96 -0800, Ian Goldberg wrote: > > > > > >But it _specifically_ restricts virus-checkers (and, also, it would seem, > > >backup programs, but that could be stretching it): > > > > > >ECCN 5D002.c.3: > > ># ``Software'' designed or modified to protect against malicious > > ># computer damage, e.g., viruses > > > > My mistake. I overlooked this paragraph. I thought it had not made it into > > the final version. Virus checkers, programs like Tripwire, and all firewall > > products are export controlled under the new regs. Regardless if the > > program uses crypto or not. > > > > How long before the United Police States of America bans the export > of medicines and medical technology because it can be a defense against > biological warfare? What makes you think you're allowed to export medicines now? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From tcmay at got.net Thu Jan 2 20:14:16 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 20:14:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internal Passports In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 10:35 PM -0800 12/31/96, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 11:02 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote: >>There have been several reports cited here recently about changes in the SS >>laws to make the SS number more of an ID number. ... >> >>And concerns about "identity theft" when such a simple thing as an SS >>number is the key to so many records, rights, etc. > >I don't see how you can have the SS number be both a public ID number and a >secret password. Perhaps you could have it be one, but not both. It seems >to me that parts of our society are trying have it be a password and parts >a public ID number. (Perhaps the same parts?) Doing both just won't work. > >(Using SS as a password is subject to all the stealing and replay attacks >that make passwords a really bad idea for secure identification.) ???? I never made such a claim, that SS numbers are any kind of secret key or password. The phrase "identity theft," not coined by me, is a recent term of art involving the ease with which those with access to a person's SS number can then acquire credit cards, etc. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay at got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 2 21:16:20 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 21:16:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Cypher punks" display arrogance and stupidity in the new year In-Reply-To: <199701021534.JAA20818@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > > Here's a neat trick: if you want to list a file with line numbers, try: > > > > > > > > grep -n "^" file > > > > > > cat -n works faster. > > > > Did you time it? > > > > Yes, I wrote a prog that quickly prints a specified number of lines > (see below). Then I piped the output of that program to cat -n and > grep, respectively, and here's what I got: > > manifold::~/tmp==>./a.out 1000000 | /usr/bin/time cat -n > /dev/null > 1.32user 0.05system 0:01.62elapsed 84%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k > 0inputs+0outputs (46major+17minor)pagefaults 0swaps > > manifold::~/tmp==>./a.out 1000000 | /usr/bin/time grep -n '^' > /dev/null > 19.75user 0.04system 0:20.71elapsed 95%CPU (0avgtext+0avgdata 0maxresident)k > 0inputs+0outputs (88major+26minor)pagefaults 0swaps > > > The difference is about fifteen times. > > - Igor. > > > #include > > main( int argc, char *argv[] ) > { > > int n = atoi( argv[1] ); > > for( ; n; n-- ) > putchar( '\n' ); > } Have you got nothing better to do? I take this as a hint that we should get back to the MJ project. Meanwhile, here's an equally useful program - run it at MS DOS prompt to leave it resident, then type the names of my least favorite "cypher punks" to any program that uses INT 16 to read from kbd. ;;; cpunx.asm cseg segment assume cs:cseg,ds:cseg org 100h entry: call start org 100h state db 1 dup(?) ;3 bytes sdi dw 1 dup(?) str1 label byte db 'Gilmore',0 db 'Arachelian',0 str2mask equ 003h ; 0..3 str2 label byte db ' (fart)',0 db ' (spit)',0 db ' (barf)',0 db ' (blech)',0 gett proc near push ds xor di,di mov ds,di mov di,ds:[46ch] ;timer pop ds ret gett endp i16: cmp ah,0 jz ah0 db 0eah ; jmp o16oa dw ? o16sa dw ? ah0: push ds push cs pop ds cmp state,4 jnz st4x push di mov di,sdi mov al,ds:[di] ;ah=scancode=funccode=0 inc sdi cmp al,0 jz st1a ;done stacking jmp i16dix st4x: pushf db 09ah ; call far o16ob dw ? o16sb dw ? cmp state,0 jnz st1 push di mov di,offset str1 st0a: cmp al,ds:[di] jz st0b st0c: inc di cmp byte ptr ds:[di],0 jnz st0c inc di cmp di,offset str2 jnz st0a jmp short i16dix st0b: inc di mov sdi,di jmp short i16ist ;state=1 st1: cmp state,1 jnz st2 push di mov di,sdi cmp al,ds:[di] jnz st1a inc di cmp byte ptr ds:[di],0 jnz st1b inc state ;2 call gett st1b: mov sdi,di jmp short i16dix st1a: mov state,0 jmp short i16dix st2: cmp state,2 jnz st3 push di call gett xor di,sdi test di,0FFC0h ;around 3 seconds jz i16dix inc state ;3 ; jmp short i16dix pop di ;fall thru st3: cmp al,'A' ;state=3 jae i16x ;waiting for a delimiter push di push ax mov al,byte ptr sdi and al,str2mask mov di,offset str2 st3a: dec al js st3b st3c: inc di cmp byte ptr ds:[di],0 jnz st3c inc di jmp st3a st3b: mov sdi,di pop ax ;state=4 i16ist: inc state i16dix: pop di i16x: pop ds iret i16end: minst db 'Installed.',13,10 minstl equ $-minst malr db 'Already in memory.',13,10 malrl equ $-malr start: mov state,0 xor ax,ax mov ds,ax mov ax,word ptr ds:[16h*4] cmp ax,offset i16 ;already resident? jz skp mov cs:o16oa,ax mov cs:o16ob,ax mov ax,word ptr ds:[16h*4+2] mov cs:o16sa,ax mov cs:o16sb,ax cli mov word ptr ds:[16h*4],offset i16 mov word ptr ds:[16h*4+2],cs sti mov dx,offset minst mov cx,minstl push cs pop ds mov bx,2 mov ah,40h ;write message to stderr int 21h mov dx,offset i16end int 27h skp: push cs pop ds mov dx,offset malr mov cx,malrl mov bx,2 mov ah,40h ;write message to stderr int 21h int 20h cseg ends end entry Given that "cypher punks" don't write code, they wouldn't know how to assemble it either... Here's a COM file: table !"#$%&'()*+,-./0123456789:;<=>? @ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^_ begin 666 cpunx.com MZ!L!1VEL;6]R90!!5[\# 3H%= ]'@#T =?I'@?\6M M 77OZV]'B3X! >MD@#X 0%U(U>+/@$!. at 5U$T> /0!U!_X& 'HA_^)/@$!M MZT7&!@ ! .L^@#X 0)U$U?H;_\S/@$!]\? _W0I_ at 8 5\\07,A5U"@ 0$DM M [\6 ?[(> E'@#T =?I'Z_.)/@$!6/X& %?'\]);G-T86QL960N#0I!;')EM M861Y(&EN(&UE;6]R>2X-"L8& $ ,\".V*%8 #U" 70S+J-( 2ZC:@&A6@ NM MHTH!+J-L ?K'!E@ 0@&,#EH ^[K^ ;D, X?NP( M$#-(;K^ >Return-Path: >Comments: Authenticated sender is >From: "Ross Wright" >Organization: King Media and RW Marketing >To: kimkl at calweb.com (Kimberly Leahy) >Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 23:01:11 -0800 >Subject: Re: cookies >Priority: normal >X-UIDL: f3b0b16d616765cf37b9c5fa5150407f > >Send an inquiry to cypherpunks at toad.com You will get many >informative answers! >I be looking for your inquiry, I read that list also! > >On or About 1 Jan 97 at 21:55, Kimberly Leahy wrote: > >> Rossta, >> please enlighten on cookies that invade a browser's >> computer. where can i get more info? i was told that >> a utility is available to track and/or crush cookies. >> can you tell me where to get it or get info on such a >> thing? >> hopefully, >> kimmer >> >> > >=-=-=-=-=-=- >Ross Wright >King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services >http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia >Voice: 415-206-9906 > Cypherpunks, would you please send me infor or direct to a location where I may acquire information of these "cookies"? Thank You Ever So Much. From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Thu Jan 2 22:24:02 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 22:24:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypherpunk Elitism and Spam Filters Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970102222216.0068b54c@mail.teleport.com> I have been watching the debate on Cypherpunk Extremism, filtering spam, and the like and have a few comments. When Tim May claims that Cypherpunk solutions lead to elitism, he is more correct than Vullis or any of his ilk are willing to realize. The reasons for this are out of implementation, not out of any ill-will or evil intent. It is because it requires special knowledge and/or software to be able to implement the "solution(s)". (Note that I am only aware of his comments through quotes of his material. I have blocked him at the procmail level, so I cannot go back through trash and read the originals. Probably a good thing, as it keeps me from sinking to the level of flames and personal attacks. Attention Vullis revels in...) I have watched the conversations on filtering and have seen few, if any, methods that would be usable by a poster of average experience without alot of extra frustration and/or time involved. For a filtering or posting method to be useful (or used), it has to be uncumbersome to use, no matter the platform. Charging for posting is not (in my opinion) a good method because conversions from real cash to e-cash are not very easy and/or available at this time. It would leave the posting to the "elite" who have connections to e-cash acceptable to the list management. Tokens are nice, but most plans for them make it a pain to post with any sort of e-mail software. (Cut and pasting a token will work for one or two sites, but if a user posts to many lists, keeping track of all those tokens could become quite a pain. There is also the risk of people posting their tokens for general use or the token being used to track anonymous posters. PGP signatures are a solution, but not a very adequate one at this point. Most autosign software has one or two minor problems. The first is that they do not line wrap before signing the text. This causes the sig to break. The second thing that people get bitten by is that some signing software only takes the "default" key. This means that, without special effort, they are stuck with one key to use for signing. (Which makes anon postings a bit of a pain.) The reason anon.penet.fi became as popular as it did is because it was easier to use than the alternatives. A solution that is difficult to use will be left to an "elite" to use. (If used at all.) A good example of this is the PGP aware version of Majordomo. The traffic on one list using that software is little to none. I believe that this is because the "ante" to post is too high. (It also has strange desires for specific linefeed formats, as well as other things that make posting a chore.) The "solution" to this is to design tools that make use of these things usable, not only for the "elite", but for the rest of the user community. (Or at least the upper 70-90%. There has to be some level of knowledge for entry into the game. The difficulty is knowing where to set that "bar".) Netscape is a good example of "transparent" crypto. It has problems though. How many sites do you connect to that use SSL? Damn few I will bet. How many encrypt everything, not just the "important stuff". Next to none. Why? Getting a secure server costs a fair chunk of change. It is possible to get one for "non-commercial use", but it is still going to cost you a bit for the certificate needed to run the server. ($295 bucks and the list of hoop to jump through. Verisign usually wants you to be a corporate entity.) Any chance of a CPunk CA coming into existence any time soon? A better chance for "transparent" security is with the IPSec FreeSwan project. How many of you out there are willing to put in the effort to get it to work though? It does have a pretty high cost in knowledge and effort. (It also seems to have some places that need work. Non-Unix clients and sites feeding off of dynamic IPs are going to be a future hurdle.) It does have probability of making things a whole lot more difficult for the busybodies at the various TLAs. (The NSA krill nets will no longer be as effective.) Until the bugs are worked out, it will be an "elitist" solution. There is no escaping that. (And since there are people who would rather concentrate on personal feuds instead of technical hurdles, it will probably remain one for alot longer.) I would like to see alot less of the "elitist" solutions. My reasons are very plain. Elitist solutions take far too much of my time to use. They do not have to be that way. There are Cypherpunks doing work to make these tools more usable. Most of them are doing it in the background and not looking for the "glory". Because of the self-centered ranting of a few, most of those who were the strongest supporters of "Cypherpunk goals" no longer associate with the list. The ones who have my highest respect are those that have actually done something to accomplish those goals, instead of writing (semi-)anonymous flames and personal attacks against Tim May and/or John Gilmore. (I sometime what Vullis has done to promote privacy and security for individuals. His pissing in the list pool certainly has done nothing positive that I have seen.) [Note that I do not always agree with Tim May. There have been many time I have read his posts and wondered if he was indulging in chemical recreation. (And he has probably wondered the same about some of my posts. probably about this one...) Sometimes he is dead on and well worth reading. But his posts are at least thought out and lack the most of the vitriol that some others on this list have been spitting. Part of the problem with reputation schemes is that humans are not always consistent. Sometimes they do not fit into the "yes" or "no" boxes we try and stuff them into.] Those who are working towards "elitist" solutions are at least working towards solutions. I think people need to ask themselves what goals they desire for themselves and what it will take to get there. You don't need to write code necessarily, but you do need to do something other than just bitch and moan. What have you done to support privacy today? --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 2 22:43:32 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 22:43:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: <9612302254.AA00731@cow.net> Message-ID: <32CCAA29.676F@gte.net> Rich Graves wrote: > Bill Frantz wrote: > > At 10:54 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote: > > >Our focus is more radical. We are effectively a cyber-militia, > > >fulfilling Jefferson's recommendation that a revolution happen > > >every 20 years. (Funny, there hasn't been one in more than 200 years.[snip] > >I would say that the street action which effectively eliminated legally > >mandated racial segregation about 25 years ago qualifies as a revolution.[snip] > Cryptoanarchy, as envisioned here, is not about people mobbing in the > streets. It's fundamentally about insulating oneself from the mobs in > the streets. However, revolutions tend to have unintended consequences.[snip] Looks like we're coming to the old "irresistable force meets immovable object" consensus, yes? The sheeple are going to plod along slowly and resistantly towards personal, "secure" encryption, while the rulers would rather eat their children than give up money. My guess is that the public (see: sheeple) is *never* going to become technically oriented, no matter how many gizmos or crypto programs they have and can use. Therefore, the rulers, possessing ever greater numbers and quality of intrusive devices, will inch forward toward total control, despite temporary advances by the sheeple. The (perfect) example of the 1960's revolution was vastly outweighed by: 1. Decapitation of any independent leadership, i.e., assassinations. 2. Co-opting of schools, businesses, media, welfare programs et al. 3. Tremendous advances in disinformation and propaganda technology which has no analogy amongst the general public. Some people think the Internet will help the average guy win back some freedom, but the reality is that capital is still being shifted away from the common folk to the wealthier folk, even as the Internet expands. The sheeple have had one (unintended) weapon on their side: The fact that the scumbag fed agencies and their beneficiaries have been fighting amongst themselves a lot (see: assassinations). This will instantly stop if the sheeple become a real threat. You won't believe how fast. It's the dream of every elitist that they will someday be able to enjoy a really comfortable and yet productive existence, where the non-elite are satisfied and happy with their jobs (or are somehow being supported without unduly burdening the elitists), and most important, are just comfortable enough that they won't riot (or at least won't riot in the elitist neighborhoods). Most likely the electronic implants and drugs (Soma, HDTV/3DTV) will alleviate most of the sheeple's unhappiness, so as to reduce the requirement for the elitists to give any more attention to these problems. From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Thu Jan 2 23:00:31 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 23:00:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: OCR and Machine Readable Text Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970102225436.01072284@mail.teleport.com> At 08:06 PM 1/2/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >It's really embarassing to have to pay salaries of "public employees" >who can't come up with better arguments than the paper/magnetic/OCR nonsense >but don't have the guts to stop trying and admit they've wrong. >Does the President still make $200K/year salary? You'd think he'd either >read what he signs or tell his employees to only ask him to sign >at least half-way credible stuff. The old regulations used to pretend that >foreigners were too dumb to implement computer programs from algorithms; >now they're pretending that foreigners are too dumb to type.* >People used to say we have the best politicians money can buy, >but you ought to be able to buy better politicians than that. Or beter excuses. >At 10:31 AM 12/30/96 -0800, Tim May wrote: >>And not only is OCR able these days to handle general fonts easily enough, >>but almost all printed code is in fixed-width fonts, i.e., non-proportional >>fonts. This makes OCR easy. > >The basic difference between "easily OCRed source code" and "not easily >OCRed source code" is pretty much limited to two things >1) Half-decent print quality (black on white in Courier at 300dpi should do....) > As Tim says, this stuff is child's play. Back when OCRs were > $10,000 machines with cutting-edge 68010 processors, > reading Courier was pretty easy but it helped to put in checksums; > these days you don't really need that. (It also didn't like > wet-process 240-dpi laser printing or faxes, but modern OCR software > can generally deal with good-quality faxes and >2) Bound pages vs. loose pages (printing with perforated pages > or selling the source code in loose-leaf might count as an > "attractive nuisance" :-), but a band-saw can solve that problem > for the OCR user unless it's printed on Tyvek or something silly :-) Even an exacto-knife would work. For proportional fonts it depends on how nasty the kerning gets and the shape of the characters. (And a san serif font without too many kerning pairs should go though fine.) The technology for this has progressed quite a bit in the last few years. Next thing you know, OCR software will be export controlled as well. (Or they will require something silly, like having all code samples in caligraphy fonts.) >In the Karn case, the Feds made the silly argument that the >floppy disk version had the files neatly separated, while the >paper version split files between pages and had page numbers at the >bottoms of the pages that weren't part of the source code. >Even the $10K 68010 wonderbox could handle page headers/footers and margins, >and modern software can do decent translations into different >word processor formats. And even if it didn't, just selecting and deleting the margin areas would not be all that difficult. (Ooohhh... A couple of extra hours is really going to slow someone down.) >>For just the amount of money we've spent (in our consulting fees) on >>discussing just this issue of OCRing, the entire content of the MIT PGP >>source code book AND Schneier's AC could have been manually inputted by >>Barbadans or Botswanas, or probably even by Europeans. I used to work for a company that would transfer entire archives of medical journals. Much of it we would just OCR. Some of it we would send off shore. The OCR software was about 95% reliable and this was over 5 years ago. (And we were using 286 boxes for much of the OCR work. Not a heavy technoligical investment.) I am sure that things have improved a great deal since then. (My new scanner included OCR software. I will have to run a test and report the findings. >There's one German university that OCRed the MIT PGP source code book. >The PGP folks passed out copies of their new 3.0 Pre-Alpha and an update >at a recent Cypherpunks meeting. See >http://www.pgp.com/newsroom/sourcebook.cgi >for ordering informaiton. It's been donated to some local libraries, >such as San Jose CA, and I hope they'll send it to the Library of Congress >and various non-US university and other public libraries - the recent >rules change clarifying that it's ok to export source code should make >this much easier. The page listed does not contain order information. Do you know costs and/or order info? >[* OK, it's not really possible to type or proofread perl code accurately :-) Yeah, just look at what happened with John Orwant's _Perl 5 interactive Course_. The book is being recalled due to all the typographical errors from the pubisher. Reading some Perl code is also quite impossible. (For the reasons behind this, i recommend Charlie Stross's article on the tpoic on page 36 of _The Perl Journal_ #4.) >More to the point, OCRs aren't always real good about `backquotes' and other >little blotchy marks that some languages use, and even humans don't always >get them right.] Many character sets are not very good at displaying "little used" characters clearly. (Some of the cheaper fonts do not even include them.) Backticks are a special problem. The latest Camel book has all sorts of problems with hard to recognise backticks. BTW, there is an article on Perl and randomness in The Perl Journal #4 by John Orwant. Pretty basic for most Cypherpunks, but good reading none the less... --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Thu Jan 2 23:06:36 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 23:06:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IMPORTANT] One-time pads Message-ID: <199701030706.AAA03362@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timmy Maya styles his facial hair to look more like pubic hair. _ >@) Timmy Maya (V(_ ^^\< From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 3 00:06:38 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 00:06:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypherpunk Elitism and Spam Filters In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970102222216.0068b54c@mail.teleport.com> Message-ID: <199701030801.CAA24529@manifold.algebra.com> Alan Olsen wrote: > > I have been watching the debate on Cypherpunk Extremism, filtering spam, > and the like and have a few comments. > > When Tim May claims that Cypherpunk solutions lead to elitism, he is more > correct than Vullis or any of his ilk are willing to realize. The reasons Alan, everything leads to elitism because it is a natural way of existence of large masses of different people. The most anti-elitist societies turned out to be most segmented in the end. > I have watched the conversations on filtering and have seen few, if any, > methods that would be usable by a poster of average experience without alot > of extra frustration and/or time involved. For a filtering or posting > method to be useful (or used), it has to be uncumbersome to use, no matter > the platform. First of all, do you really want to see these posters? Second, there are very simple filtering techniques such as 1) eliminating duplicates 2) eliminating any cypherpunks messages not directly addressed to cypherpunks (prevents mailing list attacks) and 3) deleting messages originating from certain persons. These methods, I believe, do not require any kind of high intelligence. Therefore, the people who leave are either very stupid people who cannot cope with the higher traffic, or very smart people who do not see enough of good thoughts. > > Those who are working towards "elitist" solutions are at least working > towards solutions. I think people need to ask themselves what goals they > desire for themselves and what it will take to get there. You don't need > to write code necessarily, but you do need to do something other than just > bitch and moan. The only two persons who do anything with this list are Gilmore and Vulis. - Igor. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 3 00:26:16 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 00:26:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crypto reg clarification from Commerce Department Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970103082558.003de41c@popd.ix.netcom.com> http://jya.com/bxa123096.txt has the Federal Register text of the interim export administration rules. I haven't waded through all the comparisons of which interim amends what paragraph of what subplot of the revised prohibitions, etc., but there's one paragraph that may be relevant to the SWAN project. "This interim rule also amends part 744 to add a general prohibition in Sec. 744.9 with respect to technical assistance in the development or manufacture abroad of encryption commodities and software controlled for EI reasons and makes conforming changes throughout the EAR." Lucky Green has been talking with Commerce to try to get clarification of some of the requirements on a related issue; they say not to worry about some of the paragraphs because they only apply to missiles, nukes, and similar Real Munitions, but the paragraph above sounds like it's still talking about crypto. I'm not sure if "technical assistance" is clearly defined, and I'm not sure if hiring some foreigner to build something for _you_ counts as providing technical assistance to _them_, but it makes it more difficult to do the right thing while debugging non-US systems. Excerpts from Lucky's post: >From: Lucky Green >Subject: Crypto reg clarification from Commerce Department >Date: Mon, 30 Dec 1996 15:14:56 -0800 >To: cypherpunks at toad.com >.... >I just got of the phone with Bruce Kutz, Export Policy Analyst, Office of >Strategic Trade and Foreign Policy Controls. (202) 482-0092. He seems to be >the contact person for the new regs. > >I pointed Mr. Kutz to the section that alarmed me: >Sec. 736.2 General prohibitions and determination of applicability. [stuff you can't do about financing, supporting, proliferation etc.] >Mr. Kutz seemed surprised. Apparently he had not been aware that this >section was included in the new crypto regs. He then assured me that >1. Proliferation in the context of this paragraph applies only to >proliferation of >a) nuclear (bomb) technology b) missile technology ... >2. The Department of Commerce has no intention of banning the financing and >contracting of non-US crypto development. >3. Technical assistance to non-US parties requires a license. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From staff at optimalmethods.com Fri Jan 3 00:49:01 1997 From: staff at optimalmethods.com (staff at optimalmethods.com) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 00:49:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to Reach The Most People Message-ID: Targeted E-Mail Lists Will Get Your Message Out You probably have a special offer to make to many people over the internet. At ATS Publishers, Inc., we maintain a database of over 450 groups of e-mail addresses sorted according to the groups' demographic, psychographic, geographic, benefits-sought, and individual description. If you have a book, product, announcement, or service to advertise in a specific area, your greatest response rates will come from targeting these niche lists. You must have these addresses, as you will save money while no longer mailing your sales message to unqualified prospects. We absolutely guarantee your success with these lists. Here is a small sample: Opportunity Seekers, General Business, Sports (all), Entrepreneurship, Fitness & Exercise, Accountants, Health, Lawyers & Legal, Nutrition, Single Moms, Fashion, Outdoors, Dresswear, Computers, Math & Sciences (all), Finance, Investing, Fishing, Hunting, Hunting Dogs, Financial Markets, Race Boats, Wealth, Taxes, Languages, Millionaires, Divorced Parents, Gay & Lesbian, Kids, Teenagers, Adults, Seniors, Racial-Ethnic-Cultural (all), Criminal, Pornography, Shopaholics, Alcoholics, Virgins, Politics, Overweight, Paranormal, Psychology, Literature, Technical, Painters & Artists, Doctors & Medicine, Religion & Atheism, Government, Taxation, Food and Beverages, Wines & Spirits, Restaurants, Working Women, Geographical U.S., Sex, Physically Challenged Persons, Drugs, Hippies, Music and Musicians, Firearms, Militias, Students, AIDS, Disorders, Child & Baby Care, Feminists, Body Painting & Piercing, Massage, Activists, Homeowners, Real Estate, Automotive, Health Care, Insurance, Educa! tion, Infertility, Architects, Dating, Love, Telecommunications, Hardware & Tools, Homes & Gardening, S&M, Housekeeping, Spirits & Wines, Home Business, Star Trekkies, Athletes, Authors, Store Owners, Job Hunters, Photography, Plants, and another 350 groups targeted even further... If you do not see your group in these listings, don't worry! Even if they are not in our database, we will create one for you within 24 hours. Here's how to order: Write us a brief description of the groups you want to target. We will then ship you, via e-mail, a listing of the 1,000 - 5,000 most targeted prospects for your product. These are people who have PROVEN beyond any doubt that they are interested in the service you are offering. Each e-mail listing of 1000 names costs only $12.95. And although $12.95 is our minimum order, you may buy in odd lots also, say, 1,500. Each additional name after 1,000 costs only 1/2 of a cent; in this 1,500 name case, you would pay only $15.45! For 2,000 names,you would pay $12.95 plus an extra $5 (1,000 X .5 cents) for a total of $17.95. All orders are shipped via e-mail the same day, if paid by credit card (Amex/Visa/Mastercard/Diners). Or, mail your check or M.O., in the amount of $12.95 plus any additional charges, along with your groups' description, to: ATS Publishers, Inc. 3811 Ditmars Blvd. Astoria, NY 11105 Tel: (718) 274-9060 If the line is busy, keep trying! We're trying to keep up with the enormous demand, since Thursday the 26th, our first mailing. Thank you so much for your time. From matic at bau2.uibk.ac.at Fri Jan 3 01:02:01 1997 From: matic at bau2.uibk.ac.at (Markus H|bner) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 01:02:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Security & Hackerscene site Message-ID: <32CCCAF3.67B@bau2.uibk.ac.at> During the last days the site "Security & Hackerscene" has been expanded. New sections specialized on intrusion detection, IP-spoofing, ... will help you to protect your site from break-ins and will give you an insight into the latest methods and tricks used by hackers to break into obvious secure computers. Furthermore many CERT advisories and other security related text files were redesigned and are now available in HTML format. You will also find links to the best information resources (files, e-zines, texts) on the net regarding Internet-Security. URL of the "Security & Hackerscene" site: -------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.geocities.com/capecanaveral/3498/security.htm -------------------------------------------------------------- Some of the items you will find: + IP-spoofing demystified + Intrusion Detection Checklist + CGI Security Holes + How hackers cover their tracks + Compromise FAQ + Protecting Yourself from Password File Attacks + The Ultimate Sendmail Hole List + An Architectural Overview of UNIX Network Security + Essential Security Information + UNIX Backdoors + UNIX System Security Issues + Tips for Improving Your Security + as well as files commonly found in the underground scene. I would be glad to receive your feedback. Markus H|bner ====================================================================== E-Mail: matic at bau2.uibk.ac.at WWW: http://bau2.uibk.ac.at/matic Working as a freelance WEB-programmer and security-consultant. From iwlkos at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 3 01:31:25 1997 From: iwlkos at ix.netcom.com (iwlkos at ix.netcom.com) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 01:31:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to Reach The Most People Message-ID: Targeted E-Mail Lists Will Get Your Message Out You probably have a special offer to make to many people over the internet. At ATS Publishers, Inc., we maintain a database of over 450 groups of e-mail addresses sorted according to the groups' demographic, psychographic, geographic, benefits-sought, and individual description. If you have a book, product, announcement, or service to advertise in a specific area, your greatest response rates will come from targeting these niche lists. You must have these addresses, as you will save money while no longer mailing your sales message to unqualified prospects. We absolutely guarantee your success with these lists. Here is a small sample: Opportunity Seekers, General Business, Sports (all), Entrepreneurship, Fitness & Exercise, Accountants, Health, Lawyers & Legal, Nutrition, Single Moms, Fashion, Outdoors, Dresswear, Computers, Math & Sciences (all), Finance, Investing, Fishing, Hunting, Hunting Dogs, Financial Markets, Race Boats, Wealth, Taxes, Languages, Millionaires, Divorced Parents, Gay & Lesbian, Kids, Teenagers, Adults, Seniors, Racial-Ethnic-Cultural (all), Criminal, Pornography, Shopaholics, Alcoholics, Virgins, Politics, Overweight, Paranormal, Psychology, Literature, Technical, Painters & Artists, Doctors & Medicine, Religion & Atheism, Government, Taxation, Food and Beverages, Wines & Spirits, Restaurants, Working Women, Geographical U.S., Sex, Physically Challenged Persons, Drugs, Hippies, Music and Musicians, Firearms, Militias, Students, AIDS, Disorders, Child & Baby Care, Feminists, Body Painting & Piercing, Massage, Activists, Homeowners, Real Estate, Automotive, Health Care, Insurance, Educa! tion, Infertility, Architects, Dating, Love, Telecommunications, Hardware & Tools, Homes & Gardening, S&M, Housekeeping, Spirits & Wines, Home Business, Star Trekkies, Athletes, Authors, Store Owners, Job Hunters, Photography, Plants, and another 350 groups targeted even further... If you do not see your group in these listings, don't worry! Even if they are not in our database, we will create one for you within 24 hours. Here's how to order: Write us a brief description of the groups you want to target. We will then ship you, via e-mail, a listing of the 1,000 - 5,000 most targeted prospects for your product. These are people who have PROVEN beyond any doubt that they are interested in the service you are offering. Each e-mail listing of 1000 names costs only $12.95. And although $12.95 is our minimum order, you may buy in odd lots also, say, 1,500. Each additional name after 1,000 costs only 1/2 of a cent; in this 1,500 name case, you would pay only $15.45! For 2,000 names,you would pay $12.95 plus an extra $5 (1,000 X .5 cents) for a total of $17.95. All orders are shipped via e-mail the same day, if paid by credit card (Amex/Visa/Mastercard/Diners). Or, mail your check or M.O., in the amount of $12.95 plus any additional charges, along with your groups' description, to: ATS Publishers, Inc. 3811 Ditmars Blvd. Astoria, NY 11105 Tel: (718) 274-9060 If the line is busy, keep trying! We're trying to keep up with the enormous demand, since Thursday the 26th, our first mailing. Thank you so much for your time. From acidrain at scott.net Fri Jan 3 03:25:45 1997 From: acidrain at scott.net (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=B7Acid.Rain=B7?=) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 03:25:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: yawn Message-ID: <199701031125.FAA10624@koala.scott.net> Someone please tell be what i must do to be banned from this list. I will refrain from describing the obvious idiocracy here. ----==������� �Acid.Rain� �������==--- http://www.scott.net/~acidrain/ From aga at dhp.com Fri Jan 3 04:08:52 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 04:08:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Stupid Bastard Acid Rain/Re: yawn In-Reply-To: <199701031125.FAA10624@koala.scott.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, [ISO-8859-1] �Acid.Rain� wrote: > Someone please tell be what i must do to be banned from this list. I will > refrain from describing the obvious idiocracy here. > Just who the fuck is this Acid rain guy, a newbie? Doesn't this stupid bastard know that he is writing to two different lists, and not just one? > > ----==������� �Acid.Rain� �������==--- > http://www.scott.net/~acidrain/ > Dave, how the fuck did this acid rain asshole get on the Freedom Knights list? From field at pipeline.com Fri Jan 3 05:20:15 1997 From: field at pipeline.com (Richard L. Field) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 05:20:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crypto reg clarification from Commerce Department Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970103082253.090fce0e@pop.pipeline.com> To follow up on Lucky Green's conversation with Bruce Kutz on Sec. 736.2: The General Prohibitions (1 - 10) in the EAR preexisted these new crypto regs. What was changed in General Prohibition Seven (which previously applied only to nuke and missile technologies) was the addition of a subpart (ii): "You may not, without a license from BXA, provide certain technical assistance to foreign persons with respect to encryption items, as described in Sec 744.9 of the EAR." Sec. 744.9 is a new addition. It says: "(a) General prohibition. No U.S. person may, without a license from BXA, provide technical assistance (including training) to foreign persons with the intent to aid a foreign person in the development or manufacture outside the United States of encryption commodities and software that, if of United States origin, would be controlled for "EI" reasons under ECCN 5A002 or 5D002. [...] Note in addition that the mere teaching or discussion of information about cryptography, including, for example, in an academic setting, by itself would not establish the intent described in this section, even where foreign persons are present." [...] When it comes to financing and contracting, it's General Prohibition Ten you ought to be looking at. That hasn't changed under the new rules and it doesn't just apply to nukes and missiles. It says: "Sec. 736.2(b)(10) General Prohibition Ten -- Proceeding with transactions with knowledge that a violation has occurred or is about to occur (Knowledge Violation to Occur). You may not sell, transfer, export, reexport, finance, order, buy, remove, conceal, store, use, loan, dispose of, transfer, transport, forward, or otherwise service, in whole or in part, any item subject to the EAR and exported or to be exported with knowledge that a violation of the Export Administration Regulations, the Export Administration Act or any order, license, License Exception, or other authorization issued thereunder has occurred, is about to occur, or is intended to occur in connection with the item. Nor may you rely upon any license or License Exception after notice to you of the suspension or revocation of that license or exception. There are no License Exceptions to this General Prohibition Ten in part 740 of the EAR." Furthermore, in the Violations section (Sec. 764.2) it says: "(b) Causing, aiding, or abetting a violation. No person may cause or aid, abet, counsel, command, induce, procure, or permit the doing of any act prohibited, or the omission of any act required, by the EAA, the EAR, or any order, license or authorization issued thereunder." "(e) Acting with knowledge of a violation. No person may order, buy, remove, conceal, store, use, sell, loan, dispose of, transfer, finance, forward, or otherwise service, in whole or in part, any item exported or to be exported from the United States, or that is otherwise subject to the EAR, with knowledge that a violation of the EAA, the EAR, or any order, license or authorization issued thereunder, has occurred, is about to occur, or is intended to occur in connection with the item." In the past, some banks worried about this when financing letters of credit. I'm told they were assured back then that this sort of financing was not going to be prosecuted....but it's still in the regs so I wouldn't bet the ranch on it never happening. - Richard Field From jya at pipeline.com Fri Jan 3 05:20:43 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 05:20:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: E-commerce Spying Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970103131627.0069ab7c@pop.pipeline.com> MSNBC today features E-commerce: http://www.msnbc.com/news/46897.asp With sidebars on how E-payment systems require money-tracking spies. In the cause of consumer security, at the cost of privacy. Kalliste reported yesterday on the White House's spying on global bank transactions: http://www.aci.net/kalliste/ In the cause of national security, at the cost of privacy. Defense into commerce, GAK privatized. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 3 06:29:54 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 06:29:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <199701030325.EAA00372@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) writes: > > Your points are entirely correct, though: you have to trust the list admin, a > you have to have some faith in the Majordomo software not to retain your ID > once it generates your token. The usual eavesdropping concerns remain as well > Trusting the lying cocksucker John Gilmore is very foolish. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 3 06:30:33 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 06:30:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypherpunk Elitism and Spam Filters In-Reply-To: <199701030801.CAA24529@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > and 3) deleting messages originating from certain persons. These methods, > I believe, do not require any kind of high intelligence. They do require total lack of ethics. Indeed, cocksucker John Gilmore has no credibility because of his content-based censorship and plug-pulling. > The only two persons who do anything with this list are Gilmore and Vulis. I'm not doing anything with your stupid list. I'm not even on it. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From zvi at creditnet.com Fri Jan 3 07:01:22 1997 From: zvi at creditnet.com (zvi) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 07:01:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Credit Nard Network Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970103084757.00690324@creditnet.com> Hello: I wanted to folow up on your interest in Credit Card Network which you inquired about recently. My Name is Zvi Lichter, and I am the Internet Sales Manager for Credit Card Network. I have been representing Credit Card Network for over 6 months and I can help you to get the information you need to make your decision to sign up for our service. We are the solution you have been looking for. We authorize credit card transactions in realtime in less than 45 seconds. By linking your order form to our secure system we can provide you with approval/denial response in just a few seconds. We have over 240 active merchants and we are processing in excess of 20,000 transaction a day. More details can be found at : http://www.creditnet.com/cgi-bin/htmlscript?zvika.hts come visit and look up all the links. Prices: 1% on the transaction, one time set up fee of $395. No minimums or monthly service fees. ======================= SECURE ONLINE CREDIT CARD AUTHORIZATION The Credit Card Network offers secure, online credit card authorizations to internet businesses who are interested in actually making money on the internet. The service allows businesses to accept credit card payment on the internet in real time...meaning that the transaction is actually taking place while the consumer is online. This is how it looks from a consumers point of view... 1. The consumer fills out the order form on your website and gets a total price. 2. Upon clicking the consumer is then hot-linked into our secure server and our secure page comes up on his screen. The consumer then enters his credit card number and clicks on submit to charge the card. The information including total price, credit card number, name, and address is then electronically sent to the card processor at the bank. The consumer waits 10-15 seconds while the card is verified. 3. The consumer is then sent back to your website to the page where you want us to send him. It's that simple. 1.your order form ---> 2. our secure page ---> 3. back to your website We also support transparent processing. In this mode the customer stays on your order form and the credit card information is sent to Credit Card Network using sockets and PGP encryption. The result is returned in seconds. Then you can send the customer anywhere you choose and have full control over the memory variables. We have a module that automatically updates your password files with userids, passwords and expiration dates. We provide you with an expire routine that runs every 30 seconds. We also have scripts for one-time software downloads. Credit Card Network has been in business for 2 years. We have more merchants than Cybercash and we are easy to work with and pride ourselves on our customer service. If you are ready to make money on the Internet then Credit Card Network is the solution you need to be successful. The credit card network zvi at creditnet.com 1-206-287-1794 voice 1-206-933-1141 fax From fgle at sun1.uconect.net Fri Jan 3 07:09:39 1997 From: fgle at sun1.uconect.net (fgle at sun1.uconect.net) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 07:09:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: invitation Message-ID: <199701031507.KAA13920@sun1.uconect.net> Fuck_God_Up_The_Ass, A Web-based network of manufacturers, inventors, distributors, importers and exporters--can bring you together with companies interested in licensing and/or distributing manufactured products. The Exchange can help you: -Add dollars to your bottom line with no risk or capital outlay. -Get into foreign markets quickly. -Connect you with local and foreign business partners. Here's how it works: We post a description and photo of your products, design or service on the Exchange web site, where it will be seen by members in more than 56 nations. We collect inquiries and make the introductions. You, of course, retain complete control over any negotiations, and it's up to you to decide whether to go forward with a potential partner. Membership on the Exchange is free. To post a product, we ask for nothing up front, with a small fee only if you successfully conclude an agreement. This is an introductory offer where we defer the product web page construction and hosting cost until you achieve success. We're excited about this new Web-based marketing tool, and the response has been unusally strong. Among the individuals who participated in our 20-week test, 73% are in active negotiations with potential partners! For more detailed information about our free membership registration, just reply to this message and insert "info" in the Subject. We will email all the details. Douglas Cymbala Membership Department From sandfort at crl.com Fri Jan 3 07:40:10 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 07:40:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypherpunk Elitism and Spam Filters In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970102222216.0068b54c@mail.teleport.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Thu, 2 Jan 1997, Alan Olsen wrote: [Excellent analysis of the "elite vs. masses" dichotomy, elided.] > Netscape is a good example of "transparent" crypto. It has problems > though. How many sites do you connect to that use SSL? Damn few I will > bet. How many encrypt everything, not just the "important stuff". Next to > none. Why? Getting a secure server costs a fair chunk of change. It is > possible to get one for "non-commercial use", but it is still going to cost > you a bit for the certificate needed to run the server. ($295 bucks and the > list of hoop to jump through. Verisign usually wants you to be a corporate > entity.) Any chance of a CPunk CA coming into existence any time soon? We at C2Net bundle a Thawte certificate with our Stronghold secure server for only US$545. Stronghold is available free for non-commercial use and a stand-alone Thawte certificate is just US$100. A hundred bucks plus home-grown code tweaking is a low hurdle to entry for non-commercial users. For commercial users, of course, the cost of a secure server and certificate is self- liquidating. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From Jill014 at aol.com Fri Jan 3 07:42:00 1997 From: Jill014 at aol.com (Jill014 at aol.com) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 07:42:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anonymous Remailer at DHP.com Message-ID: <970103104111_1722786644@emout07.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-01-01 18:55:24 EST, lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) writes: > Subj: Re: Anonymous Post Control > Date: 97-01-01 18:55:24 EST > From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) > Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > > ph at netcom.com (Peter Hendrickson) writes: > > > It's hard to filter anonymous posters. I want to see what a few > > of them have to say so I can't filter on the remailers. > > > > If anonymous posters PGP sign their posts, it is still hard to filter > > using a lame filter software such as that which comes to Eudora. > > Anonymous users willing to PGP sign their posts could just use a > service like nym.alias.net (mailto:help at nym.alias.net), which even > allows pseudonyms to advertise their PGP keys via finger (slightly > better than the PGP key servers). > > When people post anonymously rather than pseudonymously, it is > generally because they don't want a blatant link between all of their > posts (though obviously analysis of writing style is still possible). > But why do you always use the anonymous remailer from DHP.com? Why do you not use other places? JIll > > > ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- > From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Wed Jan 1 18:54:40 1997 > Return-Path: cypherpunks-errors at toad.com > Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by emin08.mail.aol.com (8.6. > 12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id SAA26357; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 18:54:38 -0500 > Received: (from majordom at localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA12907 > for cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 14:25:53 -0800 (PST) > Received: from dhp.com (dhp.com [199.245.105.1]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) > with ESMTP id OAA12894 for ; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 14:25:06 - > 0800 (PST) > Received: (from lucifer at localhost) by dhp.com (8.8.4/8.6.12) id RAA17460 for > cypherpunks at toad.com; Wed, 1 Jan 1997 17:25:01 -0500 > Date: Wed, 1 Jan 1997 17:25:01 -0500 > Message-Id: <199701012225.RAA17460 at dhp.com> > X-Authentication-Warning: dhp.com: lucifer set sender to lucifer at dhp.com > using -f > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) > Comments: Please report misuse of this automated remailing service to < > lucifer at dhp.com>. > References: > Subject: Re: Anonymous Post Control > Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com > Precedence: bulk > From BJORN2LUZE at prodigy.com Fri Jan 3 08:08:14 1997 From: BJORN2LUZE at prodigy.com (NATHAN MALLAMACE) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 08:08:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: yawn Message-ID: <199701031532.KAA21762@mime4.prodigy.com> >> Someone please tell be what i must do to be banned from this list. I wil= >l >> refrain from describing the obvious idiocracy here. =20 >>=20 >Just who the fuck is this Acid rain guy, a newbie? If he is... FLOOD HIS MAIL BOX. - Goto: http://pages.prodigy. com/fifthnail/newbie.wav to download a kewlio WAV file.. it goes a little bit like this: 'Do I smell newbie?.. < guns start to fire... and he laughs >' it's a kewl wav file from the place where I found out how to get on this mailing list. http://pages.prodigy.com/fifthnail/maillist.htm GET ON MORE MAILING LIST! if you want to there are a ton more! >Doesn't this stupid bastard know that he is writing >to two different lists, and not just one? I donno. >>=20 >> ----=3D=3D=B7=B7=B7=B7=B7=B7=B7 =B7Acid.Rain=B7 =B7=B7=B7=B7=B7=B7=B7=3D= =3D--- >> http://www.scott.net/~acidrain/ >>=20 What a geek. >Dave, how the fuck did this acid rain asshole=20 >get on the Freedom Knights list? Mus' be on crank, you think? Whad'a cyber geek- TRASH HIM. Nail From BUTLERA2 at anz.com Fri Jan 3 08:47:11 1997 From: BUTLERA2 at anz.com (Butler, Anthony) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 08:47:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Increasing dangers facing journalists who 'name the bad guys' Message-ID: DISCUSSION Increasing dangers should not deter journalists from 'naming the bad guys' TOPIC: "Frontlines and Deadlines: A View from the War Zones" SPEAKER Robert Fisk, correspondent, The Independent When John Owen first called me in Beirut and asked me to talk to you this morning about journalists under fire, several names immediately came to mind because they are colleagues and friends who proved how easy it is for a journalist to die in the Middle East: Bob Pfeffer, Larry Buchman, Sean Toolin, Clark Todd, Tewfig Ghazali and Bahij Metni. Bob Pfeffer worked for Stern and was investigating Palestinian gun-running when four members of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine murdered him with automatic rifle fire outside the door of his home. Sean filed for The London Observer and was killed when two men, probably Palestinians, stabbed him to death by hitting him in the face with an ice pick on Abdul-Aziz Street, not far from my home. Clark stayed in the Druze village as the Phalange militia closed in on it, took a piece of shrapnel in the chest, wrote a last message to his wife on the pillowcase, and -- if one of the villagers I spoke to is to be believed -- was finished off by a Phalangist militiaman who shot him to death as he lay wounded on a sofa. Tewfig and Bahij were CBS cameramen blown, quite literally, to pieces by an Israeli tank shell which was fired, so the Israelis claimed, at what they called "terrorists." But I never imagined, when I originally wrote these first words for this talk, that I would find myself offering the name of another reporter who should have been sitting with us here this morning -- that of Veronica Guerin -- savagely murdered by hit men for a Dublin mafia boss. I worked in Ireland for five years and no man or woman there, back in the '70s, would ever kill a journalist. As one of Veronica's Irish colleagues said to me last night, "Everything has changed now. If it can happen once, it can happen again." A journalist, a mother, a great writer -- murdered because she had the guts to tell the truth. And the journalists who gather for Veronica's funeral tomorrow morning will feel anger and rage and pity and -- let us forgive them, for it applies to all of us when our colleagues die -- a little fear as well. In Algeria, almost 50 journalists have been killed, almost all of them working in the local press -- deliberately, grotesquely, their heads often severed from their backbones by men who call themselves Islamists, and who claimed the journalists worked for the military-backed government, even though some of those journalists had been imprisoned by that same government. My French colleague, Olivier Quemener, gave me a cheerful farewell in the Al Djezair hotel in Algiers a couple of years ago. He was off to the Casbah to film, he said. I was going to the Kouba district of the city. When I returned to our hotel, Quemener was dead -- shot in the chest and killed by a man who claimed he was an Islamist. His reporter, gravely wounded, was found lying, weeping beside his friend's body. In Bosnia, the cull of reporters and photographers and cameramen reached such proportions that we started armoring ourselves -- strapping 14 kilos of steel to our chests and backs and then curling ourselves into the bosoms of armored cars. A few weeks in Sarajevo and I realized why medieval knights had to be winched onto their horses by cranes. Running was so exhausting that I scarcely had the energy to file a report; the danger, so awful, that I was almost too frightened to perform the physical act of writing. We ask ourselves, of course, why we do it. Those of us who do not die find our own reasons. In a world of deceit, I believe we are among the few independent witnesses to history and to its wickedness. And although the risks are increasing as the old traditional protection bestowed upon journalists decays, I still believe we should be out there, naming the bad guys. In other words, I still think the risks are worth taking. But I use the word "think," and let me tell you why: Because weaponry is growing more sophisticated in the science of killing. Because we are not always supported by those who should wish to protect us but (who) instead ignore our requests for help or curse us for our attempt to tell the truth. Because journalists are being verbally targeted ever more assiduously by governments and pressure groups who wish to demean our work and prove that the risks we take are worthless. This may not be the message you expected to hear from me this morning, so let me, from my own experience, be more precise. Let's start with the weaponry. This is a tiny steel arrow. It was one of hundreds of equally tiny steel arrows packed into an Israeli tank shell that killed five civilians near the Lebanese town of Nabatea a couple of years ago. The shell is proximity-fused, timed to explode above the ground and turn any human beneath it to meat. These shells have been fired frequently over southern Lebanon. Since the danger of kidnapping by the Hezbollah (has subsided), these are my greatest fear and my greatest nightmare. And here is part of an aerial bomb dropped close to a U.N. convoy in which I was traveling in April, just a tiny bit of shrapnel that hissed over us, red-hot enough to sever a head or two. During that same Israeli offensive last April, set off when Hezbollah guerrillas fired Katyusha rockets into Israel after the killing of a Lebanese village boy by a bomb -- for which the Hezbollah claimed the Israelis were responsible and the Israelis said they were not -- Israeli gunboats shelled the coast road on which all of us journalists have to travel between Beirut and southern Lebanon. They were shooting, they said, at terrorists. Two American reporters and a British journalist asked their editors to make a demarche to the Israeli embassies in London and in Washington to protest the risk of death that their reporters were running at the hands of the Israelis in order to get the story. The British editor, not, I should add, my editor, declined to approach the Israelis because he said he didn't see the point. Both American editors refused to complain on their reporters' behalf because they said it would make no difference. In the end, it was we journalists in the field who had to discover that the Israeli gunboats cannot penetrate rain or fog with their radar. Thus, it was the pre-dawn mist off the sea and the decision to drive in rain squalls -- not editors -- which helped to save us. Now, I'll refer briefly to my paper, The Independent, which has loyally defended me and stood by my stories over many years. On the day of the Qana massacre, I spent seven hours under Israeli fire, had air strikes 250 meters from my location on three occasions and ended the day walking in the blood of a hundred dead refugees. Most of the letters from Independent readers thanked me for trying to tell how it was. Others did not. Let me quote from one of these. "I do not like or admire anti-Semites. Hitler was one of the most famous in recent history. You are a disgrace to a profession that should report the news." Nor should you believe that this kind of slander comes from those who support Israel, right or wrong. When I reported on Egypt's deeply flawed elections last year and investigated systematic torture and human rights abuses by the Egyptian State Security Police, I was attacked in Egypt's most prestigious newspaper, Al Ahram, by the columnist Abdul Aziz Ramadan. I was guilty, he said, of "spreading lies and deceit." I was "discredited," a "spiteful liar," a "fake," a "black crow pecking at the corpse of Egypt." And, after I investigated torture in the state security police headquarters in Bahrain -- a headquarters run, by the way, by a British former Special Branch officer called Ian Henderson -- the Bahrain newspaper, Akbar al-Khaleej, portrayed me in a cartoon, along with two colleagues -- Simon Ingram of the BBC and Christopher Walker of The Times -- as a rabid dog, straining on what was labeled a Murdoch/Maxwell leash, in my attempt to get my teeth into a bag of cash. Humorous enough, you might think. Certainly nothing to worry a hard-skinned reporter. True, but in the Arab world, a dog -- a kelb -- is something dirty. There is a word, najis in Arabic, dirty like a dog. A dog is an animal scarcely worthy of life, certainly not one whose life should be protected. And rabid dogs should be put down, exterminated. Lastly, a more disturbing example of the reason why I say I "think," rather than I "believe," about the risks we take. In 1993, I made three films with director Michael Dutfield called "Beirut to Bosnia" -- in Lebanon, Gaza, Israel, Egypt and Bosnia itself. They were made for Channel 4 in Britain and The Discovery Channel in the United States. They were an attempt to show why so much hatred and mistrust was building up against the West in the Muslim world. We filmed the Hezbollah, Hamas, the Israeli army during curfews, Israeli settlers, the family of a Holocaust victim whose tragic family history we retraced in Poland, and the forced evacuation of Muslims from their homes in Northern Bosnia. We were threatened with government censorship in Egypt, sniped at and shelled in Sarajevo, ordered to stop filming three times by Israeli troops in Gaza. Yet, after the film first aired in the States, Israeli lobby groups brought commercial pressure to bear on Discovery. Credit cards were returned to American Express, one of the U.S. sponsors, cut in half. One letter claimed that we should have called the occupied West Bank "disputed" rather than "occupied." To say, as we did, that Israel builds huge Jewish settlements on Arab land -- all facts acknowledged by Israeli human rights groups, as well as by foreign correspondents and diplomats -- was, according to the letter, twisted history. To say that Israeli troops sent the Phalangists into the Sabra and Chatila camp at the time of the 1982 Palestinian massacre -- an incontrovertible damning fact, agreed by Israel's own commission of inquiry -- was "an egregious falsehood." Another letter from a lobby group described me as "spreading venom into the living rooms of America." I was, and I quote, "Henry Higgins with fangs." Less funny, however, was Discovery's decision after receiving these extraordinary letters not to give the film a second showing. Asked if he had canceled the second showing because of pressures from these lobbyists, Clark Bunting, the channel's senior vice president, replied, "Given the reaction to the series upon its initial airing, we never scheduled a subsequent airing, so there is not really an issue as to any scheduled re-airing being canceled." When I read these gutless words, ladies and gentlemen, I was ashamed to be a foreign correspondent. Now, this, as the title of my talk says, is a view from the war zones -- a jaundiced view perhaps, certainly a personal one. But as one of those who has to drive into the smoke and fire from time to time, far too often, and I expect ever more frequently, I draw several conclusions: We are killed because of ill fortune and because the technology of death has improved. We are killed because of the evil of those who murder us to keep us quiet. We are, in effect, killed too because we are attacked by those who wish to take away our identity as honest witnesses, who wish to demean us, call us liars or racists, and thus, in effect, make us unworthy of the protection we so often need. Why, after all, should anyone care about a journalist whose work can be discarded for commercial reasons, or whose peers simply fail at the lowest hurdle to plead their reporters' cause? This last category, the lobby groups, the abusive journalists on government newspapers, are not killers in themselves, of course. But they seek to make our lives less worthy, and thus provide an environment in which our deaths are a small matter. So the message I find in my particular front line is a simple one: Defend our work and you protect our lives. DISCUSSION Jerry Lewis (Israel Radio): Why is it you seem to believe that everything that seems to go wrong has an Israel bias? I refer specifically to your television documentaries, except for the one on Bosnia itself. But [in] the ones concerning the Middle East, you seem to imply throughout that Israel's hidden hand is the cause of all the ills in the region. Robert Fisk: That's your interpretation. It's certainly not mine. Peter Hunter (manager of safety services for BBC News): One of the problems we have is that most journalists are not trained to protect themselves. What we have been trying to do for the BBC is to provide lightweight, high-quality body armor, which in fact enables you to do your job. Fisk: I don't know how to get around the body-armor problem. We never used it in Lebanon under shell fire in the siege of Beirut in '82, which was just as bad as Sarajevo. The reason is it was too hot. In southern Lebanon, when I am on U.N. convoys and they are under fire, I wear a U.N. flack jacket, which is very light. Otherwise, I'm in my ordinary clothes. It goes up to 110 degrees. If [journalists] haven't been to war before, [they should] forget everything they ever saw in Hollywood and realize that war is not about victory or defeat -- it's about death. The learning process comes in learning what roads to go down instead of rushing into the story, slowing down and asking the local people, "Have you seen anything? Has anyone come up this road in the other direction? If a car flashes its lights at you, why is it doing so?" These things I was told before I covered the war in Lebanon. But I didn't learn it until I was there, because you don't. If journalists spend as much time thinking about war as they do fitting on body armor and working out what their blood group is, it would do a lot of good. Journalists should read about what war is really like, over and over, before they go. Phil Hammond (London International Research Exchange): Why now is it such a topic of discussion, the risks that journalists take? Is it that the profession has become more dangerous? Or is it that conflicts are seen nowadays as something which threaten Western countries? Also I wonder whether you think it's still a danger, or more of a danger, nowadays that journalists identify closely with the military. Fisk: We've been talking about it for years, and I've been thinking about [the risks] every day for 20 years in the Middle East. I think the reason why we speak more about it publicly now is there are many more journalists. Television and radio has just blossomed with more and more correspondents, and with more journalists there are more deaths. I don't think it is healthy for journalists to meld into the military or into the government. There are countries, not the United States, not largely Britain, that do constantly challenge military assumptions. France is one. Mr. Lewis will tell you that Israeli journalists are constantly challenging the military assumptions and criticizing them most harshly, in a way that in Britain we do not do. If you look at the Israeli press's treatment of Israeli generals when they have made mistakes, they are very savage, and that's democracy. When you look at what the British and American press do, it's pathetic. We don't challenge these people, especially at a time of war when we need to, because there is, particularly in the United States, this dictatorship of consensus -- the feeling to criticize or suggest that your allies may be wrong is somehow unpatriotic. And that's enough to keep you off the networks. --- From hal at rain.org Fri Jan 3 09:06:04 1997 From: hal at rain.org (Hal Finney) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 09:06:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: OCR and Machine Readable Text Message-ID: <199701031704.JAA08887@crypt.hfinney.com> Before you get too carried away by the capabilities of off the shelf character recognition, read Phil Karn's experience trying to produce a working DES program from the pages of Applied Cryptography. It was easier than writing it himself, but it was still far from a turnkey operation. This is from > 5. I began by first photocopying, on a standard office photocopier, the > 18 pages containing the Triple DES source code listing from Part V of > the Book. This took about 5 minutes. Second, I scanned in the 18 sheets > on a Macintosh Quadra 610 computer system equipped with an HP ScanJet II > flatbed scanner and Omnipage Professional optical character recognition > (OCR) software. The computer, scanner, and software are all readily > available through normal consumer computer supply channels. The total > scanning process took about one and a half hours. About an hour of this > time was spent learning to use the scanning system and conducting trial > runs, as I had only used it briefly some time ago. The actual scan of the > 18 pages took about 15-20 minutes. Third, I transferred the resulting > machine-readable file from the Macintosh to my own personal computer > and brought it up under GNU EMACS, a popular and widely available text > editing program that I have used for many years. In EMACS I compared, > by eye, the scanned file displayed on my screen against the printed > listing in the Book. I began correcting the scanner's many errors, such > as mistaking the digit '0' for the letter 'O' or mistaking the vertical > bar '|' for the letter 'I'. > > 6. After manually correcting those errors noticed through visual > comparison with the Book, I invoked the "C" language compiler on the > (partially) corrected file. The compiler immediately pointed out > additional errors I had overlooked in my visual inspection so I could > also correct them by reference to the Book. I also noticed several errors > in the listing printed in the Book. However, the programmer's intentions > were obvious from the context of each error and were easily fixed. About > fifty minutes later, I successfully compiled the file without error. > > 7. The fourth step was to write a small test program to execute > the DES code with the test vectors given at the end of the source > code listing. This trivial program took less than 5 minutes to > write. Unfortunately, the test did not succeed, meaning that at > least one error went undetected by the compiler in either the code as > printed in the Book or as scanned. Scrutinizing the code more closely, > I quickly found another error in the printed version that was easily > corrected. However, it still did not produce correct results. After about > an hour of searching, I finally located the error in a list of numbers > in a table -- another error in the printed version. By reference to the > DES algorithm description in the first part of the Book, which includes > the correct numbers in tabular form, I found and corrected the error. > > 8. At this point the test finally succeeded, so I knew I had a correct > program. However, to increase my confidence further I tried a few > other DES test vectors that were not included in the source code, but > were openly published by the US National Institute of Standards and > Technology (NIST). All passed. At this point it was beyond doubt that I > had a correct, working copy of the DES source code identical to that on > the Disk with all errors removed, including those printed in the Book > as well as those added by the scanning process. > > 9. Finally, in about 40 minutes I wrote and debugged a "driver" program > analogous to that included in the Crowell declaration. This driver program > takes a sample plaintext file, encrypts it, displays the encrypted file > in hexadecimal and then decrypts it. From aga at dhp.com Fri Jan 3 09:06:05 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 09:06:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: ASSHOLE FAGGOT J.D. Falk In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, Chris Rapier wrote: > In light of this post I have decided to make the spam-list moderated. Trying to cover up the truth again Chris, huh? > I > will not tolerate this sort of behaviour in a private forum. Hey, it was J.D. Falk that started the whole thing with a loaded defame.bot. All I did was respond to a Freedom-Knights mailing list article which happened to have your list in it. > This is not a > free for all newsgroup nor is it a soapbox for you to spout deragatory > views and opinions. It is a technical forum which will be working under > the ageis of the IETF. > As I said, J.D. Falk started the whole thing with his defamatory prose about "Continued harassment by Grubor." It was his fault, and nobody's at this end. > If you have something productive to contribute I encourage your offical > subscription to the mailing list. Please limit your comments to those of a > technical nature dealing with the matter at hand. > The recognition that most every problem person is of a homosexual nature is definitely a usenet body-politic phenomenon, which will be documented and verified with whatever means that become necessary. J.D. Falk Started the whole thing, and there is no way you can get around that. Go deal with the cypherpunks. I have already talked to Falk's boss and Lawyer about him, and I plan on seeing him in Court. That shit that he publishes is not going to last very much longer. Over half of the problem people on usenet are Faggots, and that fact is going to be made well known. I want the faggot cocksucker on the witness stand, and nothing less. cheers, > On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, aga wrote: > > > On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, J.D. Falk's Autoresponder wrote: > > > > "Continued Harassment by John Grubor" and this admitted asshole Faggot > > has had this same Autoresponder set up for Months at this CAIS > > Location. This is called a "defame-bomb" -- another asshole BOFH > > tradition. I had forgotten about this problem J.D. Falk faggot until > > now, but he has this dafame-bomb set up in his procmail, it looks > > like. > > > > Now this is a further example of just how much these homosexuals have > > ruined UseNet in the past. > > > > Don't worry J.D., I misplaced the file on you and that is the reason > > why we have not filed the Lawsuit against you and CAIS yet, but > > believe you me, we WILL be down to the D.C. area and file that Lawsuit > > against you. I have already spoken to your Lawyer, and this shit is > > the last straw. > > > > A further example of how the PROBLEM people on UseNet administration > > always turn out to be the GAY crowd. This recently discovered > > phenomenon must not go unreported. > > > > > > > >On Thu, 2 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > >> >From owner-spam-list at psc.edu Thu Jan 2 23:26:42 1997 > > > >> Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) > > > >> via UUCP; Thu, 02 Jan 97 23:27:15 EST > > > >> for dlv > > > >> Received: from mailer.psc.edu by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via SMTP; > > > >> id AA17247 for dlv at bwalk.dm.com; Thu, 2 Jan 97 23:26:42 -0500 > > > >> Received: (from majordom at localhost) by mailer.psc.edu (8.8.3/8.8.2/mailer) id XAA30494 for spam-list-outgoing; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 23:06:35 -0500 (EST) > > > >> X-Authentication-Warning: mailer.psc.edu: majordom set sender to owner-spam-list using -f > > > >> From: peter at taronga.com (Peter da Silva) > > > > Another BOFH asshole who has been a major usenet problem > > for over 10 years. > > > > > > > >> Message-Id: <199701030359.VAA28649 at bonkers.taronga.com> > > > >> Subject: Re: regarding the minutes for the filtering meeting... (fwd) > > > >> To: spam-list at psc.edu > > > >> Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 21:59:16 -0600 (CST) > > > >> In-Reply-To: from "Chris Rapier" at Jan 2, 97 10:41:01 pm > > > >> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] > > > >> Content-Type: text > > > >> Sender: owner-spam-list at psc.edu > > > >> Precedence: bulk > > > >> Reply-To: spam-list at psc.edu > > > >> > > > >> > Well, the way i have been looking at things is that its going to be > > > >> > impossible to eliminate all spam. Boycotts can be routed around, > > > >> > > > >> And the secondary routes get blocked, and get injunctions against the > > > >> spammers, and so on. > > > >> > > > >> > payment > > > >> > systems for mail seems to be unweildy at the present time > > > >> > > > >> On the contrary, having advertisers paying for email is already working > > > >> with juno and hotmail and usa.net. > > > >> > > > > > > >You know, this is what I have been saying for years. Spammers will > > > >also PAY to spam UseNet, and we could finance the whole InterNet(tm) > > > >for FREE if we could just get rid of people like Chris Lewis and > > > >Chris Rapier. > > > > > > >We WANT MORE SPAMmers on the UseNet, because we can start charging > > > >them MONEY as their ISPs. > > > > > > >> > Filtration isn't perfect. Before a spammer can be blocked they have to > > > >> > spam... Modifying the headers will circumvent filters as well and well... > > > >> > you all know the shortcomings. > > > >> > > > >> The big problem with filters is that it adds support to spammer's arguments > > > >> that they're not the problem, that people who really don't want spam can > > > >> avoid it (even as they're working to make that harder). > > > >> > > > >> I dislike filters because they carry the distinct possibility of making > > > >> things worse, of establishing a basis for spam. And filters don't hurt the > > > >> spammers because they don't *care*. They'll just send more spam to the folks > > > >> who aren't filtering. It doesn't cost any more, and if they charge for 0.1% > > > >> response from a hundred thousand users they'll just charge for 0.01% from a > > > >> million... > > > >> > > > > > > >Spammers PAY money to SPAM, and every good ISP should charge the > > > >SPAMmers at their end. Then the whole Internet could be FREE for > > > >most all users. > > > > > > >These guys like Chris Lewis who cancel SPAM and Chris Rapier who > > > >tries to create "lists" of people, are both seriously harming the > > > >proper economic development of the InterNet. > > > > > > >The e-mail program that does not also contain newsgroups in the > > > >header is a NO NO. ALL traffic must be routed out of e-mail and > > > >into UseNet, but NOT vice-versa. > > > > > > > Chris Rapier > Systems Programmer/Cabin Boy 2nd Class > Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center > 11EE > From frantz at netcom.com Fri Jan 3 09:34:41 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 09:34:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internal Passports In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 7:32 PM -0800 1/2/97, Timothy C. May wrote: >At 10:35 PM -0800 12/31/96, Bill Frantz wrote: >>At 11:02 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote: >>>There have been several reports cited here recently about changes in the SS >>>laws to make the SS number more of an ID number. ... >>> >>>And concerns about "identity theft" when such a simple thing as an SS >>>number is the key to so many records, rights, etc. >> >>I don't see how you can have the SS number be both a public ID number and a >>secret password. Perhaps you could have it be one, but not both. It seems >>to me that parts of our society are trying have it be a password and parts >>a public ID number. (Perhaps the same parts?) Doing both just won't work. >> >>(Using SS as a password is subject to all the stealing and replay attacks >>that make passwords a really bad idea for secure identification.) > >???? > >I never made such a claim, that SS numbers are any kind of secret key or >password. Sorry for the confusion. The "you" was meant in its plural form, and probably should be replaced with "one". If I understand your position correctly, you would prefer to have no SS numbers (or Social Security either). >The phrase "identity theft," not coined by me, is a recent term of art >involving the ease with which those with access to a person's SS number can >then acquire credit cards, etc. Sounds like the SS number is acting as a password which gives access to privileges. Or perhaps just a key which allows you to look up tokens in public databases, which give access to privileges. Either way, it needs to be kept secret which is at odds with it acting as public person-ID number. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From panther at iglou.com Fri Jan 3 09:34:57 1997 From: panther at iglou.com (/**\anonymous/**\) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 09:34:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: OCR and Machine Readable Text In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970102225436.01072284@mail.teleport.com> Message-ID: <32CD435E.24DC@iglou.com> Alan Olsen wrote: > I used to work for a company that would transfer entire archives of medical > journals. Much of it we would just OCR. Some of it we would send off > shore. The OCR software was about 95% reliable and this was over 5 years > ago. (And we were using 286 boxes for much of the OCR work. Not a heavy > technoligical investment.) I am sure that things have improved a great > deal since then. (My new scanner included OCR software. I will have to > run a test and report the findings. I'd like to know what OCR software you were using. All tests we completed at my place of employment were very poor quality wise. We showed a %65 accuracy rate. Not very good when you need to transfer a five year backlog of medical and technical journals. This was using a high resolution scanner with a package that was bundled along with it. About a year ago, my employer considered transfering data taken off of forms into a relational database using an OCR program. Again, we found the findings to be too innacurate for our needs. I may have just been using the wrong programs for the job, but the findings were depressing... panther > --- > | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | > |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | > | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | > |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| > | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From baldwin at RSA.COM Fri Jan 3 10:09:11 1997 From: baldwin at RSA.COM (Bob Baldwin) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:09:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA Announces New "DES Challenge" Message-ID: RSA Announces New "DES Challenge" Tens of thousands of dollars in cash prizes offered; contest should improve overall Internet security by illustrating relative strength of different crypto algorithms and keysizes. Business Editors and Computer Writers REDWOOD CITY, Calif.-Jan 2, 1997--RSA Data Security, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Security Dynamics Technology, Inc. (NASDAQ: SDTI), today announced an Internet-based contest with cash prizes. The contest, known as the "RSA DES Challenge", challenges mathematicians, hackers and computer experts around the world to decipher encrypted messages. The goal of the contest is to quantify the security offered by the government endorsed DES encryption standard and other secret-key ciphers at various key sizes. The challenge proper will be launched during the RSA Data Security Conference to be held in San Francisco, January 28-31, with the target ciphertexts for the different contests being simultaneously posted on the company web-site, at http://www.rsa.com/ RSA Data Security pioneered the Internet-based "cracking" contest, when it launched the original "RSA Factoring Challenge" back in 1991. Since then, the company has paid out over $100,000 in prize money to mathematicians and hackers around the world, and the data gained from that Challenge (which is ongoing) has greatly increased mathematicians' understanding of the strength of encryption techniques based on the "factoring problem", such as the RSA Public Key Cryptosystem T. Background It's widely agreed that 56-bit keys, such as those offered by the government's DES standard, offer marginal protection against the committed adversary. By inertia as much as anything else, DES is still used for many applications, and the 20-year-old algorithm is proposed to be exportable under the latest incarnation of Clipper. It is the perfect time to demonstrate to the world that better systems are both required - and available - thus improving the world's security. There have been theoretical studies done showing that a specialized computer "DES cracker" could be built for a modest sum, which could crack keys in mere hours by exhaustive search. However, no one is known to have built such a machine in the private sector - and nobody knows if one has been built in any government, either. The successes of the RSA Factoring Challenge show that for some types of problems, it's possible to recruit spare "cycles" on a large number of machines distributed around the Internet. Therefore, by offering a suitable incentive, it should be possible to recruit sufficient CPU power across the Internet to exhaustively search the DES keyspace in a matter of weeks. Computer scientists have already developed software that will allow even the novice computer user to participate in the cracking effort. By incorporating the key search software in a "screen saver", a simple PC anywhere on the Internet can devote its spare time to working on the problem - remotely and completely unattended. Even people with limited computer skills will be able to participate. In the RSA DES Challenge, the motto will definitely be "The More, The Merrier". The Contest Full details of the RSA DES Challenge will be posted on the RSA home page (http://www.rsa.com/) during the first weeks of January. Complete rules for the competition will be provided as well as example challenges and solutions against which computer scientists and hackers can test their software. In conjunction with the RSA DES Challenge, RSA will simultaneously launch a series of other contests based around the RC5 Symmetric Block Cipher (another encryption algorithm). Since RC5 is a variable key length block cipher, targets that offer increasing resistance against so-called "exhaustive search attacks" will be posted in the hope of assessing the full impact of a widely-distributed exhaustive search. There will be 12 challenges based on the use of RC5. Prizes will be awarded for the recovery of each of 12 keys which are chosen to be of lengths varying from 40 bits all the way up to 128 bits, with the length increasing in steps of eight bits. The email sender of the first correctly formatted submissions to each contest will receive a cash prize. For the RSA DES Challenge the first sender of the secret DES key will receive $10,000. For the other contests the prize money awarded will vary with the difficulty of the RC5 key attacked. For more information about the ongoing RSA Factoring Challenge send email to challenge-administrator at rsa.com and for the latest news and developments send email to challenge-news at rsa.com. About RSA Data Security, Inc. RSA Data Security, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Security Dynamics Technologies, Inc., is the world's brand name for cryptography, with more than 75 million copies of RSA encryption and authentication technologies installed and in use worldwide. RSA technologies are part of existing and proposed standards for the Internet and World Wide Web, IT4, ISO, ANSI, IEEE, and business, financial and electronic commerce networks around the globe. The company develops and markets platform-independent developer's kits and end-user products, and provides comprehensive cryptographic consulting services. For more information on any of RSA's encryption technologies, please call RSA directly at 415/595-8782 or send electronic mail to sales at rsa.com. RSA also provides information on its Web site at http://www.rsa.com. **************************************************************** Kurt R. Stammberger Director, Technology Marketing RSA Data Security, Inc. (A Security Dynamics Company) 415-595-8782 vox 415-595-1873 fax kurt at rsa.com www.rsa.com From nobody at replay.com Fri Jan 3 10:57:45 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:57:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Accounts payable Message-ID: <199701031857.TAA13354@basement.replay.com> Timothy May the self-admitted child molester possesses a rudimentary dick less than one inch long, half the size of his mother's clitoris, that barely makes a fistful. Thereby hangs the root of this Jew-hating sissy's sick fixation on little boys and Usenet forgeries. ____ \ _/__ Timothy May \\ / \/ From byrd at ACM.ORG Fri Jan 3 10:58:51 1997 From: byrd at ACM.ORG (Jim Byrd) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:58:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: OCR and Machine Readable Text Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970103135011.006af448@super.zippo.com> I used to work for an OCR company (Kurzweil, a division of Xerox; now Xerox Advanced Imaging). The OCR software they had did better than 95% over 10 years ago. And yes, you could run on a 286. The trick was to use a board plugged into the 286 which itself had enough horsepower (a Motorola cpu) to do the job. I actually started a project to develop a Windows (version 1.3!) driver for this, but at the time Xerox had no interest in Windows. So the project was cancelled and the Windows people essentially dismissed. Xerox now has a Windows product called TextBridge. At 12:35 PM 1/3/97 -0500, /**\\anonymous/**\\" wrote: >Alan Olsen wrote: >> I used to work for a company that would transfer entire archives of medical >> journals. Much of it we would just OCR. Some of it we would send off >> shore. The OCR software was about 95% reliable and this was over 5 years >> ago. (And we were using 286 boxes for much of the OCR work. Not a heavy >> technoligical investment.) I am sure that things have improved a great >> deal since then. (My new scanner included OCR software. I will have to >> run a test and report the findings. > > I'd like to know what OCR software you were using. All tests we >completed at my place of employment were very poor quality wise. We >showed >a %65 accuracy rate. Not very good when you need to transfer a five >year >backlog of medical and technical journals. This was using a high >resolution >scanner with a package that was bundled along with it. About a year >ago, >my employer considered transfering data taken off of forms into a >relational >database using an OCR program. Again, we found the findings to be too >innacurate for our needs. I may have just been using the wrong programs >for >the job, but the findings were depressing... > >panther > >> --- >> | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | >> |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | >> | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | >> |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| >> | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| > > From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 3 11:05:27 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 11:05:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: WIPO and domain names Message-ID: For those who haven't seen it already, there is something in the bushes: http://www.wipo.org/eng/internet/domains/index.htm From tcmay at got.net Fri Jan 3 11:08:56 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 11:08:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Timmy's Lost It: [Was Extremism in the defense of liberty isno vice] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: It's always sad to see another sometimes-reasonable (though sometimes foaming) writer go down the Detweiler-Vulis route, e.g., by making his arguments hinge on calling me "Timmy" (what _is_ it with this nickname that makes it so damned attractive to Vulis, Vlad, and Attila?). At 8:14 AM +0000 1/1/97, Attila T. Hun wrote: > your elitism is crap; if you know it and persist, you are asking > to lose the "war" with the Feds; if you don't know it, you're just > ignorant. you are doing nothing except feeding your own ego in the > hope of winning one battle and establishing that self-same elitism. .... > I didn't fight in foreign wars for this crap from an 'American.' Actually, the war you apparently fought in was of course a total waste. This is too well known to repeat here. Making rhetorical arguments hinge on the notion that you fought in some god-forsaken war in the middle of nowhere is absurd. You were just cannon fodder, a pawn in the geopolitical chess game, a means of enhancing certain political careers...though you ultimately let them down, as LBJ chose to bow out, and Nixon resigned. You were playing your role, Attila! As for my "elitism," I've never presented myself in any other fashion. I've discussed this issue many times. Get used to it, or ignore it, or just keep foaming at the mouth and ranting about how I need to take "yellow pills" to avoid being an ally of "Bubba." --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay at got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From mix-admin at nym.alias.net Fri Jan 3 11:17:56 1997 From: mix-admin at nym.alias.net (lcs Remailer Administrator) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 11:17:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: What happened to remailer-operators@c2.org? Message-ID: <19970103191721.9665.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Sorry for this somewhat off-topic post, but I figured it was the best way to reach people who would know. Does anyone know what happened to the remailer-operators at c2.org mailing list? I get: rcpt to: 550 ... User unknown Thanks. From gary at safetydisk.com Fri Jan 3 11:28:07 1997 From: gary at safetydisk.com (Gary Aikens) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 11:28:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... Message-ID: <19970103174004703.AIT291@[205.187.61.2]> ...and pets are lost or turn up missing every year! Protect your loved ones today! Think about all the things you do to protect your loved ones. Isn't there one more thing you should do? Child and Pet ID Kits have been around for years, but most of them haven't changed with the years. Traditional ID Kits allow you to compile valuable information about your child or pet that you can use in the event your child or pet is missing. We are responding to the rapid changes in technology. We know that any ID Kit just isn't good enough. Our ID Kit is quite different! You supply us with up to three photos and pertinent information about your child or pet and we create a SAFETYDISK. In PC or MAC format, SAFETYDISK is a 3 1/2" disk that contains photos and valuable information that could help law enforcement agencies in the search for a missing child or pet. What makes our kit so unique is that each SAFETYDISK is actually pre-formatted for the World Wide Web. SAFETYDISK can be put on any Internet server within seconds and displayed to millions and millions of people who might spot your child or pet! For more information, visit our website at http://www.mvisibility.com/sd/ Thanks, Gary Aikens President, SafetyDisk, Inc. From blancw at microsoft.com Fri Jan 3 11:50:05 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 11:50:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crypto reg clarification from Commerce Department Message-ID: The General Prohibitions: (ii): You may not, without a license from BXA, think about technical things with respect to encryption items, as described in Sec 744.9 of the EAR.Instead, when you reason upon the validity and consequencs of your code or your actions, you will set your neural systems to reference Sec. 736.2(b)(10) and Sec. 764.2 (b) & (e). .. Blanc From fod at brd.ie Fri Jan 3 12:07:39 1997 From: fod at brd.ie (Frank O'Dwyer) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:07:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701031110.LAA31173@brd.ie> > [...] the drivel that comes from some of our more prolific posters is > best handled by filtering by the list members themselves. (I currently > have 3 of them going directly to the trash. Perhaps aga should get > kickbacks from Qualcomm. He managed to sell a copy of EudoraPro.) It would be nice if each user could install filters on Majordomo itself. Not only would we not need to buy Eudora Pro, but we wouldn't have to pay to download messages we didn't want to read, and without having to employ a moderator (censor). The most serious drawback I can think of is the slight loss of privacy involved in revealing one's filtering preferences to the server - however, the people who get filtered are generally no secret. You just told the list you filter aga for example. In conjunction with your token scheme (maybe even without it), something like that could cut volume really nicely. In conjunction with anonymous subscription, people might be willing to run more powerful filters on the server end (positive filtering, keyword search, etc) [that would need some kind of token scheme, else spammers/mailbombers could just stuff their articles with keywords]. It might even be possible to implement a feature like 'subscribe cypherpunks-lite', where you get subscribed to a list minus the most filtered posters... Cheers, Frank O'Dwyer From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Fri Jan 3 12:19:27 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:19:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: OCR and Machine Readable Text In-Reply-To: <32CD435E.24DC@iglou.com> Message-ID: Accuracy will depend on the quality of the original being scanned, as well as the capability of the OCR system; flat originals scan much better than the "bent open" pages of a book or magazine, heavy stock tends to let less "bleed" through from the reverse side, fonts with extreme kerning are more difficult, point size is a factor, etc. I've seen 97%+ w/ Calera, (about 2 years ago) when using flat, first generation high quality photocopies w/ minimal skew and courier or similar typeface. OTOH, the same system did not scan well at all w/ badly skewed photocopies (caused by the "bend" induced by the binding of the original). If you are scanning medical journals, take a look at your originals and also at where the errors are occuring. You can also use a spell checker (after building up a suitable dictionary for your application) to cut out some of the error. I'd guess your results to be less satisfactory for other applications where extreme accuracy is a must. "3", "8", and "B" for example, are often confused; not a big problem w/ a medical journal, but plays havoc w/ code, accouting data, etc. -r.w. On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, /**\anonymous/**\ wrote: > Alan Olsen wrote: > > I used to work for a company that would transfer entire archives of medical > > journals. Much of it we would just OCR. Some of it we would send off > > shore. The OCR software was about 95% reliable and this was over 5 years > > ago. (And we were using 286 boxes for much of the OCR work. Not a heavy > > technoligical investment.) I am sure that things have improved a great > > deal since then. (My new scanner included OCR software. I will have to > > run a test and report the findings. > > I'd like to know what OCR software you were using. All tests we > completed at my place of employment were very poor quality wise. We > showed > a %65 accuracy rate. Not very good when you need to transfer a five > year > backlog of medical and technical journals. This was using a high > resolution > scanner with a package that was bundled along with it. About a year > ago, > my employer considered transfering data taken off of forms into a > relational > database using an OCR program. Again, we found the findings to be too > innacurate for our needs. I may have just been using the wrong programs > for > the job, but the findings were depressing... > > panther > > > --- > > | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | > > |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | > > | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | > > |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| > > | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| > From abostick at netcom.com Fri Jan 3 12:43:31 1997 From: abostick at netcom.com (Alan Bostick) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:43:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [NOISE] Re: Timmy's Lost It: [Was Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, Timothy C. May wrote: > > It's always sad to see another sometimes-reasonable (though sometimes > foaming) writer go down the Detweiler-Vulis route, e.g., by making his > arguments hinge on calling me "Timmy" (what _is_ it with this nickname that > makes it so damned attractive to Vulis, Vlad, and Attila?). It's a meme, both self-perpetuating *and* spontaneously generating. The antagonist, in the passion of the moment, doesn't hit the space, shift, or 'A' keys while typing fast. Other people, insensed by the post, respond in kind, and so forth. Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 3 12:57:05 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 12:57:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anonymous Remailer at DHP.com In-Reply-To: <970103104111_1722786644@emout07.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <199701032056.MAA12850@mailmasher.com> Jill014 at aol.com writes: > But why do you always use the anonymous remailer from DHP.com? > Why do you not use other places? Whom are you asking? Personally, I use at least 4 remailers for every message I send. I have a chain of 3 I trust, and have premail automatically select a reliable remailer for the last hop. It may just be that dhp.com has been high on the list lately. So a lot of messages have been coming from there. From nobody at replay.com Fri Jan 3 13:25:33 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Name Withheld by Request) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 13:25:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: 'Fuck_God_Up_The_Ass' (was: invitation) Message-ID: <199701032125.WAA26094@basement.replay.com> fgle at sun1.uconect.net spammed: > Received: (from majordom at localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id HAA09438 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 07:09:39 -0800 (PST) > Received: from sun1.uconect.net ([206.156.42.50]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id HAA09425 for ; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 07:09:27 -0800 (PST) > From: fgle at sun1.uconect.net > Received: from fgle.uconect.net ([206.156.55.17]) by sun1.uconect.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id KAA13920 for ; Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:07:22 -0500 > Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 10:07:22 -0500 > Message-Id: <199701031507.KAA13920 at sun1.uconect.net> > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: invitation > Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com > Precedence: bulk > X-Newsgroups: list.cypherpunks > > Fuck_God_Up_The_Ass, [snip] > Douglas Cymbala > Membership Department I somehow doubt that Douglas has sufficient Vaseline to fulfill his erotic fantasies! (Or his "god" is rather small...) How many clueless spammers need to get stung by indiscriminately posting to spam-bait addresses planted in Usenet until they figure out that it's a Really Bad Idea[tm]? I've heard rumors that at least one idjit spammer lost his account for spamming a religious mailing list with something like that! Can you say "oops"? From ericm at lne.com Fri Jan 3 14:35:32 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 14:35:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <199701031110.LAA31173@brd.ie> Message-ID: <199701032232.OAA24347@slack.lne.com> Frank O'Dwyer writes: > > [...] the drivel that comes from some of our more prolific posters is > > best handled by filtering by the list members themselves. (I currently > > have 3 of them going directly to the trash. Perhaps aga should get > > kickbacks from Qualcomm. He managed to sell a copy of EudoraPro.) > > It would be nice if each user could install filters on Majordomo itself. > Not only would we not need to buy Eudora Pro, but we wouldn't have to > pay to download messages we didn't want to read, and without having > to employ a moderator (censor). Bad idea. It's tough enough on the host running a list with 1500 or 2000 people on it. Adding outbound filtering for each user would be a real burden on the list host. It's better to distribute the processing by making the user agent (or mail transport that's delivering to the user) do the filtering. In addition, a filtering majordomo will only 'protect' the lists that it serves. I don't know about you but I get a lot of spam from all sorts of different sources. I need to have a filter anyhow. It's not hard to add some more rules to filter out each lists's bozos. It's a lot simpler to do that than it would be to upload filter rules to each of the 10 or 12 listservers I get mail from. There's also a security issue. How are you going to set it up so that I can't say hack Tim May's filters to send him nothing but posts from Phil H-B and Detwiler? Yea, you can do it with passwords or PGP or whatever, but it's still more overhead. Why bother with it when you don't need to? -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From gary at safetydisk.com Fri Jan 3 14:56:16 1997 From: gary at safetydisk.com (Gary Aikens) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 14:56:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... Message-ID: <19970103175750062.AJW281@[205.187.61.2]> ...and pets are lost or turn up missing every year! Protect your loved ones today! Think about all the things you do to protect your loved ones. Isn't there one more thing you should do? Child and Pet ID Kits have been around for years, but most of them haven't changed with the years. Traditional ID Kits allow you to compile valuable information about your child or pet that you can use in the event your child or pet is missing. We are responding to the rapid changes in technology. We know that any ID Kit just isn't good enough. Our ID Kit is quite different! You supply us with up to three photos and pertinent information about your child or pet and we create a SAFETYDISK. In PC or MAC format, SAFETYDISK is a 3 1/2" disk that contains photos and valuable information that could help law enforcement agencies in the search for a missing child or pet. What makes our kit so unique is that each SAFETYDISK is actually pre-formatted for the World Wide Web. SAFETYDISK can be put on any Internet server within seconds and displayed to millions and millions of people who might spot your child or pet! For more information, visit our website at http://www.mvsibility.com/sd/ Thanks, Gary Aikens President, SafetyDisk, Inc. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 3 16:50:12 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 16:50:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: ASSHOLE FAGGOT J.D. Falk In-Reply-To: <199701032052.OAA03255@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: <819yZD2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> snow writes: > > The recognition that most every problem person is of a homosexual > > nature is definitely a usenet body-politic phenomenon, which will > > be documented and verified with whatever means that become necessary. > > You are a problem, therefore, you are a homosexual. > > Gee, isn't logic fun? > Just following the homos' logic... If you don't like someone and he happens to be a homo, then you're a homophobe, and all the homos are supposed to fuck you over. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dennis10301 at www1.utech.net Fri Jan 3 17:12:46 1997 From: dennis10301 at www1.utech.net (Dennis Alverson) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 17:12:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Guaranteed downline!!! Message-ID: WANTED: FRUSTRATED NETWORKERS. MLM Breakthrough. Downline built for you -- GUARANTEED. No fees or hassles. For info visit my web site before the internet explosion begins. http://www.entrepreneurs.net/don/changes-da1132.html or send email to my autoresponder at dennis-ch at don.gen.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- You don't have to respond to this message. You will not be sent this message from me again. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From fod at brd.ie Fri Jan 3 18:04:10 1997 From: fod at brd.ie (Frank O'Dwyer) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 18:04:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <199701032232.OAA24347@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <199701040151.BAA01396@toby.brd.ie> > > It would be nice if each user could install filters on Majordomo itself. > > Not only would we not need to buy Eudora Pro, but we wouldn't have to > > pay to download messages we didn't want to read, and without having > > to employ a moderator (censor). > > Bad idea. It's tough enough on the host running a list with 1500 or > 2000 people on it. Adding outbound filtering for each user would > be a real burden on the list host. It's better to distribute the > processing by making the user agent (or mail transport that's delivering > to the user) do the filtering. I guess you're not paying for your mail then :-) Just stand back from this for a moment - doesn't it seem just nonsensical to have a robot (majordomo) cranking out 10s of messages to 1000s of users, day in day out, just for other robots (filters) to delete them? And to pay for the privilege? I mean, is it really better to consume the cycles on _everybody's_ machine, _plus_ use all that bandwidth? I'd say that's not obvious. Granted, it takes my creaking old 486 about 10 minutes for exmh to do a filtered 'inc' on the new mail. However I have to pay the phone bills to download all the cruft in the first place, just in order to get the rare nugget. And I can't use my mailer while the 'inc' is running. And if everyone else is paying and and waiting too, then maybe it turns out to be better for the messages to be filtered centrally, so we all waste less time and money, even if the server does heat up a little. (Hell, I might even chip in to upgrade the list server if that's what it took, and still save money.) Besides, it's not necessarily true that filtering would make the server load significantly worse (certainly not if PGP is the other option), or even that it makes it worse at all. For example, the overhead on doing a lookup on a short list of filtered users might well be more than offset by not having to send the message. (Having once seen a DEC alpha brought to its knees by 'sendmail', I can believe that...). If processing turned out to be a genuine problem then maybe the list could be split over several servers. (In an ideal world, of course, the filtering agents would be mobile, and would learn to back all the way up the pipe and would eventually run on the spammer's machines :-) > In addition, a filtering majordomo will only 'protect' the lists that it > serves. I don't know about you but I get a lot of spam from all sorts > of different sources. I need to have a filter anyhow. It's not hard to > add some more rules to filter out each lists's bozos. It's a lot > simpler to do that than it would be to upload filter rules to each > of the 10 or 12 listservers I get mail from. True, but I'd sure love not to have to download some of the cruft down the old 28.8 line in the first place...I suppose IMAP would have the same thing going for it but it's not here yet (plus you still have all that list cruft that 99% of people filter or delete going up and down the internet). [ deletia ... The security issues you mention are real, but so are the solutions you mention :-) ] Cheers, Frank O'Dwyer. From steve at resudox.net Fri Jan 3 18:21:34 1997 From: steve at resudox.net (Steve Stewart) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 18:21:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: OCR and Machine Readable Text In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970102225436.01072284@mail.teleport.com> Message-ID: <32CDBDD9.2A27@resudox.net> �I have used OCR a fair bit, and I agree with you,� I think you're being generous by saying� even a 65% accuracy rate. I think our OCR technology today is pathetic, and it would be quicker just to type the damn documents ourselves. I've used a bunch of different packages from guys like HP, and others. I certainly don't know what Alan Olsen was using. Then again, it obviously depends on the quality of the documents you are scanning. So If you had perfect crisply printed, beautiful documents, then maybe you'd get a good accuracy rate. But nice documents, are usually ones generated recently, therefore probably already on the computer, and so they don't even need to scanned. You see what I'm getting at, all the documents we don't have on the computer are, usually, older ones and therefore of lesser quality, so that's why our OCR fails almost more often than not. I guess I'm being a little harsh, I mean this type of technology is quite revolutionary and actually quite amazing, but it's far, far from perfect. � Just my 2 cents... � ��� Steve From rcgraves at disposable.com Fri Jan 3 20:36:27 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 20:36:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Civil rights, wrongs, and extremism in the defense of liberty Message-ID: <32CDDDE7.13EA@disposable.com> Bill Frantz mentioned the 1960's civil rights movement as one of those revolutions that Thomas Jefferson thought were a good idea. Maybe that's what he had in mind, maybe not. It's good to keep in mind that other people, including many here, may have different conceptions of ordered liberty than we do. Here's a Bork piece from 1963. I also recommend the lengthy article on "Liberalism Defined" in the 21-12-96 issue of The Economist. It's online, at least for a while, at http://www.economist.com/issue/21-12-96/xm0017.html -rich http://www.tezcat.com/~nrn/bork63.txt Civil Rights - A Challenge by Robert Bork Passions are running so high over racial discrimination that the various proposals to legislate its manifestations out of existence seem likely to become textbook examples of the maxim that great and urgent issues are rarely discussed in terms of the principles they necessarily involve. In this case, the danger is that justifiable abhorrence of racial discrimination will result in legislation by which the morals of the majority are self-righteously imposed upon a minority. That has happened before in the United States - Prohibition being the most notorious instance - but whenever it happens it is likely to be subversive of free institutions. Instead of a discussion of the merits of legislation, of which the proposed Interstate Public Accommodations Act outlawing discrimination in business facilities serving the public may be taken as the prototype, we are treated to debate whether it is more or less cynical to pass the law under the commerce power or the Fourteenth Amendment, and whether the Supreme Court is more likely to hold it Constitutional one way or the other. Heretical though it may sound to the constitutional sages neither the Constitution nor the Supreme Court qualifies as a first principle. The discussion we ought to hear is of the cost in freedom that must be paid for such legislation, the morality of enforcing morals through law, and the likely consequences for law enforcement of trying to do so. Few proponents of legislation such as the Interstate Public Accommodations Act seem willing to discuss either the cost in freedom which must accompany it or why this particular departure from freedom of the individual to choose with whom he will deal is justified. appears to recognize but to wish to avoid these questions, for, in speaking on behalf of the bill before a congressional committee, he went so far as to state that the law would create no precedent. That of course is nothing less than an admission that he does not care to defend the bill on general principles. There seems to be a strong disposition on the part of proponents of the legislation simply to ignore the fact that it means a loss in a vital area of personal liberty. That it does is apparent. The legislature would inform a substantial body of the citizenry that in order to continue to carry on the trades in which they are established they must deal with and serve persons with whom they do not wish to associate. In part the willingness to overlook that loss of freedom arises from the feeling that it is irrational to choose associates on the basis of racial characteristics. Behind that judgment, however, lies an unexpressed natural-law view that some personal preferences are rational, that others are irrational, and that a majority may impose upon a minority its scale of preferences. The fact that the coerced scale of preferences is said to be rooted in a moral order does not alter the impact upon freedom. In a society that purports to value freedom as an end in itself, the simple argument from morality to law can be a dangerous non sequitur. Professor Mark DeWolf Howe, in supporting the proposed legislation, describes southern opposition to "the nation's objective" as an effort "to preserve ugly customs of a stubborn people." So it is. Of the ugliness of racial discrimination there need be no argument (though there may be some presumption in identifying one's own hotly controverted aims with the objective of the nation). But it is one thing when stubborn people express their racial antipathies in laws which prevent individuals, whether white or Negro, from dealing with those who are willing to deal with them, and quite another to tell them that even as individuals they may not act on their racial preferences in particular areas of life. The principle of such legislation is that if I find your behavior ugly by my standards, moral or aesthetic, and if you prove stubborn about adopting my view of the situation, I am justified in having the state coerce you into more righteous paths. That is itself a principle of unsurpassed ugliness. Freedom is a value of very high priority and the occasions upon which it is sacrificed ought to be kept to a minimum. It is necessary that the police protect a man from assault or theft but it is a long leap from that to protection from the insult implied by the refusal of another individual to associate or deal with him. The latter involves a principle whose logical reach is difficult to limit. If it is permissible to tell a barber or a rooming house owner that he must deal with all who come to him regardless of race or religion, then it is impossible to see why a doctor, lawyer, accountant, or any other professional or business man should have the right to discriminate. Indeed, it would be unfair discrimination to leave anybody engaged in any commercial activity with that right. Nor does it seem fair or rational, given the basic premise, to confine the principle to equal treatment of Negroes as customers. Why should the law not require not merely fair hiring of Negroes in subordinate positions but the choice of partners or associates in a variety of business and professional endeavors without regard to race or creed? Though such a law might presently be unenforceable, there is no distinction in principle between it and what is proposed. It is difficult to see an end to the principle of enforcing fair treatment by private individuals. It certainly need not be confined to racial or commercial matters. The best way to demonstrate the expansive ness of the principle behind the proposed legislation is to examine the arguments which are used to justify it. Perhaps the most common popular justification of such a law is based on a crude notion of waivers: Insistence that barbers, lunch counter operators, and similar businessmen serve all comers does not infringe their freedom because they "hold themselves out to serve the public." The statement is so obviously a fiction that it scarcely survives articulation. The very reason for the proposed legislation is precisely that some individuals have made it as clear as they can that they do not hold themselves out to serve the public. A second popular argument, usually heard in connection with laws proposed to be laid under the Fourteenth Amendment, is that the rationale which required the voiding of laws enforcing segregation also requires the prohibition of racial discrimination by business licensed by any governmental unit because "state action" is involved. The only legitimate thrust of that "state action" characterization, however, is to enable courts to see through governmental use of private organizations to enforce an official policy of segregation. There is a fundamental difference between saying that the state cannot turn over its primary election process, which is actually the only election that matters, to the "private" and all-white Democratic Party and saying that a chiropodist cannot refuse a Negro patient because a state board has examined him and certified his competence. The "state action" concept must be confined to discerning state enforcement of policy through a nominally private agency or else it becomes possible to discern the hand of the state in every private action. One of the shabbiest forms of "argument" is that endorsed by James Reston when he described the contest over the public accommodations bill as one between "human rights" and "property rights." Presumably no one of "liberal" views has any difficulty deciding the question when so concisely put. One wishes nonetheless, that Mr. Reston would explain just who has rights with respect to property other than humans. If A demands to deal with B and B insists that for reasons sufficient to himself he wants nothing to do with A, I suppose even Reston would agree that both are claiming "human rights" and that this is in no way changed if one of the humans is colored and the other white. How does the situation change if we stipulate that they are standing on opposite sides of a barber chair and that B owns it? A number of people seem to draw a distinction between commercial relationships and all others. They feel justified, somehow, in compelling a rooming house owner or the proprietor of a lunch counter to deal with all comers without regard to race but would not legislate acceptance of Negroes into private clubs or homes. The rationale appears to be that one relationship is highly personal and the other is just business. Under any system which allows the individual to determine his own values that distinction is unsound. It is, moreover, patently fallacious as a description of reality. The very bitterness of the resistance to the demand for enforced integration arises because owners of many places of business do in fact care a great deal about whom they Serve. The real meaning of the distinction is simply that some people do not think others ought to care that much about that particular aspect of their freedom. One of the Kennedy administration's arguments for the bill is that it is necessary to provide legal redress in order to get the demonstrators out of the streets. That cannot be taken seriously as an independent argument. If southern white racists - or northern ones, for that matter - were thronging the streets, demanding complete segregation of commercial facilities, it is to be hoped that no responsible politician would suggest passing a law to enable them to enforce their demands in court. In this connection, it is possible to be somewhat less than enthusiastic about the part played by "moral leaders" in participating in demonstrations against private persons who discriminate in choice of their patrons. It feeds the danger of the violence which they are the first to deplore. That might nevertheless be tolerable if they were demonstrating against a law that coerced discrimination. They are actually part of a mob coercing and distributing other private individuals in the exercise of their freedom. Their moral position is about the same as Carrie Nation's when she and her followers invaded saloons. Though the basic objection is to the law's impact upon individual liberty, it is also appropriate to question the practicality of enforcing a law which runs contrary to the customs, indeed the moral beliefs, of a large portion of the country. Of what value is a law which compels service to Negroes without close surveillance to make sure the service is on the same terms given to whites? It is not difficult to imagine many ways in which barbers, landlords, lunch counter operators, and the like can nominally comply with the law but effectively discourage Negro patrons. Must federal law enforcement agencies become in effect public utility commissions charged with the supervision of the nation's business establishments or will the law become an unenforceable symbol of hypocritical righteousness?. It is sad to have to defend the principle of freedom in this context, but the task ought not to be left to those southern politicians who only a short while ago were defending laws that enforced racial segregation. There seem to be few who favor racial equality who also perceive or are willing. to give primacy to the value of freedom in this struggle. A short while back the majority of the nation's moral and intellectual leaders opposed all the manifestations of "McCarthyism" and quite correctly assured the nation that the issue was not whether communism was good or evil but whether men ought to be free to think and talk as they pleased. Those same leaders seem to be running with the other pack this time. Yet the issue is the same. It is not whether racial prejudice or preference is a good thing but whether individual men ought to be free to deal and associate with whom they please for whatever reasons appeal to them. This time "stubborn people" with "ugly customs" are under attack rather than intellectuals and academicians; but that sort of personal comparison surely ought not to make the difference. The trouble with freedom is that it will be used in ways we abhor. It then takes great self restraint to avoid sacrificing it, just this once, to another end. One may agree that it is immoral to treat a man according to his race or religion and yet question whether that moral preference deserves elevation to the level of that principle of individual freedom and self-determination If, every time an intensely-felt moral principle is involved, we spend freedom, we will run short of it. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 3 21:34:34 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:34:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice] Message-ID: <32CDE25A.63AB@sk.sympatico.ca> An embedded message was scrubbed... From: unknown sender Subject: no subject Date: no date Size: 486 URL: From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 3 21:34:34 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:34:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice] Message-ID: <32CDE274.C8C@sk.sympatico.ca> An embedded message was scrubbed... From: unknown sender Subject: no subject Date: no date Size: 776 URL: From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 3 21:34:51 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:34:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fed's blew it this time. In-Reply-To: <056uZD74w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <32CDE387.A30@sk.sympatico.ca> The solution to world peace? We KILL all of the 'violent' people. (Thank you. Just put my Nobel Peace Prize in the mail.) Toto Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > "Attila T. Hun" writes: > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > > In <219sZD42w165w at bwalk.dm.com>, on 12/31/96 > > at 11:59 AM, dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said: > > > > ::> Timothy C. May wrote: > > ::> > > > ::> > Your message is the equivalent of that brain-damaged ebonite's > > ::> > "Why can't we all just get along?" > > ::> > > ::> Tim, > > ::> Have you 'coined a phrase' here? > > ::> Perhaps future generations, reading of the exploits of the > > ::> 'Ebonites', will recognize your contribution to the language. > > ::> Have you seen _Mars Attacks_ where Jack Nicholson, playing the > > ::> president, says just that? > > > > ::have you noticed that a lot of recent popular movies either portray > > ::the U.S.G. as a bunch of crooks and criminals, or make fun of killing > > ::them all (e.g. Mars Attacks). This would have been unthinkable 20 > > ::years ago. > > > > 20 years ago, the Vietnam protests were just dying down. the > > movie industry which has been one of the more vocal anti-war > > centers (except in making violent war movies which make money) was > > still somewhat respectful of the USG. > > Was the media industry really anti-war, or just anti-Nixon? When Lyndon > Johnson sent the troops to 'Nam, the media first supported him. When Nixon got > elected, against the media's wishes, the media attacked him over everything he > was doing, including the war, just like they attacked Reagan and Bush. I'm > usure if Nixon had pulled out completely in '69, the media would have been > pro-war. They're whores, like Declan McCulough. > > Bombing the hell out of North Viet Nam targets was evil, but effective. But: > compare the way USD is portrayed in _Apocalypse Now & _Deer Hunter (a > monolythic machine servings some sinister purpose and killing the natives; > white people are safe; the rogue gets terminated by USG itself) with the way > it's portrayed in _Rambo and _Red Dawn (gubmint abandons the pow's*, abandons > the locals; useless, but barely evil, and it's not clear how far up the evil > goes) and with the way it's been portrayed in this year's movies: _Courage > Under Fire (a bunch of criminals trying to cover up their fuckup, all the way > to the top); _Ransom (the main villain is a NYC cop, other cops are useless; > it's not Federales, but close enough); _Eraser ("rogue" WitSec, the cops are > the enemies); _Professional (the top villain works for the DEA). Pop movies > reflect the attitudes of the audience they're made for. > > Dr. Grubor is a Viet Nam vet. I have great respect for him. > > *) Klinton's being paid by the Indonesians to "normalize" relation with VC, > incorporated by reference. > > > Other than the liberals who give Bubba a birthday party > > --probably more for their own publicity (except Barbra), most > > everybody is getting fed up with the government and beginning to > > realize the USG not only over governs, but the public is also > > beginning to understand the usurpation of power, and the basic > > unconstitutionality of the regulatory agencies. > > > > Utah is as good an example as any; they have never been > > Fed supportive (even if it was Republican), but the church mandate > > is to support the government --however, they are quickly swinging > > to a large majority which not only does not like the Federal > > government, but who are also actively stating the government is > > illegal-- and the church is silent. > > > > The other Intermountain states have been just plain independent > > minded, but tolerated the Feds. Not any more. Idaho and eastern > > Washington are not a safe place for the Feds. Montana makes no > > bones about it; Wyoming, Colorado, and New Mexico are vocal. And AZ > > is as pissed as they come over the MJ pronouncement "--what do you > > mean the Feds are telling us our vote is worthless and our States' > > Rights don't mean pig shit." Nobody particularly cares about the > > MJ, it's the pure and simple emphasis on States' Rights and the > > Voters' Rights to self-determination and the 10th Amendment. > > > > Analysis of California attitudes is even more revealing; the > > statement the DEA would pull prescription permits from doctors > > prescribing maryjane in AZ and CA has stirred a firestorm which > > will only get larger. > > Is that why the criminal Usenet Cabal is interfering with the propagation > of sci.med.cannabis and other MJ-related Usenet newsgroups? > > > The people spoke and the Feds said: "Fuck You!" > > > > The question then is, how long before the Eastern whimps and > > liberal tit suckers wake up and realize they too are about to lose > > the option of being liberal tit suckers? > > > > Of all things, MJ may be the last straw (going up in smoke > > ); now, if the press will get off their sensationalism on the > > CDA and talk about what it is we are really fighting --free speech > > as a whole, Thomas Jefferson might wake up one day soon and say: > > "Alright! but it took you stupid bastards more than the 20 years > > to have a little revolution to teach Washington who the government > > serves!" > > I have little regard for Thomas Jefferson and rest of the "founding fathers" > gang. Their revolution replaced one bunch of oppressors with another; no > wonder it was followed by Shay's (sp?) Rebellion (whose farmer leaders were > sentenced to hang for treason; later commuted); and Alien and Sedition Acts. > > > Maybe Bubba needs a little more cocaine so he gets "brave" > > enough to call in UN troops to quell a riot... then WE watch the > > fun. Some of you sissies might even lift your hardware and watch > > your first melon explode. After the first one, it's easy. > > > > For the first time a civilized nation has full gun > > registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more > > efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the > > future. > > --Adolf Hitler (1935) > > > > Is Adolf's future here again? > > I had a great-grandfather named Adolf. The Communists killed him. > > > 46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, > > sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting > > firearms. ...Consider the following statement: > > > > I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist > > confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government. > > > > --The USMC Combat Arms Survey > > > > The same survey had questions of obeying commands from UN officers, > > and obeying commands from UN officers on US territory, and against > > US citizens. Anybody who wants a copy of the whole survey, send > > me email. > > > > This was not somebody's master thesis; on some special > > operations bases it was given by a major, others a light bird, etc. > > all SEALS and USMC spec-op groups were given the "test" --the > > younger men were >85% compliant; the reuppers and lifers were real > > low on compliance (~15%). Our PC and revisionist history has built > > the generation they want: functionally illiterate "world-oriented" > > cannon fodder. > > How does one brainwash a brainless "cypher punk"? > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 3 21:35:06 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:35:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <199612312032.MAA04214@crypt.hfinney.com> Message-ID: <32CDEE8F.3956@sk.sympatico.ca> Hal Finney wrote: > > We might also want to consider the paradoxical possibility that if we > remove the junk, the list will die! At least now we are constantly > reminded that the cypherpunks list exists. Other lists like the > cryptography and coderpunks can sometimes go for quite a while without > any posts at all. On CP you have the sense of a dynamic community where > you can hope for a response to your posts, more so than on a list which > is silent for days at a time. Hal, Have you been watching "It's A Wonderful Life", with Jimmy Stewart, again? Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 3 21:35:10 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:35:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fed's blew it this time. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CDE461.74DA@sk.sympatico.ca> > The people spoke and the Feds said: "Fuck You!" Bend over and vote. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 3 21:35:21 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:35:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CDE1DF.5722@sk.sympatico.ca> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > "Timothy C. May" writes: > > > > I'll continue to be radical in my views. Nothing wrong with extremism in > > the defense of liberty, as some wise men said. How about extremism in the defense of moderation? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 3 21:35:22 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:35:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CDF0D3.123B@sk.sympatico.ca> Peter Hendrickson wrote: > People who don't like using PGP, or can't use it, or won't use it, > do not belong on this list. Does this also apply to people who don't 'trust' PGP, or who feel more secure using another form of encryption? Are you working on a 'commission' basis, here? Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 3 21:35:26 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:35:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CDF37F.3A13@sk.sympatico.ca> Peter Hendrickson wrote: > I don't believe that people making valuable contributions have any > trouble at all coughing up a dollar to do so. Very few people post > more than 10 messages a month. $10/month isn't much of a burden. I agree. Poor people have nothing of value to contribute to society. They probably ought to be in a camp somewhere, so that they don't bother the hi-rollers. They can share bunks with the disabled. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 3 21:37:05 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:37:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CDF437.13C7@sk.sympatico.ca> Peter Hendrickson wrote: > If our custom was to send money to people who make good posts, then > you could imagine the fee being quite high, say $20, since most of > the money will be made back. Voila! We have a wonderful feedback > system for how much contribution we have made. And there would be no possibility of ending up with a forum consisting of those with the most money spending all of their time agreeing with one another. From jya at pipeline.com Fri Jan 3 21:37:51 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:37:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: EAR Doc Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970104053335.0069ccd8@pop.pipeline.com> We've prepared a hyperlinked version of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) to assist analysis, evaluation and commentary on interim rules for encryption export: http://jya.com/eartoc.htm It's sobering to study the EAR and see the lethal weapons to which encryption is wed -- the most mass-murderous of high-technology calmly described as commercial warfare for the commonweal. Ponder the Commerce Control list to see the mayhem elite minds concoct. From ph at netcom.com Fri Jan 3 21:45:18 1997 From: ph at netcom.com (Peter Hendrickson) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 21:45:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme Message-ID: The proposal to limit "noise" posts by using re-usable tokens is interesting because it has the effect of filtering and at the same time remains responsive because the "moderator" passes judgement after posting has occurred. In essence, the poster is betting that the moderator will approve the post retroactively. The purpose of limiting the tokens available is to give them value so that there is a cost associated with losing the bet. However, distribution of the tokens has the same problems that centrally planned economies have distributing bread. Should people wait in line, receive bread at random, or get their bread through connections? None of these solutions is attractive. The right way to implement the scheme is to use dollars for tokens because the USG has already solved the problem of giving the tokens value. The "moderator" returns the money to people when posts are worthwhile and keeps it otherwise. This means that the "bet" can be quite a bit larger than a dollar because responsible posters will get their money back. Starving graduate students will not be discouraged from posting. Abusive posters, anonymous posters, or spam artists will have to pay a substantial fee for the privilege. Of course, there's no reason to have just one moderator on the list. A moderator could just be an e-mail account that forwards mail to the list if valid payment is received. (Moderators should PGP sign their messages so mail forging won't work.) Readers could filter on which moderators have approved the kinds of posts they want to read. The effect of this scheme is to allow newcomers, infrequent posters, or anonymous posters to get through killfiles without taking the time and effort to develop a reputation. Peter Hendrickson ph at netcom.com From haystack at cow.net Fri Jan 3 22:00:20 1997 From: haystack at cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 22:00:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <9701040543.AA00966@cow.net> Big Brother's little helpers: http://www.anet-stl.com/~wrogers/biometrics/index.html From kent at songbird.com Fri Jan 3 22:23:21 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 22:23:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: OCR and Machine Readable Text In-Reply-To: <32CD435E.24DC@iglou.com> Message-ID: <199701040726.XAA17982@songbird.com> /**\\anonymous/**\\ allegedly said: > > Alan Olsen wrote: > > I used to work for a company that would transfer entire archives of medical > > journals. Much of it we would just OCR. Some of it we would send off > > shore. The OCR software was about 95% reliable and this was over 5 years > > ago. (And we were using 286 boxes for much of the OCR work. Not a heavy > > technoligical investment.) I am sure that things have improved a great > > deal since then. (My new scanner included OCR software. I will have to > > run a test and report the findings. > > I'd like to know what OCR software you were using. All tests we > completed at my place of employment were very poor quality wise. We > showed > a %65 accuracy rate. Not very good when you need to transfer a five > year > backlog of medical and technical journals. This was using a high > resolution > scanner with a package that was bundled along with it. About a year > ago, > my employer considered transfering data taken off of forms into a > relational > database using an OCR program. Again, we found the findings to be too > innacurate for our needs. I may have just been using the wrong programs > for > the job, but the findings were depressing... My understanding is that the most efficient way of inputting text is "double typing" where two people type the same document, and a mechanical comparison of the result is used to find errors. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From ph at netcom.com Fri Jan 3 23:07:07 1997 From: ph at netcom.com (Peter Hendrickson) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 23:07:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Naive Export Question Message-ID: Given that: 1. It is legal to export books with printed source code. 2. It is legal for foreigners to type it in. 3. It is legal for foreigners to post what they typed. 4. It is legal to pay foreigners to type things into a computer. It seems to me that it would be legal for the author of a book with source code to pay foreigners to type in the code and post it. The cost of doing so is small compared to the cost of writing and publishing the book. I assume that this is illegal, but which laws does it violate? Peter Hendrickson ph at netcom.com From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 3 23:43:14 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 23:43:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] ElGamal Message-ID: <199701040743.XAA07918@mailmasher.com> Tim C[ocksucker] May proves that the Midwestern gene pool needs some chlorine in it. /\ \ / /\ //\\ .. //\\ Tim C[ocksucker] May //\(( ))/\\ / < `' > \ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 00:40:17 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 00:40:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <9701020637.AA04024@cow.net> Message-ID: <32CE0EA2.3471@sk.sympatico.ca> Bovine Remailer wrote: > > So, we had a spike of spam attack around Christmas, > primarily using the mechanism of subscribing the cypherpunks > list to other mailing lists. Now, everybody is off designing > methods to limit postings to the list. > > You know what this reminds me of? The enthusiasm displayed > by the the current US government administration to get bills passed > that would curtail even more rights of its citizens in the wake of > the TWA flight 800 crash. Perhaps the solution is to put in a system of mettle detectors. > Cypherpunks, you have met the enemy and it is you. From gbroiles at netbox.com Sat Jan 4 00:44:36 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 00:44:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Personal use exception to ITAR/EAR Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970104004631.006b8bb8@ricochet.net> Someone wrote to the list in the last day or so (I seem to have mislaid the message) asking what happened to the ITAR's personal use exemption. The introductory comments to the new 12/30/96 regs indicate that: "License Exceptions TMP and BAG effectively replace the Department of State's personal use exemption." (Federal Register, p. 68575) License exception TMP is described at 15 CFR 740.4, and BAG is described at 15 CFR 740.9, both of which are available via John Young's helpful hypertext version of the EARs at . -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From roy at sendai.scytale.com Sat Jan 4 01:34:54 1997 From: roy at sendai.scytale.com (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 01:34:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <970104.021030.1j3.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In list.cypherpunks, ph at netcom.com writes: > In essence, the poster is betting that the moderator will approve > the post retroactively. > The "moderator" returns the money to people when posts are worthwhile > and keeps it otherwise. > Of course, there's no reason to have just one moderator on the list. In the case of several moderators, who gets the ecash? And doesn't this open the list to bidding? "Pass this message, and you can keep the e$500." - -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy at scytale.com DNRC Minister Plenipotentiary of All Things Confusing, Software Division PGP Public Key fingerprint = 31 86 EC B9 DB 76 A7 54 13 0B 6A 6B CC 09 18 B6 Key available from pubkey at scytale.com, which works now -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMs4Q8hvikii9febJAQEbrAQAmgwAeqSsi2qIkqakNRPCpwCwNnYudNRi SuPE2LueC+WuhugtLeyDDet+WgefE9X84F4qxn/QVB+tJAGbZzfCPO24shelXEyz ngr0oevKqzcfAAzbB4tMtXe5gl6+zykExXjsx4J/KjMNPL0QAE490uvnKqus/aE8 mSlAU9k/KQo= =ik7B -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tcmay at got.net Sat Jan 4 01:38:22 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 01:38:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Naive Export Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 11:07 PM -0800 1/3/97, Peter Hendrickson wrote: >Given that: >1. It is legal to export books with printed source code. >2. It is legal for foreigners to type it in. >3. It is legal for foreigners to post what they typed. >4. It is legal to pay foreigners to type things into a computer. > >It seems to me that it would be legal for the author of a book with >source code to pay foreigners to type in the code and post it. The >cost of doing so is small compared to the cost of writing and >publishing the book. > >I assume that this is illegal, but which laws does it violate? This is known as "structuring," as with structuring of funds transfers with the apparent intent of avoiding certain laws. (Not really, but I would not be surprised if the courts give some latitude to prosecutions along these lines, or if specific language is eventually added to make such circumventions a felony.) All in all, as the various posts about Bernstein, Karn, OCR, the MIT Press version of PGP, etc. have shown, attempting to block cryptographic code from leaving the U.S. is a lost cause, for many reasons. On a related topic, my hunch is that it is much more likely for a prosecution to involve a major software company skirting the ITAR/EAR rules by subcontracting with offshore companies (e.g., RSADSI using the NEC chips, or Cylink using Israeli programmers) than it is that some lowly Net person will be proscuted for dribbling out a few hundred lines of some crypto program. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay at got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From rapidd at gtwinc.com Sat Jan 4 01:43:39 1997 From: rapidd at gtwinc.com (rapidd at gtwinc.com) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 01:43:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: "FREEDOM for you this New Year" Message-ID: ********************************************************* According to our resources the enclosed information maybe of interest to you. If you wish to be Removed and receive no further mailings simply send an E-mail message to: remove2 at pleaseread.com Thank you. Please Do Not Click Reply To This Message. ********************************************************* If you could make one improvement in your life for the New Year what would that be? Could it be a desire to achieve FREEDOM?? Freedom from worry? Freedom to act on your dreams? Freedom to improve your lifestyle? Freedom from bills? Freedom to go where you want, when you want (with money as no object)? Freedom to get the things you always wanted but couldn�t afford? Freedom to help someone close to you (your parents, your spouse or "significant other", relatives, friends, neighbors, business associates, etc.)? What would this type of "Freedom" mean to you?? Is it then worth a couple of minutes of your time to let us show you and your relatives or friends how to start earning over $500 a week; then over $500 a day; and move on to earn over $10,000 a week in supplemental income? All in your spare time -- even_while_you_sleep!! -- That's right, I said --- ++ "OVER TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS A WEEK!!!" ++ For less than the price of a dinner for two in a nice restaurant, you can be on your way to making your dreams come true. No health fads, no "imitation" products, no scams, no schemes. Just convenient access to everyday products (like telephone and gasoline) that everybody you know uses --- we promise <<>> Sounds to good to be true? That is what I first thought, But it is true and is already happening! HOW is this possible?? Just take a look at our Web site -- right NOW: START 1997 off on the right foot!! TAKE YOUR FIRST STEP TOWARDS FINANCIAL SECURITY!!! http://www191014.ai.net See how and why this can happen for you, your family and your friends try the Web address above! (you can copy and paste the Web address into your browser of choice) Hint: if your Web browser is buggy or producing errors, try Netscape or Microsoft Internet Explorer for best viewing) ** We're_even_giving_away_one_all-expense_paid SKI VACATION_for_two in Steamboat Springs, Colorado no purchase necessary (must be 18) ** (Sure beats a coffee mug or a T-shirt, doesn't it?). That is because we appreciate your time in evaluating this ground-floor opportunity. You can be on your way to making your dreams come true. You will have an opportunity for income for you and your family, even your friends. They will thank you for the rest of your life. *** Here�s the deal *** It is so easy. Just do the numbers. We�re sending this E-Mail to over 8 MILLION people over the next few weeks. If just one-half of one percent sign up, you could have a portion of 40,000 people generating INCOME FOR YOU EVERY DAY right through next the new year and beyond!! This is a "no risk" opportunity! The sooner you ACT, the more of these people you will have WORKING FOR YOU! Now, honestly, what have you got to lose? -- a few minutes of browsing?? Use your World Wide Web browser to locate us at: http://www191014.ai.net CLICK the address above, look at the opportunity. Then be sure to sign up for the SKI VACATION CONTEST. Better yet, ask for the application and take this important step to make your dreams come true. <<>> Thank You again for your time, Direct Access Corporation eightmil at pleaseread.com http://www191014.ai.net From fod at brd.ie Sat Jan 4 05:00:56 1997 From: fod at brd.ie (Frank O'Dwyer) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 05:00:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hyperlink Spoofing: an attack on SSL server authentication Message-ID: <199701041259.MAA00180@brd.ie> I've written up an attack on SSL server authentication at http://www.iol.ie/~fod/sslpaper/sslpaper.htm As far as I am aware, this attack hasn't been written about before. It does not attack the SSL protocol or low-level cryptography, but works at a higher level in order to persuade users to connect to fake servers, with the browser nonetheless giving all the usual appearances of a secure session. Not much technical sophistication is required to carry off the attack, and the impact is that a user may be persuaded to reveal information such as credit card numbers, PINs, insurance or bank details, or other private information to the fake server. Another risk is that the user may download and run trojan Java applets or executables (e.g. banking or database clients) from the fake server, believing them to be from the real server and therefore safe. I am posting this announcement on comp.security.misc, ssl-talk and on cypherpunks. If you know of any other individuals who may be concerned about this attack, but who do not read this group or those lists, please forward this message to them. Cheers, Frank O'Dwyer fod at brd.ie From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Sat Jan 4 05:32:03 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 05:32:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Secret-Sharing Algorithm Message-ID: <852383891.629351.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > I've been looking over Shamir's secret sharing polynomial scheme that > Schneier describes in section 23.2 of AC2. The basic equation for a (3,n) > threshold scheme is (ax^2+bx+M) mod p. I understand that the coefficients > need to be randomly generated for each message but is it OK to reuse the same > prime p over and over? If the message M is always a 160-bit SHA hash, could > I just find the first 161-bit prime and hard-code it into my application and > then just generate new 160-bit coefficients for each new message? Yes, as long as the message can never be more than 160 bits this would be fine, the co-efficients must be true random for the security to be perfect. Indeed using the same prime is an advantage as you suggest because it does not alter the security but increases the ease of implementing the system. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Sat Jan 4 05:38:53 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 05:38:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anonymous Post Control Message-ID: <852383891.629350.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > It would be nice if toad.com would verify signatures and insert a > header into the messages with the PGP User Id of every poster. > Then it would be very easy for many people to filter the messages > using widely available off-the-shelf mail software. Well the obvious answer seems to me to stop majordomo at toad.com accepting ANY messages from anonymous sources but let pseudonyms post, pseudonymous posting allows the owner of the nym to accumulate reputation capital without disclosing his or her true identity. Bear in mind of course that this is a purely technical answer and I happen not to believe that anonymous posting should be stopped. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From aga at dhp.com Sat Jan 4 05:47:12 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 05:47:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: How many Faggots on this list? In-Reply-To: <19970103235600.SAA29719@ladder01.news.aol.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, Santa12801 wrote: > FUCK YOU..YOU GOD DAM STUPID MOTHERFUCKER > And HERE comes ANOTHER one, coming out of the woodwork! -aga (bring 'em out of the woodwork).bot From jw250 at columbia.edu Sat Jan 4 05:56:52 1997 From: jw250 at columbia.edu (Jim Wise) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 05:56:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Naive Export Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, Peter Hendrickson wrote: > Given that: > 1. It is legal to export books with printed source code. > 2. It is legal for foreigners to type it in. > 3. It is legal for foreigners to post what they typed. > 4. It is legal to pay foreigners to type things into a computer. > > It seems to me that it would be legal for the author of a book with > source code to pay foreigners to type in the code and post it. The > cost of doing so is small compared to the cost of writing and > publishing the book. It would probably be chased down under the `financing foreign crypto' bits... > I assume that this is illegal, but which laws does it violate? And here we have the heart of the regulations... Only _actually_ close what they're sure they can get away with, but make sure to make it seem that the rules are logical and complete, so people will refrain from exporting crypto legally or illegally for fear that they will break the law without meaning too... -- Jim Wise jim at santafe.arch.columbia.edu http://www.arch.columbia.edu/~jim * Finger for PGP public key * From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 4 06:35:25 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 06:35:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <32CDF37F.3A13@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: Toto writes: > Peter Hendrickson wrote: > > > I don't believe that people making valuable contributions have any > > trouble at all coughing up a dollar to do so. Very few people post > > more than 10 messages a month. $10/month isn't much of a burden. > > I agree. > Poor people have nothing of value to contribute to society. They > probably ought to be in a camp somewhere, so that they don't bother > the hi-rollers. They can share bunks with the disabled. Timmy May and his ilk want the poor to remain poor, so they'll be willing to work for pennies and provide cheap labor for the idle "cypher punk" elite. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 4 06:35:25 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 06:35:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypherpunk Elitism and Spam Filters In-Reply-To: <32CE2505.1D2D@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: Toto writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > I'm not doing anything with your stupid list. I'm not even on it. > > That's right. This list is now being 'haunted' by the 'ghost' of > the late, great Dr. DV K. Boo! aa@@aaao a@@@@@@@@@@@aao @@@@@@@@@@ ::::::: :::: @@ @@ @@@ :::::::::::: :::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@ :::::::::::::::: :::::::: @@@@@."".@@@@@ :::::::::::::::::: ::::::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ::::::::::::: :::::::::: @@@@@@' `@@@@@@@ :::::::::: :::::::::::::: @@@@@b__d@@@@@',@@@@@@@@ ::::::::::::: ::::::::: aaaa`@@@@""".@@@@,a@@@@@@@ :::::::::::::::: :::::::: aa@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ :::::::::: :::::::: ::::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ :::::::::::a :::::::: ::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ::::::::::: @@@a :::::::: :::: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ::::::::::: @@@@@@@a ::::::: a at a @@@ :: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ::::::::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@aaa : a@@" @@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ::::::::::: @@@@@@@a @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ :::::::::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@a @@@@@@@@@@"" a@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@@@@@ ::::::::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@@@@@'"@@ a@"@@@@@@@ @@@ : @@@@@@@@ ::::::::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ,@@'"' : @@ @@" "@@@"@@ ::: @@@@@ ::::::::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @@' :::: @@@ :::: @ ::::::::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ :::::: : :::::: :::::::::: a@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ::::::: ::::::::::: :::::::::: a@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@' ::::::: ::::::::::::::::::: a@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ :::::::: ::::::::::::::::: ""a@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@' ::::::::: ::::::::::::: @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@' :::::::::: ::::::::::::::: """""@@@@@""""""""' ::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::: --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From rah at shipwright.com Sat Jan 4 06:52:38 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 06:52:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ecash naysayers Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 17:02:52 -0500 From: Roderick Simpson To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: Ecash naysayers Anyone heard a convincing naysayer of electronic cash? Who were they? Best, Rod R o d e r i c k S i m p s o n rod at wired.com A s s o c i a t e P r o d u c e r T h e H o t W i r e d N e t w o r k www.braintennis.com www.wiredsource.com ------------------------------ --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From adam at homeport.org Sat Jan 4 07:07:34 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 07:07:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hyperlink Spoofing: an attack on SSL server authentication In-Reply-To: <199701041259.MAA00180@brd.ie> Message-ID: <199701041504.KAA24308@homeport.org> Ed Felten of Princeton presented something similar at the Dimacs Network Threats workshop in November 96. Frank O'Dwyer wrote: | | I've written up an attack on SSL server authentication at | | http://www.iol.ie/~fod/sslpaper/sslpaper.htm | | As far as I am aware, this attack hasn't been written about before. | It does not attack the SSL protocol or low-level cryptography, but works | at a higher level in order to persuade users to connect to fake servers, | with the browser nonetheless giving all the usual appearances of a | secure session. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From adam at homeport.org Sat Jan 4 07:12:55 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 07:12:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Naive Export Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701041509.KAA24331@homeport.org> Timothy C. May wrote: | On a related topic, my hunch is that it is much more likely for a | prosecution to involve a major software company skirting the ITAR/EAR rules | by subcontracting with offshore companies (e.g., RSADSI using the NEC | chips, or Cylink using Israeli programmers) than it is that some lowly Net | person will be proscuted for dribbling out a few hundred lines of some | crypto program. I doubt it. People are often much more resource poor than companies. A company with the prospect of a few million in sales can defend itself in court much better than some individual. The ITARs survive on FUD, not strong legal basis. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From ph at netcom.com Sat Jan 4 07:49:16 1997 From: ph at netcom.com (Peter Hendrickson) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 07:49:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme Message-ID: At 2:10 AM 1/4/1997, Roy M. Silvernail wrote: >In list.cypherpunks, ph at netcom.com writes: >> In essence, the poster is betting that the moderator will approve >> the post retroactively. >> The "moderator" returns the money to people when posts are worthwhile >> and keeps it otherwise. >> Of course, there's no reason to have just one moderator on the list. > In the case of several moderators, who gets the ecash? And doesn't this > open the list to bidding? "Pass this message, and you can keep the > e$500." The moderator keeps the cash. The moderator is pulled in several directions. He or she wants to keep the money but also wants people to post through him or her. The moderator also wants to be credible or their services will not be required. If it is implemented in a decentralized manner, the list is not up for bidding, but the ability to get past killfiles is. That is, anybody can post to the list, but some people will only read things coming from credible sources. The money you pay gets to those people. This is no different from the original scheme with a limited number of tokens. If the anonymity is preserved, you can always pay somebody $500 to go to the trouble of getting one of the rare tokens distributed or to buy one off a list member who already has one. In the modified scheme, the cost is quantified and easy to express and understand. Peter Hendrickson ph at netcom.com From fod at brd.ie Sat Jan 4 07:54:21 1997 From: fod at brd.ie (Frank O'Dwyer) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 07:54:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hyperlink Spoofing: an attack on SSL server authentication In-Reply-To: <199701041504.KAA24308@homeport.org> Message-ID: <199701041555.PAA00531@brd.ie> > Ed Felten of Princeton presented something similar at the Dimacs > Network Threats workshop in November 96. Jim Truitt just posted a link for their paper, which I've linked off my page. Although it incorporates most of the same ground as my stuff, I think I have shown some additional vulnerabilities and (more importantly) some new fixes. Cheers, Frank O'Dwyer. > Frank O'Dwyer wrote: > | > | I've written up an attack on SSL server authentication at > | > | http://www.iol.ie/~fod/sslpaper/sslpaper.htm > | > | As far as I am aware, this attack hasn't been written about before. > | It does not attack the SSL protocol or low-level cryptography, but works > | at a higher level in order to persuade users to connect to fake servers, > | with the browser nonetheless giving all the usual appearances of a > | secure session. > > > -- > "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." > -Hume > > From frissell at panix.com Sat Jan 4 08:03:18 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 08:03:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Atoms vs Bits Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970104105925.00704cbc@panix.com> If you doubt that wealth and atoms aren't linked much these days, one need only point out that the total weight (in tons) of the US annual GDP is about the same as it was 100 years ago while the constant dollar value of that production has increased 12 fold. Source - Greenspan speech quoted in The Economist Suvey of the World Economy 28 September 1996. DCF From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 4 09:50:18 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 09:50:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anonymous Post Control In-Reply-To: <852383891.629350.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <1wN1ZD35w165w@bwalk.dm.com> paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk writes: > Well the obvious answer seems to me to stop majordomo at toad.com > accepting ANY messages from anonymous sources but let pseudonyms > post, pseudonymous posting allows the owner of the nym to accumulate > reputation capital without disclosing his or her true identity. Paul Bradley accumulated oodles of reputation capital with his obscene rants about "brute force attacks on one-time pads". Now he wants more censorship. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From iang at cs.berkeley.edu Sat Jan 4 09:51:02 1997 From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 09:51:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: New rules for Internet sales to CA buyers In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970102144026.0069bc00@mail.io.com> Message-ID: <5am59h$4pi@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <3.0.32.19970102144026.0069bc00 at mail.io.com>, Greg Broiles wrote: > >The following subsection of California Business & Professions Code section >17538 took effect 1/1/97 and may be of interest to people following state >attempts to regulate net sales: > >[...] > (d) A vendor conducting business through the Internet or any other >electronic means of communication shall do all of the following >when the transaction involves a buyer located in California: [snip] > >Legislative history can be found at > >ouse=B> > So is this saying that a merchant _anywhere in the world_ can be prosecuted under California law if someone in California goes to their web page, and the web page doesn't satisfy the requirements (which I snipped)? How is a merchant in, say, Finland, supposed to know that this law (or others like it in any city, state, or country in the world) exists? - Ian -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMs6YZEZRiTErSPb1AQEfbQQAkTjheiJ7iX0auSFWzthQ9zsgMQWmrSok 7ETe3D20BhIC11Rqkb6hMm8zwk8j4n+zXk1I6PlGAiRVS8LHlEEoxBhkMCHCzEEO J0CNjURByuXVIzvEuaKm9VE6ymtOw+U+lHRpPerKt5nrRZM+Wg2ccPhqG5WBhrhJ hJT8jUYto3Q= =zyI9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From abostick at netcom.com Sat Jan 4 09:56:51 1997 From: abostick at netcom.com (Alan Bostick) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 09:56:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ecash naysayers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: > > --- begin forwarded text > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 17:02:52 -0500 > From: Roderick Simpson > To: Multiple recipients of list > Subject: Ecash naysayers > > Anyone heard a convincing naysayer of electronic cash? Who were they? > > Best, > Rod The propblem with that question is that as phrased it stacks the deck in favor of electronic cash. What is "convincing"? Find someone with a cogent critique of an electronic payments scheme or scheme, and I can guarantee that I can find someone, very likely on the WIRED editorial staff, who won't be "convinced" by it. What is a "naysayer"? Someone who presents a detailed critical technical analysis of a payments scheme? Someone who thinks that electronic payments represent the Number of the Beast and are a sign of the coming Apocalypse? Lastly, what is "electronic cash"? Chaumian anonymous digital cash? Transmission of credit card data? The question is so poorly phrased as to be almost impossible to intelligently answer "yes". Somewhere in it there is buried a real question with a real answer. Maybe Roderick Simpson will tell us what it is. PS: I'm *not* a electronic cash naysayer. Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 4 10:00:29 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:00:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [NOISE] Re: Timmy's Lost It: [Was Extremism in the defense of lib In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Alan Bostick writes: > On Fri, 3 Jan 1997, Timothy C. May wrote: > > > > > It's always sad to see another sometimes-reasonable (though sometimes > > foaming) writer go down the Detweiler-Vulis route, e.g., by making his > > arguments hinge on calling me "Timmy" (what _is_ it with this nickname that > > makes it so damned attractive to Vulis, Vlad, and Attila?). > > It's a meme, both self-perpetuating *and* spontaneously generating. The > antagonist, in the passion of the moment, doesn't hit the space, shift, > or 'A' keys while typing fast. Other people, insensed by the post, respond > in kind, and so forth. Does Timmy's middle initial (C.) _really stand for Cunt? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 4 10:11:34 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:11:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: ASSHOLE FAGGOT J.D. Falk In-Reply-To: <819yZD2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <32CE9CF6.6ED0@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > snow writes: > > > The recognition that most every problem person is of a homosexual > > > nature is definitely a usenet body-politic phenomenon, which will > > > be documented and verified with whatever means that become necessary. > Just following the homos' logic... If you don't like someone and > he happens to be a homo, then you're a homophobe, and all the homos > are supposed to fuck you over. Remember the line from the film "I'm Gonna Get You Sucka", where the guy says "The brothers went in with guns, and they came out with jobs"? Apple had that technique down when they started "donating" their piece- o'-shit Apple II's and Mac's to schools et al (get 'em while they're young and defenseless). So now most of these kids, grown up, are thinking "Homosexual marriages, yeah, what's wrong with that?". You won't believe what these clowns have in store next (as a social experiment). BTW, the L.A. school system is also adopting Ebonics. BTW #2, I wouldn't think to complain about someone's sexual preferences until they start waving their dicks in my face, which is a favorite pastime in parts of Los Angeles. From tcmay at got.net Sat Jan 4 10:56:13 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:56:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 7:49 AM -0800 1/4/97, Peter Hendrickson wrote: >The moderator keeps the cash. The moderator is pulled in several >directions. He or she wants to keep the money but also wants people ...blah blah blah.... All of these schemes--some of them pretty clever--for posting tokens, reputation-based killfiles, buying and selling reputation futures, etc., are almost certainly far too complicated to deploy on a list like ours. I have some direct evidence. The "Extropians" mailing list, beset with similar perceived S/N problems several years ago, tried some of these approaches. I've mentioned this before, and strongly urge those contemplating such schemes to find some archives of this time period (I don't know if they exist) and see what some of these real world experiments did. (Granted, there was no PGP encryption being used, but this is not really central at this point to most of the proposed schemes.) Here are some of the main Extropians list experiments I recall from the 1992-4 period, and some comments: 1. List-server-maintained filters. Subscribers could request that mail from "Joe Doe" not be sent to them. Subscribers could request only certain topics, or only certain subscribers, etc. Specific messages could be requested (e.g., of someone being filtered). 2. A reputation market, with share prices for the repuations of specific individuals, specific claims about the future, or even general topics. For example, the shares of "crypto anarchy" might have started trading at 15 thornes, and later reached 110 thornes. (Thorne was the guy who eventually got the code running, mostly.) 3. Private justice was tried, using the notion of "polycentric law." Those with beefs with others could "file suit" with some entity. "Tim's Protection League" could serve up certain kinds of justice, including forcing his own clients to not post, for example. (Readers will note the influence of Neal Stephenson's "Snow Crash" on some of the ideas, along with the ideas of Bruce Benson, David Friedman, and others.) What were the results? First, much list bandwidth was consumed discussing the design of these systems, the limitations of simple scalar measurements, and what real ratings systems and reputation-based killfiles ought to have. (Sasha Chislenko, now affiliated with Firefly, the distant grandchild of such schemes, was involved.) Second, there was an actual increase, in my opinion, in off-topic posts, as the weaknesses of these systems were probed, and workarounds found. Third, the aforementioned weaknesses were just too obvious. Here are some examples: * The reputation market was incredibly easy to manipulate. I used my initially distributed "thornes" to drive up the share prices in my own "tcmay" share prices. I also spent $15 of "real world" money to buy the thornes of a guy who was not interested in using them...this $15 translated into a _lot_ of thornes, which I could then use to buy lots of shares, and see the share prices increase. (I left the Extropians list in January of 1994, and at the time had the largest portfolio...no big deal, but it shows how such markets are not exactly very grounded in underlying reality!) * The killfiles at the host consumed a fair amount of CPU cycles...partly to pay for the increased services, a subscription fee for the Extropians list was initiated....this apparently drove the membership in the list down to much lower levels. (Which some may think is a good thing, but I understand from friends who remained on the list after 1/94 that posting rates dropped to such a low level that the list became much less interesting to read...I heard a few days ago that volume is back up to about 40 messages a day, and that the subscription fee has been dropped.) * The private adjudication of disputes was the most absurd of all. There was little or no incentive for "rational" judgements, and anyone could form their own "protection" justice system. I created my own, with myelf as the only member. This was not forbidden by the list meta-rules on such things, so I became de facto my own justice system, not bound by any other systems. Now, don't get me wrong....these "experiments" were interesting in their own right. And eventually such experiments may actually work out. Certainly many of us believe in the importance of individuals and groups setting up similar institutions on their own intiative. The problems, however, are apparent. (It would be nice to see a much longer article on the results of these experiments. It could even get published, in my opinion, as the issues are interesting. Emergent organizational principles, polycentric law, etc. Perhaps someone still on the Extropians list could suggest that this would make a nice article.) A lack of richness of interactions is part of the problem. The lack of accountability is another. The loopholes in the meta-rules compounds other problems. And a _lot_ of list bandwidth got consumed. The flame wars also got even more vitriolic. So, rather than do similar tinkering with the Cypherpunks list--not that either Hugh Daniel or John Gilmore have given any hint they are willing to do such tinkering--I suggest those who want to try token-based posting, or information markets in reputation capital, or herd-consensus killfiles, etc., set up a separate mailing list and implement whatever they wish. While such schemes may turn out to be imortant, I'm here on this list to discuss various ideas, not to be guinea pigs in somebody's pet idea (not to mix my pet metaphors, or my pet peeves). Cheers, --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay at got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 4 10:57:01 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:57:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: EAR Doc In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970104053335.0069ccd8@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: <32CEA25C.7C39@gte.net> John Young wrote: > We've prepared a hyperlinked version of the Export > Administration Regulations (EAR) to assist analysis, > evaluation and commentary on interim rules for > encryption export: > It's sobering to study the EAR and see the lethal > weapons to which encryption is wed -- the most > mass-murderous of high-technology calmly described > as commercial warfare for the commonweal. When you consider the censorship-prone mindsets of many of the private-security-employed cypherpunks, it kinda makes sense, yes? Think about those Israeli tank rounds, exploding into hundreds of little steel arrows designed to rip flesh apart, and then analogize to the possibilities for technically capable encryption users.... From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 4 10:57:17 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:57:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CEA645.4DAA@gte.net> Toto wrote: > Peter Hendrickson wrote: > > People who don't like using PGP, or can't use it, or won't use it, > > do not belong on this list. > Does this also apply to people who don't 'trust' PGP, or who feel > more secure using another form of encryption? > Are you working on a 'commission' basis, here? In the interests of freedom, just in case you missed it, it's called MLM/PGP, i.e, PGP is the ultimate multi-level marketing tool. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 4 10:59:12 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 10:59:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: <19970103174004703.AIT291@[205.187.61.2]> Message-ID: <32CEA055.26F3@gte.net> Gary Aikens wrote: > ...and pets are lost or turn up missing every year! > Protect your loved ones today! > Think about all the things you do to protect your loved ones. Isn't there > one more thing you should do? > Child and Pet ID Kits have been around for years, but most of them haven't > changed with the years. Traditional ID Kits allow you to compile valuable > information about your child or pet that you can use in the event your child or > pet is missing. We are responding to the rapid changes in technology. We know > that any ID Kit just isn't good enough. C'mon Gary, why would anyone want to bother with all of this crap? Chip implants are already in millions of pets. It's simple, cheap, and there's no work for the owner. Thousands of humans are also implanted, i.e., Green Berets, Seals, and similar types, women with breast implants, and so on. There's a move- ment on to implant most children, so they're not as vulnerable to kid- napping, etc. I realize most people are still afraid of the 666 stuff (direct evidence from the phone company shows most people will not accept #s with 666 prefixes), but they'll get over it when they see the benefits, and how it frees up their time so they can watch more TV or play on the Internet. From tcmay at got.net Sat Jan 4 11:03:11 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 11:03:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ecash naysayers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 9:56 AM -0800 1/4/97, Alan Bostick wrote: >On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: >> Date: Fri, 3 Jan 1997 17:02:52 -0500 >> From: Roderick Simpson >> To: Multiple recipients of list >> Subject: Ecash naysayers >> >> Anyone heard a convincing naysayer of electronic cash? Who were they? >> >> Best, >> Rod > >The propblem with that question is that as phrased it stacks the deck >in favor of electronic cash. What is "convincing"? Find someone with a >cogent critique of an electronic payments scheme or scheme, and I can >guarantee that I can find someone, very likely on the WIRED editorial >staff, who won't be "convinced" by it. What is a "naysayer"? Someone ... I think the problem is even more obvious: the "Brain Tennis" forum is a crystallization of the worst tendency in journalism today: having two opposing views on any issue. As on television, where two talking heads take opposite postions, suggesting a roughly even split in popular opinion (even if popular opinion--not to mention the underlying actual truth--is tilted 95-5). Caveat: I've only followed a few of these "brain tennis" things, which is what I assume Simpson is recruiting for, and I was sorely disappointed. But not surprised. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay at got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sat Jan 4 11:31:38 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 11:31:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... (fwd) Message-ID: <199701041932.NAA32121@einstein> Hi all, Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 04 Jan 1997 10:24:21 -0800 > From: Dale Thorn > > C'mon Gary, why would anyone want to bother with all of this crap? > Chip implants are already in millions of pets. It's simple, cheap, > and there's no work for the owner. And there are several standards which are NOT compatible. Simply putting a chip in your pet (or child) is not sufficient to guarantee their return. If the system at use at the pound is not compatible the chip in the pet won't even respond and the operator has no idea of the actual situation. This is one of the reasons many states are enacting laws regarding the sale and transfer of pets. There was a piece on CNN just a couple of weeks ago about this problem, one state in the central US is in the process of passing various laws about animal trading. Seems they have a problem with people stealing pets from peoples homes and collecting 'for free' pets and then selling them to the medical labs at a hefty profit. Their advise was to never give pets away, but to always charge at least $10 ea. and if leaving pets unattended either put them inside a locked bldg. or else have your neighbors watch them in a fenced yard. > Thousands of humans are also implanted, i.e., Green Berets, Seals, and > similar types, women with breast implants, and so on. There's a move- > ment on to implant most children, so they're not as vulnerable to kid- > napping, etc. Baloney. I know two SEAL's (I share an office at work with one) and I can verify they are NOT chiped. I also have several female friends who have had various breast surgeries and they also are not chipped. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 4 11:40:17 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 11:40:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <55R1ZD38w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ph at netcom.com (Peter Hendrickson) writes: > > The moderator keeps the cash. The moderator is pulled in several > directions. He or she wants to keep the money but also wants people > to post through him or her. The moderator also wants to be credible > or their services will not be required. Asshole censor and cocksucker John Gilmore is NOT credible. He's a content- based plug-puller. Also he made enough $$ on Sun's IPO not to give a fuck about your measly $1/post. (Compare him with Geffen, always happy to forego a few million bucks in profits to supress whatever offends his political agenda.) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ritamay at myna.com Sat Jan 4 12:06:47 1997 From: ritamay at myna.com (Rita May Marendic) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 12:06:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Please read! High Tech Message-ID: I Sincerely appologize if this is unwanted e-mail. Please hit REPLY and type REMOVE in the SUBJECT area and SEND to be removed from this list. - Rita Marendic This is a new biz you might be interested in you really just have to listen to this demo to believe it. Listen to the whole thing, takes about 3 minutes or so ... at the end you can leave a message and our upline will call you. In the message tell your name, phone number & the best time/day to call you. You also need to leave MY name Rita Marendic & MY Distributor number: which is 1853400. This process will work the same way for YOU when you get into this one with me! If you prefer you may hang up and e-mail me with your phone number and time to call you. It would be worth your time to call the number again and listen to this TWICE! 416-763-9045. I did! I just could not believe what I was hearing the first time! AND, this is just a PART of what we have for sale with this one! It gets even better! LOTS of people are going to want to get in this! Not much hassle involved ... we just generate leads and have them call & listen to this demo on the phone. You think WE can sell this? This is Brand New ... Since November ... (last month!) With this BizOp we pay a one-time out-of-pocket and then ALL future fees come out of REVENUE. No more out-of-pocket after the getting-in fee. THIS is a beauty ... Let me know what you think. Sincerely, Rita Marendic From ph at netcom.com Sat Jan 4 12:43:45 1997 From: ph at netcom.com (Peter Hendrickson) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 12:43:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists Message-ID: At 11:02 AM 1/4/1997, Timothy C. May wrote: >At 7:49 AM -0800 1/4/97, Peter Hendrickson wrote: >> The moderator keeps the cash. The moderator is pulled in several >> directions. He or she wants to keep the money but also wants people > ...blah blah blah.... > All of these schemes--some of them pretty clever--for posting tokens, > reputation-based killfiles, buying and selling reputation futures, etc., > are almost certainly far too complicated to deploy on a list like ours. > ...[Interesting Extropian history deleted.]... > So, rather than do similar tinkering with the Cypherpunks list--not that > either Hugh Daniel or John Gilmore have given any hint they are willing to > do such tinkering--I suggest those who want to try token-based posting, or > information markets in reputation capital, or herd-consensus killfiles, > etc., set up a separate mailing list and implement whatever they wish. If the point of these schemes is to filter content (*), there is no reason why they have to be implemented for the entire list. They can always be converted to a tag on the message which readers can use, but are not required to. I'm sure Tim would not object to any scheme implemented in this way. (So sure, in fact, that I will give him a dollar if he does object. ;-) (* If the point is to stop spam attacks, then they do have to affect the entire list.) Peter Hendrickson ph at netcom.com From tcmay at got.net Sat Jan 4 13:10:13 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 13:10:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 12:43 PM -0800 1/4/97, Peter Hendrickson wrote: >If the point of these schemes is to filter content (*), there is no >reason why they have to be implemented for the entire list. They >can always be converted to a tag on the message which readers can >use, but are not required to. > >I'm sure Tim would not object to any scheme implemented in this way. >(So sure, in fact, that I will give him a dollar if he does object. ;-) > >(* If the point is to stop spam attacks, then they do have to affect >the entire list.) Oh, I would hardly have any objection to any system which is "transparent" to me, i.e., where I can ignore the whole issue. I forgot to mention in my article that one of the serious problems with the various Extropians experiments--and likely to be in any of the new experiments--is that each required learning, with many people never quite getting the hang of how the systems worked. Thus, various FAQs were written--but ignored by those most in need of them. And people asked questions on the list about the process, etc. Ultimately, all of the brainpower which went into how figuring out how "thornes" were traded, how the killfiles worked, etc., were wasted. This is why I favor learning killfiles on my _home_ machine...the comment someone made about how "inefficient" such home-based killfiles are, compared to some hypothetical list-based killfile, ignores this issue that N different mailing list or forums will likely have almost N different systems, syntaxes, etc. Not a timesave in the final analyis to have to learn N killfile approaches! Should "majordomo" be modified in a powerful way, and gain wide distribution, e.g, as "killfiledomo," :-}, then this might establish a kind of standard for such killfile-oriented lists...but I see no likelihood of this happening soon. Again, I think these clever schemes are a waste of time. Except for the one of using the versions of majordomo (which exist, as I understand things) which only allow posts by subscribed members. This may nuke anonymous posts, but so what? The _possibility_ of anonymity, which we mostly all support, does not mean that people have to listen to such posts. And since the junk from anonymous posts is getting to be a serious problem.... Another possibility is that anonymous posts get kicked into a file for later approval or nonapproval by someone. Nothing fancy (that is, no "tokens" and complicated accounting systems, such as have been proposed), just a manual "moderation" by someone, or some set of volunteers, etc. Enough moderation to let the "Red Rackham" sorts of good posts through while blocking the "Make Money Fast" and barnyard insults from making it. If a system is complicated, many or even most people won't use it. Whether PGP or procmail. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay at got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 4 13:40:28 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 13:40:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: <32CEA055.26F3@gte.net> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > I realize most people are still afraid of the 666 stuff (direct evidence > from the phone company shows most people will not accept #s with 666 > prefixes), but they'll get over it when they see the benefits, and how In the 212 area code (Manhattan), 666 is around Columbia University. I used to be at 212-666-6984 for some 7 years. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From lep1 at bellsouth.net Sat Jan 4 14:17:56 1997 From: lep1 at bellsouth.net (lep1 at bellsouth.net) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 14:17:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Saw you Online! Message-ID: <199701042219.RAA04522@mail.mco.bellsouth.net> Take_a_look_at_my_latest_rip-off!, Does your long distance carrier give you a flat 9.9 cents per minute on your interstate long distance 24-hours-per-day 365- days per year? AND the ability to ELIMINATE your long distance phone bills thru an optional referral credits program? AND FREE teleconferencing with up to 450 other members (where each member just pays their own 10.9 cents per minute but no teleconference bridge charges)? They don't charge you anything to join, there's no hidden expenses or term contracts or catches of any kind and who couldn't use one less bill per month?! Just say the words (words=long distance) and I'll send a helpful email that will save you a lot of long distance money or even make your long distance FREE thru the optional referral credits program! Sincerely, Larry Price From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Sat Jan 4 15:37:10 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 15:37:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701031310.NAA00485@server.test.net> Peter Hendrickson wrote: > At 11:02 AM 1/4/1997, Timothy C. May wrote: > > All of these schemes--some of them pretty clever--for posting tokens, > > reputation-based killfiles, buying and selling reputation futures, etc., > > are almost certainly far too complicated to deploy on a list like ours. > > > ...[Interesting Extropian history deleted.]... > > > So, rather than do similar tinkering with the Cypherpunks list--not that > > either Hugh Daniel or John Gilmore have given any hint they are willing to > > do such tinkering--I suggest those who want to try token-based posting, or > > information markets in reputation capital, or herd-consensus killfiles, > > etc., set up a separate mailing list and implement whatever they wish. > > If the point of these schemes is to filter content (*), there is no > reason why they have to be implemented for the entire list. They > can always be converted to a tag on the message which readers can > use, but are not required to. I think this filtering/censorship stuff is getting way too complicated to be practical. It is in my opinion inappropriate to moderate or automatically filter the list itself, because that is a form of censorship. Expecting people to install and use new software is asking too much. The way I see it, you have several simple options: 1) read everything, and hit d when you decide a post is noise 2) filter at your own machine - there's lots of software. Presumably those requesting list server user controlled filtering are saying that they find it too much hassle to install or learn how to use such software, or that they don't want to pay for downloading garbage 3) start up a mailing list mirror, subscribe the mirror to cypherpunks at toad.com, and implement user controlled filtering in majordomo on the mirror. This frees up some of toad.com's current load, and puts all filtering load on the mirror. If there's a demand for such a service, someone can do it. 4) subscribe to a filtered version of cypherpunks, and run the risk that the owner filters material which would be interesting to you. 5) setup a filtered version of cypherpunks which explicitly filters just commercial spam, and mail loop errors. Currently I use method 1. A couple of people lately have so consistently posted garbage that I am considering it may be worth the effort of switching to method 2. If someone did 5 and the delay was reasonably short, I would probably subscribe to it. The only thing I would be happy to see happen in the way of list based filtering, is anything to cut out pure commercial, non crypto related spam. Spammers seem to have discovered mailing lists as efficient distribution methods in addition to direct mass mailing lately. Unfortunately this is difficult to filter automatically, and no one has the time to do it in close to real time, and time lags hinder discussion. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 At 09:50 AM 1/4/97 -0800, Ian Goldberg wrote: >Greg Broiles wrote: >>The following subsection of California Business & Professions Code section >>17538 took effect 1/1/97 and may be of interest to people following state >>attempts to regulate net sales: >> >>[...] >> (d) A vendor conducting business through the Internet or any other >>electronic means of communication shall do all of the following >>when the transaction involves a buyer located in California: >[snip] > >So is this saying that a merchant _anywhere in the world_ can be prosecuted >under California law if someone in California goes to their web page, >and the web page doesn't satisfy the requirements (which I snipped)? Yes; but since the law is a criminal statute, the presence of the defendant is required (absent the defendant's waiver) for a prosecution to occur. Securing the appearance of an out-of-state or out-of-country defendant (extradition) is an expensive and complicated process. Violation of the statute is a misdemeanor, and California is unlikely to try to extradite someone in order to try them for a misdemeanor charge. (This is an economic choice, not a legal restriction - I worked on a case when I was in Oregon where our client, at that time an Oregon resident, charged with a misdemeanor in California, managed to make the prosecutor angry enough that the various state & county agencies involved did jump through the hoops to request extradition.) >How is a merchant in, say, Finland, supposed to know that this law (or others >like it in any city, state, or country in the world) exists? By hiring an attorney, of course. :) This is a significant problem; in the past, it's been difficult enough to do business in far-away places that the only organizations likely to do so were large enough that they were able to pay people to keep track of applicable local rules. But now it's easy to advertise or do business worldwide, and it's very difficult to control which jurisdictions have access to your advertising materials. So it's likely that many people and organizations will unintentionally violate many laws in jurisdictions they're not familiar with. Hopefully the various enforcement agencies will take this into account when enforcing their laws. I wouldn't be surprised, frankly, if California never prosecutes anyone for violation of this law - it's hard to imagine that this will turn out to be an enforcement priority for anyone. It is, of course, still useful for selective enforcement, similar to laws against vagrancy or loitering or public drunkenness, where illegal behavior is usually ignored but vigilant enforcement is employed to punish or drive away people who are unpopular for an unrelated reason. If the legislators really wanted this to be enforced, they'd have given citizens a private right of action against offending web publishers. Then we'd see some excitement. C-Net's NEWS.COM has an article on the new law at . -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 4 16:50:21 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 16:50:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <7e91ZD56w165w@bwalk.dm.com> "Timothy C. May" writes: > Except for the one of using the versions of majordomo (which exist, as I > understand things) which only allow posts by subscribed members. This may > nuke anonymous posts, but so what? The _possibility_ of anonymity, which we > mostly all support, does not mean that people have to listen to such posts. > And since the junk from anonymous posts is getting to be a serious > problem.... > > Another possibility is that anonymous posts get kicked into a file for > later approval or nonapproval by someone. Nothing fancy (that is, no > "tokens" and complicated accounting systems, such as have been proposed), > just a manual "moderation" by someone, or some set of volunteers, etc. > Enough moderation to let the "Red Rackham" sorts of good posts through > while blocking the "Make Money Fast" and barnyard insults from making it. Timmy seems to be VERY bothered by those anonymous posts and would surely like them to stop - perfectly illustrating why the "cypher punks" are enemies of free speech. Timmy can killfile anything he doesn't like, but he wants to prevent everyone else from seeing whatever information Timmy doesn't want to be disseminated. You lose, Timmy. The truth wants to be free. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From jimbell at pacifier.com Sat Jan 4 17:10:29 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 17:10:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Timmy's Lost It: [Was Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice] Message-ID: <199701050110.RAA10132@mail.pacifier.com> At 11:15 AM 1/3/97 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >As for my "elitism," I've never presented myself in any other fashion. I've >discussed this issue many times. Get used to it, or ignore it, or just keep >foaming at the mouth and ranting about how I need to take "yellow pills" to >avoid being an ally of "Bubba." I don't fault you for being "elitist." However, Rich Graves was right: I think that cryptoanarchy, while obviously eliminating taxation and income redistribution sounds cozy for economic elites, actually also eliminates the basis for those elites to be formed in the first place. To cite just one example that will hit close to home for you, without copyrights or patents (which are, obviously, monopolies enforced by governments) it would be far harder for companies such as Intel to maintain a near-monopoly on the DOS-compatible microprocessor market. And it has long been observed in libertarian discussion circles that far from hating regulation, most large (American; and others) corporations actually receive a net benefit from it as compared with smaller companies: The cost of complying with regulations doesn't increase linearly with the size of company, which means that those same regulations are a way of fighting competition if they are played right. Bring in crypto-anarchy and this effect is no longer operating. Despite all this, I still see nothing inconsistent in even an "elitist" pushing for crypto-anarchy: The current political system has become so dramatically inefficient and keeps so many people (through welfare, Socialist Insecurity, and government employment) well-fed through income redistribution, that I think finally even an "elitist" would be happy to chuck the whole system and adopt a crypto-anarchy-equalized system. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From office at phoenix.com.ai Sat Jan 4 18:08:14 1997 From: office at phoenix.com.ai (Alfred Michael Arzt) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 18:08:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: NETWORKING ALERT!!! Message-ID: <3.0.16.19970105024456.24670aca@phoenix.com.ai> NETWORKING ALERT! A Powerful Homebased Money Making Machine Is Sweeping The Country!! LARRY THOMPSON who turned Herbalife into a billion dollar corporation has ended retirement to put together the most duplicable & lucrative 100% Homebased opportunity ever! Traditional Networking is now obsolete! The next MLM giant is LifeTronix! * No meetings, cassette tapes, videos, etc. Our cutting edge marketing tools make "traditional" MLM obsolete! Larry Thompson & the Wealth Building System helps recruit your prospects in their homes & trains you & your organization - FREE over the phone. * Nutritional Breakthrough! The most revolutionary - life changing products ever! Feel results in minutes! Scientific breakthrough! Totally Amazing! Patented product line - no competition! ==> Patented Water Soluable Nutritional Products, 3-5 times Quicker, Better and Faster Results. ==> World's First True Stabalized Oxygen! Ph Balanced. Use it internally or externally. ==> First ever Oxygen-Based Stop Smoking Product. Oxygen based Weight Loss product and Oxygen Based Skin Care product. ==> Liquid Blue Green Algae Super Food and Much More! ==> Unlimited use of 800 #'s & LIVE outbound calls for your training! Never leave home to earn your fortune! ==> Homebased System is 100% Duplicatable - Company Retails product for you! ==> Up to 40% retail profit! Weekly Payouts! A compensation plan that allows everyone to start making serious money FAST! * The most lucrative compensation plan developed ever devised! Weekly Payouts! No group volumes! Unlimited income potential - all from home. P/T - F/T! Plus So Much More! New Ground Breaking Opportunity - Don't Delay!! It Doesn't Get Any Better Then This! Position yourself at the TOP! Call 1-800-678-5522 ext 78679 for more information! Best regards, Alfred Michael Arzt Publisher, Telecommuter From azur at netcom.com Sat Jan 4 18:35:20 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 18:35:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Judge Bork on Ebonics Message-ID: The following is from pages 300-307 of Robert Bork's brilliant book, "Slouching Towards Gomorrah". This is a book which should be read by everyone--and especially by liberals. Here are Judge Bork's thoughts on multiculturalism, bilingual education, and "Black English", otherwise known as "Ebonics". ==================================================== The natural centrifugal tendencies of ethnicity were once counteracted by a public school system that stressed indoctrinating immigrants to be Americans. The schools were agents of cultural unification. They taught patriotism and standards derived from European cultures. Part of our national lore, and glory, is the fact that youngsters speaking not a word of English were placed in public schools where only English was used and very shortly were proficient in the language. That was crucial to the formation of an American identity Now, however, the educational system has become the weapon of choice for modern liberals in their project of dismantling American culture. Our egalitarians view every cul- ture (other than European) as equal. They resent and resist attempts to Americanize immigrants, and the crucial battleground is language. That is the reason for bilingual education. Initially, some well- meaning souls saw bilingual education as a way of easing the immigrant child's entry into American culture. The child would take courses in English but learn many subjects in his native tongue, usually Spanish. Within two or three years, the argument ran, the child would be able to take all of his courses in English. It is now clear, however, that the program is designed not to facilitate but to delay entry into American culture, and, to the degree possi- ble, make certain that assimilation is never complete. So many languages are spoken by immigrants that it is impos- sible to provide bilingual education for all. That is why bilingual education is so often in Spanish, the language most immigrants speak. But that fact gives away the real reason for the programs. Vietnamese and Polish children were put into English-speaking classes and were competent into English long before the Hispanics in bilingual schools. That leaves the partisans of bilingualism only the choice of saying that Hispanic children are not as capable as others or admitting that they, the educators, are driven by hostility to American culture, and the rewards to be had by teachers' unions and educational bureaucrats. The rewards would not be there, however, if ideology had not created the situation. Often, the bilingualists do not care whether immigrant chil- dren learn English. The key to success for the students is "self- esteem. . . . Children do badly in school because of their feelings of 'shame' at belonging to a minority group rather than the 'domi- nant group.' For the children to do better, teachers must "con- sciously challenge the power structure both in their classrooms and schools and in the society at large." As Richard Bernstein writes, "Bilingual education ... is an act of rebellion against white, Anglo cultural domination." And the "animus against assimilation, is not an implicit part of the emerging educational philosophy. It is explicit, open, out there, a standard belief. 'The psychological cost of assimilation has been and continues to be high for many U.S. citizens,' declares the National Council of Social Studies (NCSS), in Washington, D.C., in its 1992 'Curriculum Guidelines for Mul- ticultural Education.' "It too often demands self-denial, self-hatred, and rejection of family and ethnic ties." This pathetic whine is not insignificant since the NCSS is the country's largest Organiza- tion devoted to social studies education. Public dissatisfaction with the linguistic fracturing of society has led to calls for an English-only amendment to the Constitu- tion. The frustration is understandable, but there is no need to amend the Constitution to achieve an English-speaking nation. All that need be done is the abolition of bilingual education and the repeal of the Voting Rights Act's requirement of different language ballots. Children from other countries will learn English in public schools as they used to do. Their parents will accept the change once they begin to see its results. Immigrant parents want their children to learn English and become Americans. The opposition to that, manifested in bilingual education, comes from American elites who form an adversarial culture, alienated from the culture of the West and wishing to weaken it. In 1989, the Commissioners Task Force on Minorities in New York concluded: "African Americans, Asian Americans, Puerto kicans/Latinos, and Native Americans have all been the victims of an intellectual and educational oppression that has characterized the culture and institutions of the United States and the European American world for centuries." All young people were being "miseducated" because of a "systematic bias toward European cul- ture and its derivatives." Bernstein asks, rhetorically, "Could the multicultural animus against 'European culture and its derivatives' emerge more clearly than that? Here we have a direct statement that the Western culture is harmful to nonwhite children ." Despite the evidence and the frankness of its advocates, most people, including very astute people, tend to accept the beneficent view of multiculturalism put forth by its less candid partisans. Thus, one can find diametrically opposed views of the phe- nomenon, one put forward, for example, by Richard Bernstein and another articulated by Conor Cruise O'Brien. Bernstein writes, "Multiculturalism is a movement of the left, emerging from the counterculture of the 1960's... It is a code word for a politi cal ambition, a yearning for more power, combined with a gen- uine, earnest, zealous, self-righteous craving for social improve- ment. . . ." He says we are "likely to end up in a simmering sort of mutual dislike on the level of everyday unpleasantness..." O'Brien, on the other hand, thinks that multiculturalism and diversity are "actually both a mask for, and perhaps an unconscious mode for achieving, a unity which would be broader-based and to that extent stronger. . . . The real agenda is the enlargement of the American national elite to include groups of persons who have traditionally been excluded from the same, mainly for reasons associated with race and gender. What is in view is the enlarge- ment and diversification of the composition of the future govern- ing class of the United States of America." I am afraid it is clear that Bernstein has it right and O'Brien has it wrong. Multiculturalism is advertised by its less candid prac- titioners as opening students to the perspectives and accomplish- ments of groups that have been largely ignored and undervalued in conventional curriculums. The goal, it is said, is to enrich the student's understanding of the world and to teach him respect for and tolerance of others who are different. It substitutes an ethic of inclusion for the older ethic of exclusion. This is the movement's self-portrait, and O'Brien seems to have accepted it at face value. If there were truth in that advertising, if that were what the goal really is, no one could legitimately object to what is taking place in the American educational system. Unfortunately, there appears to be very little truth in the pretensions of the multiculturalists. Bernstein took a two-year leave of absence from the New York Times to gather the facts of the multicultural ideology and its opponents. His is not an impressionistic book or one based on an ideological predisposition; it is a report of empirical findings. He points, for example, to the remarkable change in attitude towards Christopher Columbus between 1892 and 1992. Though not a single new fact about Columbus's life and exploits had been uncovered, the country's mood swung from one of uncritical adu- lation to one of loathing and condemnation, at least among the members of the "intellectual" class. The change was accomplished by the aggressive ideology of multiculturalism. The Columbus turnaround is merely a specific instance of more general alter- ations in our moral landscape. What it signifies, and what becomes increasingly obvious, is that multiculturalism is a philosophy of antagonism to America and the West. The hostility of the multiculturalists to this nation and its achievements can hardly be overstated. Lynne Cheney, the former head of the National Endowment for the Humanities, quotes a professor who is pleased that multiculturalism has the "potential for ideologically disuniting the nation" by stressing America's faults so that students will not think this country deserves their special support. That multiculturalism is essentially an attack on America, the European-American culture, and the white race, with special emphasis on white males, may be seen from the curriculum it favors. A curriculum designed to foster understanding of other cultures would study those cultures. Multiculturalism does not. Courses are not offered on the cultures of China or India or Brazil or Nigeria, nor does the curriculum require the study of languages without which foreign cultures cannot be fully understood. Instead the focus is on groups that, allegedly, have been subjected to oppression by American and Western civilization--homosexu- als, American Indians, blacks, Hispanics, women, and so on. The message is not that all cultures are to be respected but that Euro- pean culture, which created the dominance of white males, is uniquely evil. Multiculturalism follows the agenda of modern lib- eralism, and it comes straight from the Sixties counterculture. But now, in American education, it is the dominant culture. Bernstein catalogues the basic changes multiculturalism has made in the nature of public discourse. "First is the elimination from acceptable discourse of any claim of superiority or even special status for Europe, or any definition of the United States as derived primarily from European civilization. "Second is the attack on the very notion of the individual and the concomitant paramount status accorded group identifi- cation. "Third is the triumph of the politics of difference over the politics of equality, that great and still-visionary goal of the civil rights movement. Multiculturalism here is the indictment of one group and the exculpation of all the others. . . "This obsession with the themes of cultural domination and oppression [by whites] justifies one of the most important departures from the principal and essential goal of the civil rights movement, equality of opportunity. Multiculturalism insists on equality of results." Hence it is that multiculturalists have turned Martin Luther King, Jr.'s dream into a nightmare. He asked that his children "not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character," which, as Bernstein says, is the "essential ideal of liberal- ism:' But multiculturalists say, "Judge me by the color of my skin for therein lies my identity and my place in the world." Multiculturalism requires the quotas or affirmative action that create group dislike of other groups and self-segregation. There is no other way to ensure that each valued ethnic group is repre- sented in the student body and on the faculty. Of late, educators have begun to speak of diversity instead of multiculturalism, but it is the same thing. University presidents and faculties, secondary and primary school principals and teachers, all chant the diversity mantra. So powerful has this harmful notion become that it not only dictates who is admitted to a school but sometimes deter- mines who may leave. Students of Asian ancestry, for example, have tried to transfer to public schools whose curriculum was better suited to their ambitions but been denied the transfer on the grounds that their departure would lessen diversity. One father complained that his adopted Korean daughter could contribute no non-western per- spective to the school she sought to leave because she had been brought to this country at the age of five months. No matter; she was of the requisite racial group. When the controversy was reported in the newspapers, she was allowed to transfer. But the episode demonstrates that the multiculturalists are sometimes will- ing to force a person into a cultural identity that person does not have on the grounds of ancestry alone. The quality of education must necessarily decline as students turn from substantive subjects to ideologically driven resentments, in the case of non-whites, or guilt, in the case of whites. Although white students are often required to study America's "oppressed" subcultures and their allegedly superior qualities, it is regarded as racist to require that non-whites study Western culture. That was the meaning of the radicals' attack on Stanford's Western Culture program in which students were required to sample the writings of men who had helped shape Western culture-Shakespeare, Dante, Locke, etc. A black student who objected to the program said its message was "Nigger, go home." That exclusionary inter- pretation is precisely the opposite of the real message of the pro- gram, which was "Let us study what we have in common as inheritors of a tradition." The black student's objection follows from the perverse teaching of multiculturalism that those who have been "traditionally excluded" must now reject inclusion. This has the odd effect of damaging all groups. The insistence on separate ethnic identities means that persons in each group can study their own culture, often in highly flattering and historically inaccurate form. Multiculturalism then means not the study of others but of oneself. The student who immerses himself in multi- cultural studies, who lives in a dormitory where admission is defined by ethnicity, who socializes only with members of his eth- nic group, does not acquire the knowledge and discipline that he might have and does not learn how to deal comfortably with those of other ethnicities. One of the ways in which cultures improve is by borrowing from other cultures. Europe borrowed important aspects of mathematics, for example, from the Arab world. But the essence of multiculturalism is the isolation of groups so that they do not borrow from one another. The result is the relative cultural impoverishment of all groups. In education at all levels, the substance of the curriculum changes to accommodate multiculturalist pressures. We have already seen this in feminist and Afrocentric studies, but it is everywhere. In New York state it is official educational doctrine that the United States Constitution was heavily influenced by the political arrangements of the Iroquois Confederacy. The official promulgation of this idea was not due to any research that dis- closed its truth. Nor has any other state adopted this nonsensical idea. New York adopted it because the Iroquois mounted an intensive lobbying campaign directed at the State Department of Education. Far from this being a beneficial borrowing from another culture, it was a detrimental forcing of a false notion by one culture on another. John Leo notes that the decision "shows that some school authorities, eager to avoid minority group pres sure and rage, are now willing to treat the curriculum as a prize in an ethnic spoils system." That it is ideologcally driven by guilt and not an attempt to pacify a large bloc of voters is clear from the fact that there are only a little more than 38,000 Indians in New York state, most of whom probably have no interest in the myth of the Iroquois and the Constitution. This sort of thing is happening across the country as various ethnic groups and feminists demand that history be rewritten according to their party lines. This not only debases history but pits the various groups against one another as they struggle for space in the textbooks. New York's "interest in history is not as an intellectual discipline," Schlesinger writes, "but rather as social and psychological therapy whose primary purpose is to raise the self- esteem of children from minority groups." Those who have traditionally been excluded because of race or gender are not helped by multiculturalists who teach them that European culture and standards are the cause of their difficulties and may be jettisoned, that history has no content aside from its ideological usefulness, that there are different ways of knowing, that linear thinking is a white male stratagem to oppress those who are not white or male, that standard English is no better than a variety of dialects such as "black English." To the extent the tra- ditionally excluded believe any of this, they are additionally handi- capped in life, and further excluded. To the extent they are taught that self-esteem comes before achievement and leads to achieve- ment, they are lied to and held back. --end From gbroiles at netbox.com Sat Jan 4 18:35:40 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 18:35:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970104182713.0069a05c@mail.io.com> At 01:10 PM 1/3/97 GMT, Adam Back wrote: >The only thing I would be happy to see happen in the way of list based >filtering, is anything to cut out pure commercial, non crypto related >spam. Spammers seem to have discovered mailing lists as efficient >distribution methods in addition to direct mass mailing lately. Some evildoer has been posting messages to Usenet purporting to be from "cypherpunks at toad.com"; some of the messages posted have been to newsgroups frequented by the make-spam-fast crowd, so now we've apparently been identified as within an especially gullible market segment. The messages sent to Usenet are labelled "SPAM BAIT" (or something like that) - apparently the sender of the messages thinks they're doing something useful. >Unfortunately this is difficult to filter automatically, and no one >has the time to do it in close to real time, and time lags hinder >discussion. For me, real time access to Cypherpunks is unproductive; I find that I get the most value out of the list if I read my accumulated messages once every day or two instead of once an hour. Also, at a "macro" perspective, too much feedback can be as harmful or inefficient as too little feedback. I think that a "3 posts per person per day" rule might produce interesting results; at least from my perspective, people who send many messages (> 5, or so) per day usually don't have anything of substance to say and I frequently skip all of their posts. It would also encourage people to avoid the "Me, too" or "I think you're an idiot" messages which can just as easily be sent privately or not at all. Implementing such a rule would be disproportionately burdensome technically and politically, so I'm not seriously suggesting that we implement it, but I do think it's useful to think of "fewer, better" posts as a goal. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From tcmay at got.net Sat Jan 4 18:41:18 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 18:41:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: I'm not arguing for State-supported monopolies! In-Reply-To: <199701050110.RAA10132@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: At 4:57 PM -0800 1/4/97, jim bell wrote: >I don't fault you for being "elitist." However, Rich Graves was right: I >think that cryptoanarchy, while obviously eliminating taxation and income >redistribution sounds cozy for economic elites, actually also eliminates the >basis for those elites to be formed in the first place. To cite just one >example that will hit close to home for you, without copyrights or patents >(which >are, obviously, monopolies enforced by governments) it would be far harder >for companies such as Intel to maintain a near-monopoly on the >DOS-compatible microprocessor market. Of course. Please read my various sections in the Cyphernomicon on what will be the likely effect of liquid information markets on corporations--both Gibson and Chomsky have similar views, by the way. I have explicitly cited the role of crypto anarchy in undermining large corporations (changing the "nature of the firm"), and have said quite directly that crypto anarchy means as much for the nature of corporations as for government institutions. On the issue of my particular financial situation, no firm conclusions can be drawn. While Intel might not have existed as it did--always a tough thing to argue subjunctive realities--it is also the case that the very high tax rates (counting the various taxes, not just Federal) I paid for my working career could have allowed me to accumulate money in other ways. In any case, I don't make my arguments based upon "could have beens" like this. (Vis-a-vis my current expectations and my plans for securing my wealth...alternative pasts, such as "What if Intel had not had patent protection?." are meaningless. All that counts is the future from now on out. And in the time period I expect some semblance of crypto anarchy to evolve, which is a matter of decades, not months or years, there will be plenty of time for me to shift assets and move to a non-U.S. locale, if need be.) >And it has long been observed in libertarian discussion circles that far >from hating regulation, most large (American; and others) corporations >actually receive a net benefit from it as compared with smaller companies: >The cost of complying with regulations doesn't increase linearly with the >size of company, which means that those same regulations are a way of >fighting competition if they are played right. Bring in crypto-anarchy and >this effect is no longer operating. Of course. I've said this very thing several times...perhaps you are remembering points I myself made. Again, don't attempt to refute my ideas by casting me as a Defender of Intel and Protector of State-Supported Monopolies. I'm not such a thing. >Despite all this, I still see nothing inconsistent in even an "elitist" >pushing for crypto-anarchy: The current political system has become so >dramatically inefficient and keeps so many people (through welfare, >Socialist Insecurity, and government employment) well-fed through income >redistribution, that I think finally even an "elitist" would be happy to >chuck the whole system and adopt a crypto-anarchy-equalized system. Indeed. And when you stop thinking I'm somehow arguing for State support of Intel and other corporate entities, my position will be even more obviously consistent. (As to my particular wealth from my investments, only part of it is directly attributable to having worked at Intel. Much of it is due to _investments_ in various companies over a 20-year period. I have confidence that had a less constrained market existed, I could have done about as well, or even better.) --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay at got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 4 19:07:59 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 19:07:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CF160D.626A@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Dale Thorn writes: > > I realize most people are still afraid of the 666 stuff (direct evidence > > from the phone company shows most people will not accept #s with 666 > > prefixes), but they'll get over it when they see the benefits, and how > In the 212 area code (Manhattan), 666 is around Columbia University. > I used to be at 212-666-6984 for some 7 years. When I was with Uncle Sam overseas, I bunked with guys from Brooklyn, Queens, and areas like that. They didn't seem to be influenced as much by the Bible-thumpers etc. as people from Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, and so on. Of course, that was the 1960's. Things have changed a lot, and the U.S. is much more cosmopolitan now. Nonetheless, it's interesting how much of the FUD from conservative Christianity (to name an example I'm familiar with) still has a strong presence in people's minds... What I could tell about 666 in my own case, I can hardly believe myself. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 4 19:11:18 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 19:11:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701041932.NAA32121@einstein> Message-ID: <32CF1A27.57A0@gte.net> Jim Choate wrote: > Forwarded message: > > Date: Sat, 04 Jan 1997 10:24:21 -0800 > > From: Dale Thorn > > C'mon Gary, why would anyone want to bother with all of this crap? > > Chip implants are already in millions of pets. It's simple, cheap, > > and there's no work for the owner. > > Thousands of humans are also implanted, i.e., Green Berets, Seals, and > > similar types, women with breast implants, and so on. There's a move- > > ment on to implant most children, so they're not as vulnerable to kid- > > napping, etc. > Baloney. I know two SEAL's (I share an office at work with one) and I > can verify they are NOT chiped. I also have several female friends who have > had various breast surgeries and they also are not chipped. Well, I guess the baloney clause wins, 'cause I certainly can't verify it. OTOH, if an intelligence officer (i.e., Navy Seal) tells me the sky is green and the grass is blue, I'll understand completely (wink). The breast implant thing is supposed to be law, although again, I don't have my hand in anyone's bra to check them out.... From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 4 19:23:54 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 19:23:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: New rules for Internet sales to CA buyers In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970102144026.0069bc00@mail.io.com> Message-ID: <32CF1E65.AD7@gte.net> Ian Goldberg wrote: > In article <3.0.32.19970102144026.0069bc00 at mail.io.com>, > Greg Broiles wrote: > >The following subsection of California Business & Professions Code section > >17538 took effect 1/1/97 and may be of interest to people following state > >attempts to regulate net sales: > > (d) A vendor conducting business through the Internet or any other > >electronic means of communication shall do all of the following > >when the transaction involves a buyer located in California: > So is this saying that a merchant _anywhere in the world_ can be prosecuted > under California law if someone in California goes to their web page, > and the web page doesn't satisfy the requirements (which I snipped)? > How is a merchant in, say, Finland, supposed to know that this law (or others > like it in any city, state, or country in the world) exists? It's all rather academic, my dear Ian. Just as the Atom bomb made the United Nations mandatory, and large-scale war impossible for the U.S., the Internet will be the thing that facilitates ushering in one-world government. When Bill Gates and friends put up those 800-plus satellites to beam the "news, entertainment, and important events" all over the world to everyone's TV set, the circle will be complete. From succeslink at aol.com Sat Jan 4 19:30:14 1997 From: succeslink at aol.com (Peter Sorensen) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 19:30:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Make $300 a Day!! Message-ID: <199701050329.WAA26307@oo.com> Our records show that you are an entrepreneur looking for an opportunity. If we have reached you in error, please let us know so we can remove you from our records We are looking for a limited number of entrepreneurs and others who would like to make up to $300.00 a day working with our company. We are not... Multi level matketing a chain letter or any pyramid scheme We are a legitimate company located in Florida who offers an incredibly unique and extremely useful product. If you would like more information on this explosive opportunity, visit our web site at: http://members.aol.com/succeslink but hurry, we only have a limited number of positions available. We look forward to working with you!! Peter Sorensen - President Success Link - Your link to success From tcmay at got.net Sat Jan 4 20:09:29 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 20:09:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970104182713.0069a05c@mail.io.com> Message-ID: At 6:38 PM -0800 1/4/97, Greg Broiles wrote: >I think that a "3 posts per person per day" rule might produce interesting >results; at least from my perspective, people who send many messages (> 5, >or so) per day usually don't have anything of substance to say and I >frequently skip all of their posts. It would also encourage people to avoid >the "Me, too" or "I think you're an idiot" messages which can just as >easily be sent privately or not at all. Implementing such a rule would be >disproportionately burdensome technically and politically, so I'm not >seriously suggesting that we implement it, but I do think it's useful to >think of "fewer, better" posts as a goal. Is this 3 per day _on average_, or _peak_? (I was quiet for Xmas and NYE, so I built up a "credit" of about 21 posts, of which I still have some left :-)) Seriously, this rule was also tried by the Extropians, with little useful effect. While the goal of "fewer, but better" posts is a noble one, mechanical rules such as are implied by quotas are a bad idea. For various reasons. Most of my posts are reasonable long ones (is this also a violation of a policy Greg would support?), and I try to completely avoid short, "me too," rejoinders or the typical net.repartee that so pollutes other lists. (If you think our list is bad, you ought to see lists which are completely dominated by one-line witticisms and inside jokes....) Frankly, some of us have more time and interest in posting to this list than some others have. As I like to say, "for various reasons." Clearly all 1200+ subscribers cannot post 3 messages a day and have the list survive; that some posters post many more than 3, some post 3 or fewer, and the vast majority post none at all is completely unsurprising. Attempts to mechanically limit the number of peak posts to some arbitrary limit, without taking into account other factors, will backfire badly. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay at got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From nobody at huge.cajones.com Sat Jan 4 20:38:41 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 20:38:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Judge Bork on Ebonics Message-ID: <199701050438.UAA26367@mailmasher.com> At 6:37 PM 1/4/1997, Steve Schear wrote: >The following is from pages 300-307 of Robert Bork's brilliant >book, "Slouching Towards Gomorrah". This is a book which should >be read by everyone--and especially by liberals. > >Here are Judge Bork's thoughts on multiculturalism, bilingual >education, and "Black English", otherwise known as "Ebonics". Thank you for taking the trouble to type in Bork's thoughts. You might enjoy reading the introduction to his book on antitrust law. He eloquently demonstrates how antitrust law is designed and implemented to undermine the rule of law. The participants are fully aware of their actions and Bork documents it. Nonetheless, I have some disagreements with Judge Bork. I believe he is too eager to lump "multi-culturalists" and "revisionists" into one coherent mass. He also seems to ignore the many substantive and interesting points raised by the revisionists. >Bernstein took a two-year leave of absence from the New York >Times to gather the facts of the multicultural ideology and its >opponents. His is not an impressionistic book or one based on an >ideological predisposition; it is a report of empirical findings. He >points, for example, to the remarkable change in attitude towards >Christopher Columbus between 1892 and 1992. Though not a >single new fact about Columbus's life and exploits had been >uncovered, the country's mood swung from one of uncritical adu- >lation to one of loathing and condemnation, at least among the >members of the "intellectual" class. The change was accomplished >by the aggressive ideology of multiculturalism. The Columbus >turnaround is merely a specific instance of more general alter- >ations in our moral landscape. If it is the case that no new facts are known about Columbus, which probably isn't true anyway, then we have to seriously question what people were thinking in 1892. See "Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong" by James W. Loewen for a full treatment. The summary: Columbus was a bad man who lead the Spanish government in causing the deaths of about 8 million people. How can we rever such a monster? Why did people in 1892 do so? Less dramatically, Columbus's visionary belief in a round world was not as visionary as claimed. Many people were aware of this fact at the time. There are many similar examples of mythmaking. What has changed since 1892 is intellectual integrity and it has changed for the better. Of course, in 1892 the United States was just completing one of the most successful land grabs in history. One can either concede a strong belief in the right of conquest or one can lie about it. In 1892 they lied about it. >That was the meaning of the radicals' attack on Stanford's Western >Culture program in which students were required to sample the >writings of men who had helped shape Western culture-Shakespeare, >Dante, Locke, etc. A black student who objected to the program said >its message was "Nigger, go home." If Universities were run like businesses serving customers, this question would not even have to be raised. Students may study whatever they are willing to pay for. >That exclusionary inter- pretation is precisely the opposite of the >real message of the pro- gram, which was "Let us study what we have >in common as inheritors of a tradition." This I disagree with. There is nothing magical about promoting "tradition". I much prefer to study the most worthwhile literature and philosophical ideas available regardless of their source. While Shakespeare is certainly worth studying, Sun Tzu is at least as worthwhile, depending on one's goals. >The insistence on separate ethnic identities means that persons in >each group can study their own culture, often in highly flattering >and historically inaccurate form. But this is exactly what the Universities and other "educational" institutions in the United States have been doing for years. >Multiculturalism then means not the study of others but of oneself. This is simply false. When people argue about the curriculum at Stanford University, they are arguing about the education of a group composed primarily of young wealthy European-Americans. >In education at all levels, the substance of the curriculum >changes to accommodate multiculturalist pressures. We have >already seen this in feminist and Afrocentric studies, but it is >everywhere. In New York state it is official educational doctrine >that the United States Constitution was heavily influenced by the >political arrangements of the Iroquois Confederacy. The official >promulgation of this idea was not due to any research that dis- >closed its truth. Nor has any other state adopted this nonsensical >idea. I am very skeptical of Bork's claim. For example, the method of admitting states to the Union and granting them nearly equal status with the existing states does not, I believe, have precedent in European history. However, this is how the Five Nation Iroquois functioned. At first glance, it seems reasonable to suggest that the authors of the Constitution got this idea from the Iroquois. If anybody knows otherwise, I would be most interested to hear about it. "Lies My Teacher Told Me" had this fascinating passage on page 103: "In the 1740s the Iroquois wearied of dealing with several often bickering English colonies and suggested that the colonies form a union similar to the league [i.e., the Iroquois -ed.]. In 1754 Benjamin Franklin, who had spent much time among the Iroquois observing their deliberations, pleaded with colonial leaders to consider the Albany Plan of Union: "It would be a strange thing if six nations of ignorant savages should be capable of forming a scheme for such a union and be able to execute it in such a manner as that it has subsisted ages and appears insoluble; and yet that a like union should be impracticable for ten or a dozen English colonies.'" Consider this excerpt from page 104: "For a hundred years after our Revolution, Americans credited Native Americans as a source of their democratic institutions. Revolutionary-era cartoonists used images of Indians to represent the colonies against Britain. Virginia's patriot rifle companies wore Indian clothes and moccasins as they fought the redcoats. When colonists took action to oppose unjust authority, as in the Boston Tea Party or the anti-rent protests against Dutch plantations in the Hudson River Valley during the 1840s, they chose to dress as Indians, not to blame Indians for the demonstrations but to appropriate a symbol identified with liberty." Or consider this, also from page 104: "As a symbol of the new United States, Americans chose the eagle clutching a bundle of arrows. They knew that both the eagle and the arrows were symbols of the Iroquois League. Although one arrow is easily broken, no one can break six (or thirteen) at once." The truth is, many revisionists have many interesting things to say. Disturbingly, I have noticed that the anti-revisionists have a marked tendency towards ad hominem attack and seldom address the specific points raised. My belief is that many established historians see themselves as promoting a "tradition" and not as searchers for truth. I would like to hear opposing points of view if backed up by evidence. (Lowewen, for instance, has some squirrelly values and there are a number of errors in his book.) >This sort of thing is happening across the country as various ethnic >groups and feminists demand that history be rewritten according to >their party lines. This not only debases history but pits the various >groups against one another as they struggle for space in the >textbooks. New York's "interest in history is not as an intellectual >discipline," Schlesinger writes, "but rather as social and >psychological therapy whose primary purpose is to raise the self- >esteem of children from minority groups." Loewen claims that Schlesinger wrote an entire book on the Jackson administration in which he omitted any reference to the forcible relocation of the Cherokees from Georgia to Oklahoma. Regardless of whether one cares about such crimes - and one should - this episode is worth studying for its Constitutional implications alone. The Cherokees had a treaty with the United States Government. They took their case to the Supreme Court. Chief Justice of the United States John Marshall ordered that the Cherokees be left alone. Andrew Jackson replied "I'd like to see John Marshall stop me." Jackson, a former general, was presumably popular with the Army. I haven't verified Loewen's claim, but I have read an essay by Schlesinger in which he attacks historical revisionism without actually addressing any claim by the revisionists. Red Rackham From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:10:03 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:10:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: Naive Export Question] Message-ID: <32CF41C8.7759@sk.sympatico.ca> An embedded message was scrubbed... From: unknown sender Subject: no subject Date: no date Size: 812 URL: From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:10:09 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:10:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: Timmy's Lost It: [Was Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice]] Message-ID: <32CF4221.4556@sk.sympatico.ca> An embedded message was scrubbed... From: unknown sender Subject: no subject Date: no date Size: 1416 URL: From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:10:14 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:10:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: Experiments on Mailing Lists] Message-ID: <32CF4B4B.FC3@sk.sympatico.ca> An embedded message was scrubbed... From: unknown sender Subject: no subject Date: no date Size: 1315 URL: From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:10:28 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:10:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CF4EB7.6633@sk.sympatico.ca> Peter Hendrickson wrote: > This is no different from the original scheme with a limited number > of tokens. If the anonymity is preserved, you can always pay somebody > $500 to go to the trouble of getting one of the rare tokens distributed > or to buy one off a list member who already has one. In the modified > scheme, the cost is quantified and easy to express and understand. And the person who pleases the most people gets to be Prom Queen. (this requires either having 'great teeth' or having 'no teeth') From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:10:37 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:10:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CF4CE7.5AB8@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Are you working on a 'commission' basis, here? > > In the interests of freedom, just in case you missed it, > it's called MLM/PGP, i.e, PGP is the ultimate multi-level > marketing tool. Did I miss getting in on the 'ground floor', here? Damn. Well, I guess I'll just have to wait for the next email telling how to "MAKE BIG $$$$'. (my psychic abilities tell me that I won't have to wait long) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:10:38 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:10:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: New rules for Internet sales to CA buyers In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970102144026.0069bc00@mail.io.com> Message-ID: <32CF4FDE.570A@sk.sympatico.ca> Ian Goldberg wrote: > So is this saying that a merchant _anywhere in the world_ can be prosecuted > under California law if someone in California goes to their web page, > and the web page doesn't satisfy the requirements (which I snipped)? > > How is a merchant in, say, Finland, supposed to know that this law (or others > like it in any city, state, or country in the world) exists? Ignorance is no excuse for violating the law. This is a standard legal principle which can be loosely translated as, "It's not 'our' problem that you're not psychic, sucker." From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:10:41 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:10:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: <19970103174004703.AIT291@[205.187.61.2]> Message-ID: <32CF50A5.3E23@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > I realize most people are still afraid of the 666 stuff (direct evidence > from the phone company shows most people will not accept #s with 666 > prefixes) Perhaps this explains why you never see a 666th floor in apartment buildings. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:10:48 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:10:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Your Comment Here) Message-ID: <32CF51BA.1B7C@sk.sympatico.ca> "Before I joined CypherPunks, I couldn't even 'spell' cocksucker. Now,...(Your Comment Here)." From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:11:04 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:11:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CF50F4.41AD@sk.sympatico.ca> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > I used to be at 212-666-6984 for some 7 years. Aha! From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 4 21:41:21 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:41:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: <199701031310.NAA00485@server.test.net> Message-ID: <32CF58D3.5205@sk.sympatico.ca> Adam Back wrote: > I think this filtering/censorship stuff is getting way too complicated > to be practical. No, it's really fairly simple if you remember a few basics: 1. Tokens will be used for posting on Sunday through Wednesday. 2. Left-handed people can only post between 4 and 6 p.m. 3. People whose last names start with the letters 'a' through 'm' will not have to follow the 'Random Rules'. 4. People whose last names start with the letters 'n' through 'z' will be required to follow the 'Random Rules', but they will not be told what they are until the day following their post. (otherwise, it would destroy the whole idea behind randomizing the posting rules) 5. Dr. DV K will be given two seperate tokens each day. One token will allow him to post a message containing the word 'cock', and the other one will allow him to post a message containing the word 'sucker'. 6. People posting messages such as 'this' one will, eventually, after reading their own postings, realize that they don't have a 'real' life, and kill themselves--thus becoming a solution to their own problem. From ghio at netcom.com Sat Jan 4 21:58:45 1997 From: ghio at netcom.com (Matthew Ghio) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 21:58:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: FIPS for AES In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970102153923.006bfbf0@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: <199701050556.AAA00312@myriad.alias.net> John Young wrote: > Federal Register: January 2, 1997, Pages 93-94. > > Announcing Development of a FIPS for Advanced Encryption Standard ... > Summary: A process to develop a FIPS for Advanced Encryption Standard > (AES) incorporating an Advanced Encryption Algorithm (AEA) is being > initiated by the NIST. It is intended that the AES will specify an > unclassified, publicly disclosed encryption algorithm capable of > protecting sensitive government information well into the next century. Well, well, well... Looks like we have some dissent in the ranks of the GAK alliance. :) From ghio at netcom.com Sat Jan 4 22:20:33 1997 From: ghio at netcom.com (Matthew Ghio) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 22:20:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: FIPS for AES In-Reply-To: <9612311143.AA08693@cow.net> Message-ID: <199701050618.BAA00319@myriad.alias.net> Anonymous wrote: > One issue which I haven't seen anybody address is the > provision to make export licenses easier to obtain for those > companies which show a credible business plan that supports GAK. > > 1) Isn't this showing favouritism in an administrative > decision to people who support the government's political agenda. > > 2) If the export of a certain encryption `item' is inimical to > `National Security', isn't the harm to the `National Security' the same > regardless of whether the exporter plans to produce GAK products in the > future or not? > > Based on these two points shouldn't this aspect of the regulations > considered as being `arbitrary' and hence unconstitutional. Yes, yes, and no... Arbitrary government decisions are not unconstitutional in general; however, arbitrary discretion in prohibiting publications is most certainly a voilation of the First Amendment. > A further thought. If you obtain an export license by showing > the government a business plan that supports GAK, but then do not > follow your business plan, how will the goverment `get' you? They get you through their paradigm of standardless discretion. From mpd at netcom.com Sat Jan 4 22:43:31 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 22:43:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: <32CF58D3.5205@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <199701050643.WAA18324@netcom17.netcom.com> Toto wrote: [snip] > 5. Dr. DV K will be given two seperate tokens each day. One > token will allow him to post a message containing the word > 'cock', and the other one will allow him to post a message > containing the word 'sucker'. LOL. Just another normal day here on Dimitripunks. :) -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From nobody at replay.com Sat Jan 4 22:45:27 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 22:45:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Oakland School Board modifies Ebonics decision Message-ID: <199701050645.HAA06796@basement.replay.com> Oakland, CA, Reuters -- Oakland School Board modifies Ebonics decision. On Saturday, the Oakland School Board, meeting in emergency session, voted to modify its controversial "Ebonics" program, which authorized Ebonics, or "black English," as a second language for the purposes of teaching minority children and for receiving federal funds for language programs. But the program became the laughingstock of the nation, as critics pointed out, and the White House was quick to announce that no funding for Ebonics programs will be forthcoming. As President Clinton noted, "Hell, down in Arkansas we got folks talkin' like that everyday, and we don't call it "bubbonics, " now do we?" Under pressure from the parents of the remaining white children, the Oakland School Board has decided to add "white English," also known as "Albonics," to the list of special languages. Under the proposal, Albonics would be a valid language for teaching white children who are lacking ghetto jive skills. As School Superintendent Lavondala Rasheed-Washington explained, "Yez be all we be sayin', know? Da honkies be sayin' ebonics be dissin' dem. We'z be skaggin' and deyz be tootin' an shit. Dis be bad." (A translation into Albonics was not available at press time.) In related news, the Oakland School Board has completed work begun over the Christmas school break to subtitle all school signs in Ebonics. The "Boys" and "Girls" restrooms in all Oakland schools are now subtitled "Niggaz" and "Bitches." From jimbell at pacifier.com Sat Jan 4 22:49:26 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 22:49:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... Message-ID: <199701050649.WAA19140@mail.pacifier.com> At 10:57 PM 1/4/97 -0800, Toto wrote: >Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >> I used to be at 212-666-6984 for some 7 years. > > Aha! You figured it out, too, huh?!? Take the word "devil," remove the vowels and you get dvl. Rearrange slightly, and it's "dlv." Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From rfiero at pophost.com Sat Jan 4 23:06:36 1997 From: rfiero at pophost.com (Richard Fiero) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 23:06:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Judge Bork on Ebonics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701050704.AAA09677@smtp.pophost.com> Steve Schear wrote: > The following is from pages 300-307 of Robert Bork's brilliant > book, "Slouching Towards Gomorrah". This is a book which should > be read by everyone--and especially by liberals. > > Here are Judge Bork's thoughts on multiculturalism, bilingual > education, and "Black English", otherwise known as "Ebonics". > > ==================================================== > > The natural centrifugal tendencies of ethnicity were once > counteracted by a public school system that stressed indoctrinating > immigrants to be Americans Shame on Steve Schear for passing off this narcissistic gay whitebread shit as having been written by the renowned Robert Bork. No real person could be so transparently self-promoting and irrelevant as the obviously humorous author was. - Richard Fiero From attila at primenet.com Sat Jan 4 23:41:48 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (attila) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 23:41:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Your Comment Here) In-Reply-To: <32CF51BA.1B7C@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > "Before I joined CypherPunks, I couldn't even 'spell' cocksucker. > Now,...(Your Comment Here)." > that is my sentiment, exactly. at one time there was a given level of politeness and decorum on the list; then along comes dimitri, aga, lester and all his ali, and so on. it has degenerated into a pissing match between fools. I've never object to a little "profanity" for punctuation, sort of like: "well? what's the difference between saying 'shit' and 'buffalo chip?'" Detweiler of PC Mag was a nuisance and got into it with Tim (he just disappeared except an occasional swipe), and then there was Dr. Fred Cohen who attacled Tim on a regular basis (but he was easy enough to get rid of after I checked his credentials and exposed why he was fired from his professorship), and now we have Dimitri and several more who are worse. Dimitri at least has some good information and arguments. you know, I've always given Tim a little slack on his occasionally over-biased opinions, but... maybe Tim is the problem; he just seems to bring out the 'best' in people like Dimitri and now the list has turned into a free-for-all of the outrageously obscene. then you wonder why I create sig lines like: __________________________________________________________________________ go not unto usenet for advice, for the inhabitants thereof will say: yes, and no, and maybe, and I don't know, and fuck-off. _________________________________________________________________ attila__ To be a ruler of men, you need at least 12 inches.... _________________________________________________________________ attila__ From groupweb at village.yvv.com Sat Jan 4 23:51:57 1997 From: groupweb at village.yvv.com (GroupWeb eJournal) Date: Sat, 4 Jan 1997 23:51:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: eJournal Message-ID: <199701050537.AAA14566@yvv.com> ========================================================= G R O U P W E B eJ O U R N A L (tm) Vol. 2 No. 1, January 6, 1997 http://www.groupweb.com/your/ejournal.htm - Now serving 45,000 readers. - Send contributions to ejournal at groupweb.com --------------------------------------------------------- H A P P Y N E W Y E A R! --------------------------------------------------------- In This Issue: 1. Review '96 AND Preview '97 2. Advertisement 3. Subscribe/Unsubscribe ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -1- Review '96/Preview '97 ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT In 1996, Oprah Winfrey is selected best performer of the year, but who will win in 1997? Will the much advertised Sunset Beach sizzle your TV screens? See Oprah at: http://www.groupweb.com/ejournal/oprah.htm See Sunset Beach at: http://www.groupweb.com/ejournal/sunset.htm BUSINESS & FINANCE ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Blacks and Hispanics spent over $630 billions that outpace white spending in such areas as cars, children's clothing and perishable foods. Baby boomers invested over $1.2 trillion in 1996 and the Dow posted a record high. What will become of 1997? Before you say anything, see winners and losers among the big players in 1996 at: http://www.groupweb.com/ejournal/invest.htm How will your business do in 1997? To launch your marketing strategy, see iMarket at: http://www.groupweb.com/ejournal/imarket.htm and GroupWeb Marketplace at: http://www.groupweb.com/buy_sell/market.htm GOVERNMENT/POLITICS ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ In 1996, President Clinton won the White House, and he promised to build a bridge into the 21st century. His campaign, however, was without complains: fund raising flap and his personal character, to name but a few. At the dawn of this new year is his inauguration. What will become of Clinton's Presidency in 1997 and Gingrich's helm at the House? See Allpolitics at: http://www.groupweb.com/bizdir/links/polnews.htm GENERAL REVIEWS OF '96 AND PREVIEWS OF '97 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ See complete 1996 reviews on the Arts, business, and technology and previews of 1997 by MSNBC at: http://www.groupweb.com/ejournal/msnbc.htm or tell us what you foresee for 1997 at GroupWeb eJournal Forum: http://www.emailhost.com/msgs.html -3- Advertisement ============================================================== Best Seafood 1-800-266-5620 ============================================================== Enjoy high quality Florida seafood at the lowest possible price delivered to you in 24 hours. Enter our monthly raffle to win 5 pounds of lobster tails. No purchase necessary. http://www.best-seafood.com ============================================================ Guaranteed Programs Paying 20% Annual Rate ============================================================ Guaranteed, insured, secured and amortized banking investment programs paying 20% annual percentage rate is now available to investors worldwide. Minimum investment is $24,000 per contract. Minimum number of contracts is one. Additional bonus is available to multiple contracts. Investment can be liquidated with a 60-day notice. Offers are accepted on a first come, first served basis. To contact us, send e-mail to oval at groupweb.com ============================================================ Get Your Virtual Server ============================================================= Server Type Setup Charge Monthly Service ----------- ------------ -------------- Basic Service 50.00 20.00 Basic w/Domain 100.00 25.00 Basic w/Domain&Email 100.00 30.00 Virtual Host Service 150.00 60.00 Secure Sever 250.00 Send email to ejournal at groupweb.com ============================================================ Advertise in eJournal & GroupWeb Directories ============================================================ Send a 5-line ad to 45,000 readers for only $95.00 per issue of eJournal and get a free banner ad (155 by 55 pixel) for one year. E-mail ads should be 35 words maximum, additional words are priced at $1 per word. Send your ad and payment to InfoResearch Group 5514 La Jolla Blvd La Jolla, CA 92037 You can place your order with your Visa or MasterCard via First Virtual at: http://groupweb.com/your/place_ad.htm ============================================================= -5- Subscribe/Unsubscribe To unsubscribe send e-mail to groupweb at yvv.com with the word "REMOVE" as your subject. Thanks. ============================================================== (c) 1996 InfoResearch Group. http://www.groupweb.com From whgiii at amaranth.com Sun Jan 5 00:24:24 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 00:24:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701050826.CAA17738@mailhub.amaranth.com> Hi, Thought that I would add a few statistics on cypherpunks list filtering. Since this afternoon I received 70 messages from the mailing list. Of those 70 28 went into my twit folder (40%). Of those 28: - 2 anonymous posts: 1 was moved back to my cypherpunks folder 1 was Tim May slander message - Remaining 26 belonged to 4 users on my twit list (non spam) 42 of 70 made it past my filter into my cypherpunks folder (60%). Of those 42: - 4 were spam that got past my filter. I only filter repeat offenders. - 12 were on Controlling spam on the list - 6 were on ITAR/EAR - 3 were on SSL Spoofing - 3 were on Tim May/Cryptoanarchy - 3 were on Ecash - 2 were on OCR - 2 were on California Inet Law - 1 was on Secret Sharing - 6 were on misc topics I have found that by filtering out a handfull of users plus anonymous posts the list becomes quite manageable. As far as spam goes I don't think there is any solution other than the delete key. A good % of the time one can tell from the message topic that it is spam and can delete the message without opening it. As far as the issue of paying to download unwanted messages. One a user gets a good feel for who the want to filter out they should be able to create a killfile on their ISP's server. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info ----------------------------------------------------------- From free at nettech-resources.com Sun Jan 5 00:39:44 1997 From: free at nettech-resources.com (Flame Free) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 00:39:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Flame Free Bulk E-mail Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970105023222.0067e7fc@ix.gen.com> Send 10,000 E-mails E v e r y D a y ... with YOUR Sales Message! These E-mail messages are ONLY sent to people who have REQUESTED info like yours. Don't Risk Getting Kicked Off Your ISP for Sending Too Many E-mails or Getting Flames! Never Chap Your ISP Again. Never Get Another Flame Message! No Flame messages will ever get to YOU again ... For details goto http://www.nettech-resources.com/flamefree.htm From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 5 01:18:43 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 01:18:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Your Comment Here) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701050915.DAA28552@manifold.algebra.com> attila wrote: > swipe), and then there was Dr. Fred Cohen who attacled Tim on a > regular basis (but he was easy enough to get rid of after I checked > his credentials and exposed why he was fired from his professorship), > Why was Dr. Cohen fired from his professorship? - Igor. From rcgraves at disposable.com Sun Jan 5 01:34:53 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 01:34:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Judge Bork on Ebonics In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CF750D.7E9F@disposable.com> Hello, what's this? I thought the Know-Nothing Party disbanded in the early 1850's. Steve Schear wrote: > > The following is from pages 300-307 of Robert Bork's brilliant > book, "Slouching Towards Gomorrah". This is a book which should > be read by everyone--and especially by liberals. I'll pick it out of the library when I'm done with Mein Kampf. I don't feel inclined to subsidize this ignorant kook with my money. > The natural centrifugal tendencies of ethnicity were once > counteracted by a public school system that stressed indoctrinating > immigrants to be Americans. The schools were agents of cultural > unification. They taught patriotism and standards derived from > European cultures. What do any of those standards have to do with "European cultures"? Europe, like every other continent (save Antarctica), has a history of conflict among ideas and groups. Tell me, who embodies "European culture" best: Luther, Charlemagne, Pope Gregory XII, Orwell, Picasso, Nietzsche, Hitler, Churchill, St. Francis of Assisi, Machiavelli, Marx, Diderot, Luis XIV, Robespierre, Einstein, Paul de Man? The mark of a bigot is that he reads history selectively to find "good" values in his own group, and "bad" values in some other group. In fact "culture" is a fractal landscape. This isn't a surrender to cultural or moral relativism -- just the opposite. Some ideas are simply good, some are simply bad, independent of their origin. This is one of the things that separates rationalists (whom you may find in any culture) from romantics (whom you may find in any culture). > Part of our national lore, and glory, is the fact > that youngsters speaking not a word of English were placed in > public schools where only English was used and very shortly were > proficient in the language. Immigrants to the US today learn English twice as fast as did immigrants to the US at the turn of the century. Greater access to public education, the growth of the mass media, and the end of child labor (well it's mostly ended) are the most important factors cited. There is far less regional differentiation in English dialects around the country today than there was at the turn of the century. Nearly all well-educated and socially mobile Americans under age 40 speak a common "broadcast TV english." Southern and Brooklyn accents are less pronounced than they were. > That was crucial to the formation of an > American identity Now, however, the educational system has > become the weapon of choice for modern liberals in their project > of dismantling American culture. Yup, that's us. It's all a conspiracy to drag America into the gutter. > Our egalitarians view every culture (other than European) as equal. Nope. There is no "European culture." Only idiot collectivists of the nationalist type group people like this. > They resent and resist attempts to Americanize immigrants, and the > crucial battleground is language. A bald assertion. The straw man grows. > So many languages are spoken by immigrants that it is impos- > sible to provide bilingual education for all. That is why bilingual > education is so often in Spanish, the language most immigrants > speak. But that fact gives away the real reason for the programs. Aha! The conspiracy unmasked! > Vietnamese and Polish children were put into English-speaking > classes and were competent into English long before the Hispanics > in bilingual schools. No evidence for this assertion exists. > That leaves the partisans of bilingualism only > the choice of saying that Hispanic children are not as capable as > others or admitting that they, the educators, are driven by hostility > to American culture, and the rewards to be had by teachers' unions > and educational bureaucrats. No. I choose to call you on the bullshit assertion that Hispanic children don't learn English. This prejudice is rooted in the small but visible segment of the Hispanic population that comprises recent immigrants. It is indubitably true that illegal immigrants doing odd jobs and domestic work -- the segment of the Hispanic population most visible to sensitive anglos -- tend not to speak English. Extrapolations from this population, though, are invalid. > Often, the bilingualists do not care whether immigrant chil- > dren learn English. The key to success for the students is "self- > esteem. . . . Children do badly in school because of their feelings > of 'shame' at belonging to a minority group rather than the 'domi- > nant group.' For the children to do better, teachers must "con- > sciously challenge the power structure both in their classrooms > and schools and in the society at large." As Richard Bernstein > writes, "Bilingual education ... is an act of rebellion against white, > Anglo cultural domination." Note the only evidence offered by Bork to bolster this straw man he's building is a similar slew of bald, unsupported assertions by a friend of his. He might as well be quoting himself. > And the "animus against assimilation, > is not an implicit part of the emerging educational philosophy. It is > explicit, open, out there, a standard belief. And in support of this rather extremist position, we have: > 'The psychological cost > of assimilation has been and continues to be high for many U.S. > citizens,' declares the National Council of Social Studies (NCSS), > in Washington, D.C., in its 1992 'Curriculum Guidelines for Mul- > ticultural Education.' "It too often demands self-denial, self-hatred, > and rejection of family and ethnic ties." This pathetic whine is > not insignificant since the NCSS is the country's largest Organiza- > tion devoted to social studies education. I see. "Pathetic whine" name-calling in reference to a one-sentence quote is the best you can do. At least you give a verifiable reference so that people can see what it really says. > Public dissatisfaction with the linguistic fracturing of society > has led to calls for an English-only amendment to the Constitu- > tion. The frustration is understandable, but there is no need to > amend the Constitution to achieve an English-speaking nation. All > that need be done is the abolition of bilingual education and the > repeal of the Voting Rights Act's requirement of different language > ballots. You'd better hurry, too, so that you can disenfranchise people before they know about it. > once they begin to see its results. Immigrant parents want their > children to learn English and become Americans. The opposition > to that, manifested in bilingual education, comes from American > elites who form an adversarial culture, alienated from the culture > of the West and wishing to weaken it. Who are these "American elites"? Who's in on the conspiracy? What's in it for them? > In 1989, the Commissioners Task Force on Minorities in New > York concluded: "African Americans, Asian Americans, Puerto > kicans/Latinos, and Native Americans have all been the victims of > an intellectual and educational oppression that has characterized > the culture and institutions of the United States and the European > American world for centuries." All young people were being > "miseducated" because of a "systematic bias toward European cul- > ture and its derivatives." Bernstein asks, rhetorically, "Could the > multicultural animus against 'European culture and its derivatives' > emerge more clearly than that? Here we have a direct statement > that the Western culture is harmful to nonwhite children ." The interesting thing about this attack is that you need to accept the Task Force's mode of analysis in order to accept Bernstein's conclusion. What if you don't? What if you say that this "European culture and its derivatives" thing is bullshit, all we really have is modern culture, and be done with it? Then Bernstein's statement and the Task Force's statments are equally nonsensical. > Despite the evidence and the frankness of its advocates, most > people, including very astute people, tend to accept the beneficent > view of multiculturalism put forth by its less candid partisans. Yes. Only the enlightened Bernstein and Bork can plumb the depths of the conspiracy. Preach it, brother! > Thus, one can find diametrically opposed views of the phe- > nomenon, one put forward, for example, by Richard Bernstein Rather than "who's wrong, who's right," I'd suggest that there is more than one phenomenon to be viewed. Bernstein is talking about the excesses, some real, some imagined, and O'Brien is talking about the actual goals of the educational mainstream. I'd think that someone actually in the educational mainstream would be a better guide to its goals than someone with an ideological need to "expose" the conspiracy that causes outrages like the ebonics announcement. > O'Brien, on the other hand, thinks that multiculturalism and > diversity are "actually both a mask for, and perhaps an unconscious > mode for achieving, a unity which would be broader-based and to > that extent stronger. . . . The real agenda is the enlargement of the > American national elite to include groups of persons who have > traditionally been excluded from the same, mainly for reasons > associated with race and gender. What is in view is the enlarge- > ment and diversification of the composition of the future govern- > ing class of the United States of America." Sounds like what I've seen, for the most part. Certainly on the high end, like Berkeley and Stanford, this is what we're seeing. At the low end, like those loons in the New York state college, or the Oakland or rural Tennessee public schools, you'll get a kook or a bigot. Who the hell wants to be a public schoolteacher these days? If you don't pay people what they're worth, you're bound to get 1) losers and/or 2) ideologically motivated naive do-gooders. This isn't the fault of an anti-culture conspiracy; it's simple economics and social stratification. > I am afraid it is clear that Bernstein has it right and O'Brien > has it wrong. You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but I don't agree. > Multiculturalism is advertised by its less candid prac- > titioners as opening students to the perspectives and accomplish- > ments of groups that have been largely ignored and undervalued > in conventional curriculums. "Less candid"? It's always a sign of trouble when you impugn the motives and honesty of your opponent without providing contrary evidence. > The goal, it is said, is to enrich the > student's understanding of the world and to teach him respect for > and tolerance of others who are different. It substitutes an ethic of > inclusion for the older ethic of exclusion. This is the movement's > self-portrait, and O'Brien seems to have accepted it at face value. > If there were truth in that advertising, if that were what the goal > really is, no one could legitimately object to what is taking place > in the American educational system. And so, since it's morally impermissible to say that they really want an exclusionary system -- he's afraid of being termed a racist -- Bork needs to create something to which he *can* legitimately object. What's he gonna create? > Unfortunately, there appears > to be very little truth in the pretensions of the multiculturalists. Ah, just say they "seem" to be lying, and call in a friend. > Bernstein took a two-year leave of absence from the New York > Times to gather the facts of the multicultural ideology and its > opponents. His is not an impressionistic book or one based on an > ideological predisposition; it is a report of empirical findings. BWAHAHAHA!!! Anyone familiar with Bernstein knows what a load of crap this is. This is simply dishonest. > He points, for example, to the remarkable change in attitude > towards Christopher Columbus between 1892 and 1992. Though not a > single new fact about Columbus's life and exploits had been > uncovered, the country's mood swung from one of uncritical adu- > lation to one of loathing and condemnation, at least among the > members of the "intellectual" class. The change was accomplished > by the aggressive ideology of multiculturalism. First, since when has "uncritical adulation" of a complex historical figure been objective history? Is this something that Bork and Bernstein *favor*? Maybe we should have a state religion, too. I bet that would really get "European culture" going here, like, say, 17th century England. For someone supposedly standing up for history, Bork appears to be rather blase about it. Did nothing happen between 1892 and 1992 than the actions of partisans of an alleged aggressive ideology of multiculturalism? Let's see. In 1898 we had the Spanish-American War. Yellow journalism and jingoism were at their peak. The myth of Columbus as American hero then ascendant was not a sign of affinity with "European culture," but a *rejection* of it. Columbus was stripped of his European, particularly Spanish, features and represented as an American adventurer. He was the Santa Claus of the Monroe Doctrine. Then Buffalo Bill hired Sitting Bull. There was the First World War and its Lost Generation. Exclusiveness lost its cachet. Hemingway did not romanticize Columbus. A different kind of exclusiveness grew with the "America First" isolationist movement, which at times was blatantly pro-Nazi. Columbus was used and viewed in many different ways through the years. Meanwhile, up in the ivory tower, historians worked on the facts. I defy you to show me one book published by a real historian for a serious college-level audience that favored "uncritical adulation" of Columbus. What I believe happened was that the horrors of the two World Wars woke people up to the dangers of propaganda myths (on all sides; the anti-German "Hun" stuff from WWI is really disgusting), and teachers stopped lying to their pupils. Every real historian always knew that Columbus was a complex figure. "Loathing and condemnation" is certainly a tad strong, but Bork and Bernstein are welcome to their rhetorical excess. > What it signifies, and what becomes increasingly obvious, is When someone asserts that something is "obvious" all kinds of warning bells should go off. > that multiculturalism is a philosophy of antagonism to America > and the West. And you're an ignorant buffoon. > The hostility of the multiculturalists to this nation > and its achievements can hardly be overstated. But we'll do it anyway. > Lynne Cheney, the > former head of the National Endowment for the Humanities, > quotes a professor who is pleased that multiculturalism has the > "potential for ideologically disuniting the nation" by stressing > America's faults so that students will not think this country > deserves their special support. Well? Does it? What purpose does indoctrinating kids with "uncritical adulation" serve? What were the lessons of the First World War? Let alone the Second. > That multiculturalism is essentially an attack on America, the > European-American culture, and the white race, with special Here the buffoon plays the race card. Who's his audience? > emphasis on white males, may be seen from the curriculum it > favors. A curriculum designed to foster understanding of other > cultures would study those cultures. Multiculturalism does not. > Courses are not offered on the cultures of China or India or Brazil > or Nigeria, nor does the curriculum require the study of languages > without which foreign cultures cannot be fully understood. This is bunk. The straw man grows. > Instead the focus is on groups that, allegedly, have been subjected > to oppression by American and Western civilization--homosexu- > als, American Indians, blacks, Hispanics, women, and so on. The "Allegedly"? Indians and blacks might not have had anything bad happen to them in this country? It's clear that Bork doesn't want people to know anything about history; just "uncritical adulation" of whoever he chooses to hold up as a model. Where will Herr Bork take us now? > message is not that all cultures are to be respected but that Euro- > pean culture, which created the dominance of white males, is > uniquely evil. There is no "European culture," only history. White males created the dominance of white males. Some of their *actions* were clearly evil. *They* were and are not. > "First is the elimination from acceptable discourse of any claim > of superiority or even special status for Europe, or any definition of > the United States as derived primarily from European civilization. > > "Second is the attack on the very notion of the individual > and the concomitant paramount status accorded group identifi- > cation. This is hilarious. I think Bernstein and Bork are really so blind as to their own bigotry that they see no conflict between these two points. If group identification is supposed to be a bad consequence of multiculturalism, then where do they get off identifying with the white race and "European culture"? Smash the labels. They're obsolete, as is "uncritical adulation." That went out with the Divine Right of Kings. Remember that? That was part of the history of "European culture." The thousand years of revolution, counterrevolution, science, progress, retraction, war, disease, and art that followed the Divine Right of Kings are also part of history. > "Third is the triumph of the politics of difference over the > politics of equality, that great and still-visionary goal of the civil > rights movement. Multiculturalism here is the indictment of one > group and the exculpation of all the others. . . Here we elide into paranoid delusions. > "This obsession with the themes of cultural domination and > oppression [by whites] justifies one of the most important > departures from the principal and essential goal of the civil > rights movement, equality of opportunity. Multiculturalism > insists on equality of results." To use a term of probably Indo-European origin, "Bollocks." > Hence it is that multiculturalists have turned Martin Luther > King, Jr.'s dream into a nightmare. He asked that his children "not > be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their > character," which, as Bernstein says, is the "essential ideal of > liberalism:' But multiculturalists say, "Judge me by the color of > my skin for therein lies my identity and my place in the world." They're projecting again. Sure some nonwhite racists call themselves multicultural. Reasonable people see through that. Old bigots who harken back to a nonexistent "European culture" are just as bad. > Multiculturalism requires the quotas or affirmative action that > create group dislike of other groups and self-segregation. Four unsupported assertions in one sentence. I'm impressed. > adopted Korean daughter could contribute no non-western per- > spective to the school she sought to leave because she had been > brought to this country at the age of five months. No matter; she > was of the requisite racial group. When the controversy was > reported in the newspapers, she was allowed to transfer. But the > episode demonstrates that the multiculturalists are sometimes will- > ing to force a person into a cultural identity that person does not > have on the grounds of ancestry alone. This is not "multiculturalist." This is "racist." See the foreword to Ronald Takaki's book A Different Mirror for a more accurate view of how multiculturalists would approach the situation. Drop the bullshit strwa man. Similarly, I would also call Bork and Bernstein "racist" for trying to foist some silly personal notion of "European culture" on me merely because I'm a standard-issue white mongrel. I'm a modern citizen of the world. I owe no "uncritical adulation" to anybody. > The quality of education must necessarily decline as students > turn from substantive subjects to ideologically driven resentments, Such as "uncritical adulation"? > in the case of non-whites, or guilt, in the case of whites. Although > white students are often required to study America's "oppressed" > subcultures and their allegedly superior qualities, it is regarded as > racist to require that non-whites study Western culture. That was No. The contrived notion of "Western culture" is racist, not the notion that we should study it. There is world history, which we will study, and which we know more about than this bigoted buffoon Robert Bork. > the meaning of the radicals' attack on Stanford's Western Culture > program in which students were required to sample the writings > of men who had helped shape Western culture-Shakespeare, > Dante, Locke, etc. A black student who objected to the program > said its message was "Nigger, go home." That exclusionary inter- > pretation is precisely the opposite of the real message of the pro- > gram, which was "Let us study what we have in common as > inheritors of a tradition." Typical BS from someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. So now, as a result of the "radicals' attack on Stanford's Western Culture program," what do Stanford students study? Shakespeare, Dante, Locke, etc. Also Equiano and Buddha. We only gain. What is this "inheritors of a tradition" notion? Who died and left me Shakespeare, and why? What do you mean "we," white man? > The black student's objection follows > from the perverse teaching of multiculturalism that those who > have been "traditionally excluded" must now reject inclusion. There is no such teaching. > This has the odd effect of damaging all groups. The insistence > on separate ethnic identities means that persons in each group can > study their own culture, often in highly flattering and historically > inaccurate form. Damn, Bork and Bernstein are projecting *again*. It's not modern multiculturalist scholarchip that does this, but a bigoted rooting out of other than "European culture," by which they really mean whatever parts they find politically convenient at the time. If Locke is in fashion, "European culture" means Locke. If Hitler is in fashion, "European culture" means Hitler. > everywhere. In New York state it is official educational doctrine > that the United States Constitution was heavily influenced by the > political arrangements of the Iroquois Confederacy. The official > promulgation of this idea was not due to any research that dis- > closed its truth. Nor has any other state adopted this nonsensical > idea. New York adopted it because the Iroquois mounted an > intensive lobbying campaign directed at the State Department of > Education. Far from this being a beneficial borrowing from > another culture, it was a detrimental forcing of a false notion by > one culture on another. BWAHAHAHA!!! I love it when the completely ignorant presume to tell us about history. Bork even gets current history wrong. The "nonsensical idea" that the Iroquois Confederacy influenced the Constitution comes from the fucking Federalist Papers and the proceedings of the Constitutional Convention. You'll find this "nonsensical idea" in the works of such pillars of multiculturalism as James Q. Wilson. As I recall, it's even in De Toqueville. I learned about this "nonsensical idea" in 5th grade in a conservative private school in conservative San Diego, California, more than a decade before this intensive lobbying campaign. For your information, the Iroquois Confederacy and its political constitution were very important in the French and Indian War, in which George Washington first distinguished himself. All of the Founders from the nortern states would have been familiar with it. Recognition of this fact is not an act of politically correct tokenism; it is simply objective history. Now, objective history may not have the kindest things to say about the autonomy of the Iroquois Confederacy -- they were in large part a pawn manipulated in turn by the French, British, and Colonials -- but important they were. Dismissing their importance as a "false notion" without even a nod to the true history of the period tells far more about Bork's bigotry than it does about multiculturalism. > John Leo notes that the decision "shows > that some school authorities, eager to avoid minority group pres > sure and rage, are now willing to treat the curriculum as a prize in > an ethnic spoils system." That it is ideologcally driven by guilt > and not an attempt to pacify a large bloc of voters is clear from the > fact that there are only a little more than 38,000 Indians in New > York state, most of whom probably have no interest in the myth of > the Iroquois and the Constitution. It could also be that this "myth" is and has always been known to be objective historical truth. Didn't think of that one, did you, Borkie? > This sort of thing is happening across the country as various Yeah, yeah. This is getting boring. > ethnic groups and feminists demand that history be rewritten > according to their party lines. When that happens, I flame them. I'll also flame Bork when he tries to simply *erase* history, seeking instead "uncritical adulation" of myths he fancies. > This not only debases history but > pits the various groups against one another as they struggle for > space in the textbooks. New York's "interest in history is not as an > intellectual discipline," Schlesinger writes, "but rather as social and > psychological therapy whose primary purpose is to raise the self- > esteem of children from minority groups." Either this Schlesinger is someone other than the well-known Arthur M. Schlesinger, who has written on the importance of the Iroquois Confederacy (for example, flip through pages 80-100 of *The Almanac of American History*, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., ed.), or Bork is being a little misleading in his quoting here. > Those who have traditionally been excluded because of race > or gender are not helped by multiculturalists who teach them that > European culture and standards are the cause of their difficulties > and may be jettisoned, that history has no content aside from its > ideological usefulness, that there are different ways of knowing, > that linear thinking is a white male stratagem to oppress those > who are not white or male, that standard English is no better than > a variety of dialects such as "black English." To the extent the tra- > ditionally excluded believe any of this, they are additionally handi- > capped in life, and further excluded. To the extent they are taught > that self-esteem comes before achievement and leads to achieve- > ment, they are lied to and held back. Since this extent is zero, I see no problem. Thanks for posting this. Beats a poke in the eye. -rich From tcmay at got.net Sun Jan 5 01:41:23 1997 From: tcmay at got.net (Timothy C. May) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 01:41:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Atilla's opinion: "maybe Tim is the problem" In-Reply-To: <32CF51BA.1B7C@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: At 7:41 AM +0000 1/5/97, attila wrote: ... > swipe), and then there was Dr. Fred Cohen who attacled Tim on a > regular basis (but he was easy enough to get rid of after I checked > his credentials and exposed why he was fired from his professorship), > and now we have Dimitri and several more who are worse. Dimitri at > least has some good information and arguments. > > you know, I've always given Tim a little slack on his occasionally > over-biased opinions, but... maybe Tim is the problem; he just seems > to bring out the 'best' in people like Dimitri and now the list has > turned into a free-for-all of the outrageously obscene. Fatuous nonsense. Blaming me for the spewings of Detweiler and Vulis is bad enough, but claiming that Dr. Fred Cohen was in a battle with me, or Aga is in a battle with me, is absolute fabrication. I don't recall many interactions, if any, with Fred Cohen, and "aga" goes straight into my trash can. Attila did not mention David Sternlight, and recall that Sternlight and I did not get into any flames, either. Nor did he mention Phill Hallam-Baker, with whom I have also had no flames. In fact, I haven't been a party to many of the flames, at least not as a poster. Not with Hallam-Baker, not with Cohen, not with Sternlight...in each case, many others were involved in extensive flames. This leaves Detweiler and Vulis. The archives contain the truth on why these guys fixated on me as the object of their frustrations with the list, should anyone seek the truth. As to why my comments bring responses, there are likelier explanations than Attila's "maybe Tim is the problem." For one thing, I write a lot of essays, and launch a lot of threads...this alone implies responses are likely. For another thing, I clearly state forceful opinions...not everyone agrees with them, and on just about any such clearly stated opinion it is likely that at least someone will disagree strongly, denounce me as a racist or speciesist or elitist or whatever. Finally, for reasons I won't speculate on here, a number of folks seem to think of me as being somwhow closely linked to the list itself (more than just posting frequency). Thus, when they lash out at the list they fixate on me in some way as representing the things they dislike about the list. (The other list founders, Eric Hughes, Hugh Daniel, and John Gilmore, are not active on the list. Recall that Detweiler focussed roughly equally on Hughes and myself as his "tormentors," and Vulis is of course even more fixated on Gilmore than he is on me...I'll leave it to the abnormal psych experts to diagnose their problems. So, Attila, still think I'm the problem? Those who think so are invited to add me forthwith to their kill files. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay at got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway." From haystack at cow.net Sun Jan 5 01:58:38 1997 From: haystack at cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 01:58:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <9701050942.AA14554@cow.net> Timothy C[retin] May was born when his mother was on the toilet. ____ \ _/__ Timothy C[retin] May \\ / \/ From shamrock at netcom.com Sun Jan 5 02:05:32 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 02:05:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Your Comment Here) Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970105020032.0068718c@192.100.81.126> At 07:41 AM 1/5/97 +0000, attila wrote: > you know, I've always given Tim a little slack on his occasionally > over-biased opinions, but... maybe Tim is the problem; he just seems > to bring out the 'best' in people like Dimitri and now the list has > turned into a free-for-all of the outrageously obscene. You got to be kidding. Tim is not the problem on this list. As any long time reader of this list surely knows, I do not always agree with Tim. But it is Tim who writes the well thought out essays, and it are Vulis and Aga who post day after day that "John Gilmore is a cock sucking faggot", "Queers must be banned from the Internet" and "Timmy is a convicted child molester that likes to fuck little children up the ass". Let's be clear about this: Tim May is a major asset to this list. Vulis and Aga are slime. [Note, I am unlikely to read any replies to this post since I filter on Vulis and similar vermin in the headers _and_ body text.] -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From aga at dhp.com Sun Jan 5 03:20:13 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 03:20:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Problems are Gay In-Reply-To: <7c11ZD47w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: Most of the time, the problems are Gay... On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >From csm-tkt at support.psi.com Thu Jan 2 15:36:04 1997 > Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) > via UUCP; Thu, 02 Jan 97 16:36:55 EST > for system > Received: from support.psi.com by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via SMTP; > id AA06690 for postmaster; Thu, 2 Jan 97 15:36:04 -0500 > Received: by support.psi.com (8.6.12/PSI) > id PAA23158; Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:36:02 -0500 > Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 15:36:02 -0500 > Message-Id: <199701022036.PAA23158 at support.psi.com> > From: Customer Support Mgmt Tickets > To: postmaster at dm.com > Cc: abuse at psi.com > Subject: csm-00974 (ticket update) dns-77660 (ticket update) Can you help? > > Ticket #csm-00974 01/02/97-15:35:37 mikea SUBJECT: dns-77660 (ticket update) Can you help? > Posted by: Michael Abelson > ---------- > > > This is to inform you that we have received complaints > about traffic apparently originating in your domain. These > messages are unwelcome intrusions that violate unwritten rules > of the Internet, and are strongly resented. Please confirm > that you are aware of these complaints and are taking measures > to stop this practice. I have attached a portion of a complaint > for your information. > > Thanks for your help on this issue. > > Sincerely, > > PSINet Customer Support > > > > >I had lunch with Gilmore once. He slurps rather disgustingly when he eats. > >I suppose he slurps the same way when he sucks big dicks in San Francisco. > > > > >Much of the time on the Internet, when some asshole pulls plugs and tries to > >silence dissent, he turns out to be Gay. In particular, King John Lack-Clue ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ I rest my case. > >Gilmore, the Supreme and Absolute 12" Ruler of the "cypher punks", is an > >effeminate, limp-wristed, self-admitted and -exposed cocksucking bitch. > > > > > From ark at paranoid.convey.ru Sun Jan 5 09:26:46 1997 From: ark at paranoid.convey.ru (ArkanoiD) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 09:26:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Returned mail: Mailbox full, Please try later. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701051724.UAA25277@paranoid.convey.ru> Good news ;) Forwarded message: > From MAILER-DAEMON at paranoid.convey.ru Sun Jan 5 20:18:11 1997 > Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 09:17:36 -0800 (PST) > From: Mailer-Daemon at ix.netcom.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem) > Subject: Returned mail: Mailbox full, Please try later. > Message-Id: <199701051717.JAA15268 at ixmail5.ix.netcom.com> > To: > Auto-Submitted: auto-generated (failure) > > The original message was received at Sun, 5 Jan 1997 09:17:21 -0800 (PST) > from paranoid.convey.ru [195.212.156.196] > > ----- The following addresses have delivery notifications ----- > (unrecoverable error) > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > 554 ... Mailbox full, Please try later. > > ----- Original message follows ----- > > Return-Path: > Received: from paranoid.convey.ru (paranoid.convey.ru [195.212.156.196]) by ixmail5.ix.netcom.com (8.7.5/SMI-4.1/Netcom) > id JAA15229; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 09:17:21 -0800 (PST) > Received: (from ark at localhost) by paranoid.convey.ru (8.7.5/8.7.3) id UAA25246 for jguarnie at ix7.ix.netcom.com; Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:16:24 +0300 > From: ArkanoiD > Message-Id: <199701051716.UAA25246 at paranoid.convey.ru> > Subject: Re: Thermojetic Herbal BreakThrough!!! > To: jguarnie at ix.netcom.com > Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:16:22 +0300 (MSK) > In-Reply-To: <199612292025.MAA28652 at dfw-ix11.ix.netcom.com> from "jguarnie at ix7.ix.netcom.com" at Dec 29, 96 03:31:24 pm > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > Fuck off with your shit. > > > > > ******SORRY FOR THE INTRUSION THIS IS A ONE TIME MESSAGE***** > > ********YOU WILL NOT BE CONTACTED AGAIN******** > > > > !!!!!!!!!! THERMOJETICS HERBAL BREAKTHROUGH !!!!!!!!!! > > [skip..] -- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ {::} {::} {::} CU in Hell _| o |_ | | _|| | / _||_| |_ |_ |_ (##) (##) (##) /Arkan#iD |_ o _||_| _||_| / _| | o |_||_||_| [||] [||] [||] Do i believe in Bible? Hell,man,i've seen one! From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 09:53:24 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 09:53:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Problems are Gay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CFEA43.28CD@gte.net> aga wrote: > Most of the time, the problems are Gay... > On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > >Gilmore, the Supreme and Absolute 12" Ruler of the "cypher punks", is an > > >effeminate, limp-wristed, self-admitted and -exposed cocksucking bitch. Gilmore, 12" ?? If that were the case, he'd have *something* to be proud of, anyway. From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 10:00:40 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 10:00:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Your Comment Here) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32CFEBFB.7AE3@gte.net> attila wrote: > On Sat, 4 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > > "Before I joined CypherPunks, I couldn't even 'spell' cocksucker. > > Now,...(Your Comment Here)." > To be a ruler of men, you need at least 12 inches.... I don't think you're gonna find it here. My former girlfriend used to say "What's white and 10 inches long?" (answer: nothing) From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 10:05:21 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 10:05:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hardening lists against spam attacks In-Reply-To: <199701031110.LAA31173@brd.ie> Message-ID: <32CFED0B.6664@gte.net> Frank O'Dwyer wrote: > > [...] the drivel that comes from some of our more prolific posters is > > best handled by filtering by the list members themselves. (I currently > > have 3 of them going directly to the trash. Perhaps aga should get > > kickbacks from Qualcomm. He managed to sell a copy of EudoraPro.) > It would be nice if each user could install filters on Majordomo itself. > Not only would we not need to buy Eudora Pro, but we wouldn't have to > pay to download messages we didn't want to read, and without having > to employ a moderator (censor). The most serious drawback > I can think of is the slight loss of privacy involved in revealing > one's filtering preferences to the server [snip] The most serious drawback is the precedent you'd be setting. From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 10:27:50 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 10:27:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: <199701050649.WAA19140@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <32CFF251.1058@gte.net> jim bell wrote: > At 10:57 PM 1/4/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > >Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >> I used to be at 212-666-6984 for some 7 years. > > Aha! > You figured it out, too, huh?!? Take the word "devil," remove the > vowels and you get dvl. Rearrange slightly, and it's "dlv." I can't resist this any longer. Pity the poor slobs who have me in the filter. 1. Dale Thorn is very similar to Damien Thorn. 2. The Roman numerals in my name add up to 555. For a 'C' programmer, this can be the equivalent of 666 for a Basic programmer, taking one digit at a time. 3. If you sign (with a pen) the name quickly, using counterclockwise loops only, it will look exactly like 666, which BTW was a significant paragraph in a lawsuit between myself and a former employer (they initiated the paragraph). From roy at sendai.scytale.com Sun Jan 5 10:35:18 1997 From: roy at sendai.scytale.com (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 10:35:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701041932.NAA32121@einstein> Message-ID: <970105.012718.4D8.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In list.cypherpunks, ravage at einstein.ssz.com writes: > Forwarded message: > >> Date: Sat, 04 Jan 1997 10:24:21 -0800 >> From: Dale Thorn >> >> C'mon Gary, why would anyone want to bother with all of this crap? >> Chip implants are already in millions of pets. It's simple, cheap, >> and there's no work for the owner. > > And there are several standards which are NOT compatible. Simply putting a > chip in your pet (or child) is not sufficient to guarantee their return. I would really like to see some statistics on the number of "lost children" who have suffered (any given incommodation) exclusively due to their inability to be positively linked with some True Idendity. Most of the English-speaking children with which I'm aquainted can answer the question "What's your name?". - -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy at scytale.com DNRC Minister Plenipotentiary of All Things Confusing, Software Division PGP Public Key fingerprint = 31 86 EC B9 DB 76 A7 54 13 0B 6A 6B CC 09 18 B6 Key available from pubkey at scytale.com, which works now -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMs9ZERvikii9febJAQFdSwP/Tvwvd/cKyU3AIZGnxzawB7TvtZzxix0n lfORbWDAdt6NEPSST6QJKNFhfmedk34OdaeppwXiQd3S/mqFksXzctDr3oPRlgOz uHxaHow9sGPJsraqIbXehGtbg1xBnMYrVLjEx2wnRB2yeTWr8jAWfqDrza+yGtKc CNU0n3z4zig= =3ElR -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 10:40:37 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 10:40:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: OCR and Machine Readable Text In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970102225436.01072284@mail.teleport.com> Message-ID: <32CFF545.C27@gte.net> Steve Stewart wrote: > I have used OCR a fair bit, and I agree with you, I think you're being > generous by saying even a 65% accuracy rate. I think our OCR technology > today is pathetic, and it would be quicker just to type the damn > documents ourselves. I've used a bunch of different packages from guys > like HP, and others. I certainly don't know what Alan Olsen was using. [snip] I needed OCR to create indexed text databases of federal documents, particularly legislation. The amount of hand editing required is enormous. That alone would justify (in a sense) the use of off- shore labor. From iverson at usa.net Sun Jan 5 11:00:09 1997 From: iverson at usa.net (Casey Iverson) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 11:00:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Problems are Gay Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970105120913.0069c110@pop.netaddress.com> At 06:20 AM 1/5/97 -0500, you wrote: >Most of the time, the problems are Gay... > >I rest my case. > The arrogant, clueless, ignorant, homophobic Vulis tentacle has no idea what the problem is. From gnu at toad.com Sun Jan 5 11:39:58 1997 From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 11:39:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan Message-ID: <199701051939.LAA05342@toad.com> I agree with Sandy Sandfort and many others that things have gotten way out of hand on the list. He and I feel that the only proposed solutions likely to succeed involve inserting human judgement in the cypherpunks posting process, rather than mere automation. So I am supporting this experiment, primarily by setting up a few more mailing lists on Toad and by automatically moving the current set of subscribers to the moderated list. You will be able to move yourselves back to the unedited list if you don't want to participate in the experiment, or if, partway through, you decide you don't like the results. Sandy will be gone til Tuesday evening, so don't expect further answers from him (or many from me, I'm swamped with other activities) until then. Meanwhile I'm interested in your discussion (on the list) of the idea. We'll modify it before starting, with good ideas from you. John Gilmore ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, Like many of you, I have become very disenchanted with the quality of discourse on this list. As others have pointed out, I believe a great deal of the blame can be laid on the lack of civility between list (and non-list) members. I think this, in turn, is the result of the list being open. As such, it has no feedback mechanisms to discourage gratuitous insults and personal attacks. The result has been an escalation of such behavior--something that no amount of personal mail filtering can rectify. Recently, I made a couple of rough proposals to John Gilmore to see if there was some way to reverse this trend. We have gone back and forth on several issues, but we finally reached an agreement whereby I would partially moderate the Cypherpunk list for a one-month test period. If the consensus of list members is that the test is going well, it can be extended. If members think it sucks, it can be dropped or modified. Even before we start, though, you may wish to contribute suggestions. The following is our general plan. I'm sure there will be questions that have to be answered as they arise, but the basis outline is a follows: 1) The test will run from January 11 through February 12. 2) I will review all incoming messages for purposes of preserving decorum and reducing obviously unrelated spam. Other then that, I will not overly concern myself with off-topic posts. I will, however, expurgate all posts containing flames, insults and other irrelevant personal attacks, as well as spams, before forwarding the remaining posts to the Cypherpunk list. 3) Cypherpunks who wish to read all posts to the list may do so by taking advantage of either of two optional lists. The first (cypherpunk-flames at toad.com), will consist solely of messages expurgated from the main Cypherpunks list. (Those who subscribe to "flames" will be able to easily monitor my moderating decisions.) The second (cypherpunks-unedited at toad.com), will contain all posts sent to Cypherpunks. It will be the equivalent of the current open, unmoderated list. It will appeal to those who don't want list moderation. 4) During the test month, polite discussion of the test will always be on topic. In the last few days before the 10th of February, I will call for opinions as to whether moderation should be continued, modified or eliminated. John has agreed to abide by the consensus of the group with one proviso. Because of the large volume of bandwidth eaten by the lists, he does not want to maintain both the "flame" and "unedited" versions of the list. If list members decide to continue to have the list moderated, one of those lists will probably have to go. 5) If list members decide on a moderated list, I will be happy to assist in the ongoing process. Though I will continue to be available for duty as moderator from time to time, we will need a set of rotating volunteers to take turns acting as moderator. Volunteers are always welcome. 6) Because every message submitted to Cypherpunk will be posted to two of the three sister lists, I don't intend to lose much sleep over whether or not this or that moderating decision was perfect. I will do the best job I can, within the constraints listed here. If I err, it isn't fatal. Everyone who wants one will have two Cypherpunk venues for their posts. Sounds fair enough to me. What do you think? S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PS: The new lists aren't set up yet, so there's no point in trying to subscribe or unsubscribe to them yet. We'll let you know when they are working. -- John From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Sun Jan 5 12:03:56 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 12:03:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Screed] Re: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970105115743.01082678@mail.teleport.com> At 12:42 PM 1/3/97, Gary Aikens wrote: >...and pets are lost or turn up missing every year! >Protect your loved ones today! How much of each? (I forgot... Children and pets are interchangable.) >Think about all the things you do to protect your loved ones. Isn't there >one more thing you should do? Wrap them in aluminum foil to protect them from the bogon radiation coming from this message? >Child and Pet ID Kits have been around for years, but most of them haven't >changed with the years. Traditional ID Kits allow you to compile valuable >information about your child or pet that you can use in the event your child or >pet is missing. We are responding to the rapid changes in technology. We know >that any ID Kit just isn't good enough. It has to be marketed on The Internet(tm)! (With special THX-1138 SPAM additives for that special zing!) What new buzzword has not been exploited for the purposes of seperating the excesivly gulible from their money? >Our ID Kit is quite different! You supply us with up to three photos and pertinent >information about your child or pet and we create a SAFETYDISK. As brought to you in the early 80s by "Men without Clues". >In PC or MAC >format, SAFETYDISK is a 3 1/2" disk that contains photos and valuable >information that could help law enforcement agencies in the search for a missing >child or pet. "I am sorry that we cannot find your lost loved one as this disk has sector errors." None of which require purchace of your product. (You forgot to remind us of all the HORRIBLE things that could happen if we do not buy your "product".) >What makes our kit so unique is that each SAFETYDISK is actually >pre-formatted for the World Wide Web. You store this "Vital Information" as HTML?!?!?? >SAFETYDISK can be put on any >Internet server within seconds and displayed to millions and millions of >people >who might spot your child or pet! If they go to that web page. Few, if any, web pages gets that many hits in a short period of time. (Or a year for that matter.) They have a better chance of getting spotted by paintball guns! What you are selling is a web page substitute for a milk carton! (Without having that useful feature of holding milk.) I guess you had to find some use for that copy of Frontpage 2.0 you got for Christmas... >For more information, visit our website at http://www.mvisibility.com/sd/ Maybe you can find someone you know and/or love... (Or at least a pet.) Then again, maybe not... Or you can learn how, by sending in your children or pets to the top address on this list, you can get 3,125 loved-ones and pets ABSOLUTLY FREE! (All it takes is selling your soul to the demons of Multi-level Marketing.) >Thanks, But no thanks. >Gary Aikens >President, SafetyDisk, Inc. and clueless spammer. "I loved annoying people so much I bought the company!" --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 5 13:10:43 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 13:10:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701051939.LAA05342@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701052106.PAA00804@manifold.algebra.com> my moderation bot, STUMP, may be just for you. It is now used in four usenet newsgroups (comp.os.ms-windows.win95.moderated, soc.culture.russian.moderated, misc.invest.financial-plan, soc.religion.paganism) and it can also handle mailing lists. features include preapproved list of trusted posters, list of suspicious keywords, optional (at the posters' discretion) positive poster authentication via PGP, signing of approvals with PGPMoose, multiple moderators, moderators' mailing list, and much more. There is a plugin for Netscape that I called Modscape that allows moderators to work with a pretty Netscape-like user interface for moderating (see the picture at the web site). Modscape currently works under linux and can be easily ported to any other unix where netscape plugins are supported. http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov (go to STUMP page) John Gilmore wrote: > > I agree with Sandy Sandfort and many others that things have gotten > way out of hand on the list. He and I feel that the only proposed > solutions likely to succeed involve inserting human judgement in the > cypherpunks posting process, rather than mere automation. So I am > supporting this experiment, primarily by setting up a few more mailing > lists on Toad and by automatically moving the current set of > subscribers to the moderated list. You will be able to move > yourselves back to the unedited list if you don't want to participate > in the experiment, or if, partway through, you decide you don't like > the results. > > Sandy will be gone til Tuesday evening, so don't expect further > answers from him (or many from me, I'm swamped with other activities) > until then. Meanwhile I'm interested in your discussion (on the list) > of the idea. We'll modify it before starting, with good ideas from you. > > John Gilmore > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, > > Like many of you, I have become very disenchanted with the > quality of discourse on this list. As others have pointed > out, I believe a great deal of the blame can be laid on the > lack of civility between list (and non-list) members. I > think this, in turn, is the result of the list being open. > As such, it has no feedback mechanisms to discourage > gratuitous insults and personal attacks. The result has > been an escalation of such behavior--something that no > amount of personal mail filtering can rectify. > > Recently, I made a couple of rough proposals to John Gilmore > to see if there was some way to reverse this trend. We have > gone back and forth on several issues, but we finally > reached an agreement whereby I would partially moderate the > Cypherpunk list for a one-month test period. If the > consensus of list members is that the test is going well, it > can be extended. If members think it sucks, it can be > dropped or modified. Even before we start, though, you may > wish to contribute suggestions. > > The following is our general plan. I'm sure there will be > questions that have to be answered as they arise, but the > basis outline is a follows: > > 1) The test will run from January 11 through February 12. > > 2) I will review all incoming messages for purposes of > preserving decorum and reducing obviously unrelated spam. Other > then that, I will not overly concern myself with off-topic posts. > I will, however, expurgate all posts containing flames, insults > and other irrelevant personal attacks, as well as spams, before > forwarding the remaining posts to the Cypherpunk list. > > 3) Cypherpunks who wish to read all posts to the list may do so > by taking advantage of either of two optional lists. The first > (cypherpunk-flames at toad.com), will consist solely of messages > expurgated from the main Cypherpunks list. (Those who subscribe > to "flames" will be able to easily monitor my moderating > decisions.) The second (cypherpunks-unedited at toad.com), will > contain all posts sent to Cypherpunks. It will be the equivalent > of the current open, unmoderated list. It will appeal to those > who don't want list moderation. > > 4) During the test month, polite discussion of the test will > always be on topic. In the last few days before the 10th of > February, I will call for opinions as to whether moderation > should be continued, modified or eliminated. John has agreed to > abide by the consensus of the group with one proviso. Because of > the large volume of bandwidth eaten by the lists, he does not > want to maintain both the "flame" and "unedited" versions of the > list. If list members decide to continue to have the list > moderated, one of those lists will probably have to go. > > 5) If list members decide on a moderated list, I will be happy > to assist in the ongoing process. Though I will continue to be > available for duty as moderator from time to time, we will need a > set of rotating volunteers to take turns acting as moderator. > Volunteers are always welcome. > > 6) Because every message submitted to Cypherpunk will be posted > to two of the three sister lists, I don't intend to lose much > sleep over whether or not this or that moderating decision was > perfect. I will do the best job I can, within the constraints > listed here. If I err, it isn't fatal. Everyone who wants one > will have two Cypherpunk venues for their posts. Sounds fair > enough to me. What do you think? > > > S a n d y > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > PS: The new lists aren't set up yet, so there's no point in trying > to subscribe or unsubscribe to them yet. We'll let you know when they > are working. -- John > - Igor. From azur at netcom.com Sun Jan 5 13:14:42 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 13:14:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Judge Bork on Ebonics Message-ID: Rich, Thanks for your passionate and intelligent response. Before I attempt to address some of your objections to the passages Mr. Bork's book, let me say that while I agree with some of his observations I find his objections and perscriptions (including a legislative check on Supreme Court decisions) too little too late. BTW, the lead in and Bork material was taken from an article on alt.libertian (i.e., not my words or sentiment). >From the book's liner notes: The root of our decline, Bork argues, is the rise of modern liberalism, which stresses the dual forces of radical egalitarianism (the equality of outcomes rather than opportunities) and radical individualism (the drastic reduction of the limits of personal gratification). The roots of modern liberalism are deeply embedded in the past two and a half centuries-and perhaps-arise from the very nature of Western civilization itself. [snip] >> Vietnamese and Polish children were put into English-speaking >> classes and were competent into English long before the Hispanics >> in bilingual schools. > >No evidence for this assertion exists. See, generally, "The Failure of Bilingual Education," ed. Jorge Amselle (Washington, D.C.: Center for Equal Opportunities, 1996). > >> That leaves the partisans of bilingualism only >> the choice of saying that Hispanic children are not as capable as >> others or admitting that they, the educators, are driven by hostility >> to American culture, and the rewards to be had by teachers' unions >> and educational bureaucrats. > >No. I choose to call you on the bullshit assertion that Hispanic >children don't learn English. This prejudice is rooted in the small >but visible segment of the Hispanic population that comprises recent >immigrants. It is indubitably true that illegal immigrants doing odd >jobs and domestic work -- the segment of the Hispanic population most >visible to sensitive anglos -- tend not to speak English. >Extrapolations from this population, though, are invalid. > >> Often, the bilingualists do not care whether immigrant chil- >> dren learn English. The key to success for the students is "self- >> esteem. . . . Children do badly in school because of their feelings >> of 'shame' at belonging to a minority group rather than the 'domi- >> nant group.' For the children to do better, teachers must "con- >> sciously challenge the power structure both in their classrooms >> and schools and in the society at large." As Richard Bernstein >> writes, "Bilingual education ... is an act of rebellion against white, >> Anglo cultural domination." > >Note the only evidence offered by Bork to bolster this straw man >he's building is a similar slew of bald, unsupported assertions by a >friend of his. He might as well be quoting himself. See Richard Berstein, "Dictatorship of the Virtue: Multiculturalism and the Battle for America's Future," (New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1994), p. 244. The interior quotation is from Jim Cummins, "Empowering Minority Students," California Association for Bilingual Education, Sacramento, 1989, p. ix. [snip] > >> Public dissatisfaction with the linguistic fracturing of society >> has led to calls for an English-only amendment to the Constitu- >> tion. The frustration is understandable, but there is no need to >> amend the Constitution to achieve an English-speaking nation. All >> that need be done is the abolition of bilingual education and the >> repeal of the Voting Rights Act's requirement of different language >> ballots. > >You'd better hurry, too, so that you can disenfranchise people before >they know about it. > >> once they begin to see its results. Immigrant parents want their >> children to learn English and become Americans. The opposition >> to that, manifested in bilingual education, comes from American >> elites who form an adversarial culture, alienated from the culture >> of the West and wishing to weaken it. > >Who are these "American elites"? Who's in on the conspiracy? What's >in it for them? Ah, a very good question, and one which Bork spends a considerable time upon. In the short, they are the radicals of the '60s who have taken over or heavily modified the cultural institutions they once sought to destroy (e.g., Clinton, many intellectuals, the media (esp. Hollywood), university faculties, etc.). Special attention is given the Supreme Court (although obviously they are older than the '60s radicals) and its misguided and, in his opinion, unconstitutional basis supporting many liberal decisions (e.g., abortion and affirmative action) in the past 20 or so years. > >> In 1989, the Commissioners Task Force on Minorities in New >> York concluded: "African Americans, Asian Americans, Puerto >> kicans/Latinos, and Native Americans have all been the victims of >> an intellectual and educational oppression that has characterized >> the culture and institutions of the United States and the European >> American world for centuries." All young people were being >> "miseducated" because of a "systematic bias toward European cul- >> ture and its derivatives." Bernstein asks, rhetorically, "Could the >> multicultural animus against 'European culture and its derivatives' >> emerge more clearly than that? Here we have a direct statement >> that the Western culture is harmful to nonwhite children ." > >The interesting thing about this attack is that you need to accept >the Task Force's mode of analysis in order to accept Bernstein's >conclusion. What if you don't? What if you say that this "European >culture and its derivatives" thing is bullshit, all we really have is >modern culture, and be done with it? Then Bernstein's statement and >the Task Force's statments are equally nonsensical. True, but its not clear what "modern culture" is, as its constantly evolving. As you correctly point out, and Bork discusses elsewhere, there is no single "Eurpoean" culture. However, no society has prospered by failing to formally educate its youth in its cultural basis. Without substantial cultural unity a fractured and contentious society is a likely result. In Federalist No. 2, Publius (John Jay) wrote: Providence has been pleased to give this one connected coun- try, to one united people, a people decended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same reli- gion, attached to the same princinple of government, very simi- lar in their manners and customs... This country and this people seem to have been made for each other, and it appears as if it was the design of Providence, that an inheritance so proper and convenient for a band of bretheren, united to each other by the strongest ties, should never be split into a number of unsocial, jealous and alien sovereignties. Despite the fact that we have increasingly become a hetrogeneous society, our culture and law is clearly Protestent English-based. It was not European or, as we now say, Eurocenteric. -- Steve From vin at shore.net Sun Jan 5 13:44:23 1997 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 13:44:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: C'punks "moderation" experiment In-Reply-To: <199701051939.LAA05342@toad.com> Message-ID: Thank you. I look forward to more of the best of C'punks, without having the hassle of continually weeding out the vapid bullshit. Apparently because of your philosophical orientation, you have stayed open -- and kept the List open -- to this pattern of eggregious harassment far longer than I would have thought possible. I applaud your patience, but for myself -- I have had more than enough! I think the way you choose to resolve the problem is admirable; indeed, fair beyond belief -- and I wish any masochist who continues to read the completely unmoderated list the best of luck. It has been painful to watch an often-challenging array of voices, from a wide variety of POVs, become swamped by drivel from assholes whose only goal was to burden the List with dung. As was doubtless their goal, they chased many once-faithful readers away. I trust the List will remain open to varied POVs. Sternlight, FC, and any others who might offer substantive challenges to Libertarian boiler-plate should never be feared or denied a hearing. I don't mind strident voices. I enjoy a conflict of ideas. But I abhor the emply spams and automated gratuitous-insult machines we've all had to endure for so long. Suerte, _Vin Vin McLellan + The Privacy Guild + 53 Nichols St., Chelsea, MA 02150 USA <617> 884-5548 From pierre at rahul.net Sun Jan 5 14:08:04 1997 From: pierre at rahul.net (Pierre Uszynski) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 14:08:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701051939.LAA05342@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701052207.AA06475@waltz.rahul.net> > Because of > the large volume of bandwidth eaten by the lists, he does not > want to maintain both the "flame" and "unedited" versions of the > list. If list members decide to continue to have the list > moderated, one of those lists will probably have to go. You could maintain all options *and* still strictly reduce traffic on toad.com by encoding the moderator's decision in a header line. Then letting people subscribe to one of cypherpunks at toad.com or cypherpunks-unedited at toad.com. The first could forward only messages somehow approved, and the other would forward *all* messages, *with the decision shown in the headers*. Those of us who want to use the moderator's decisions as only advisory or who want to monitor the moderation process can subscribe to the full list and use the header in whatever manner we want. If the decision is available as a message header in the full list, there is no need for the "flames" list. The drawback is that the full list is now delayed by the moderation process (for the very few here who still seem to read in real time.) Keeping two versions of the list one delayed and one not delayed is not so good anyway because it makes it harder to use the decision as "advisory". Advantages of moderation headers: a) A more general solution, maybe later letting more than one moderation group step in (should we ever manage to muster that much manpower) maybe even letting people filter (on their own machine) on the basis of several moderator's decisions. At any rate, leaving space for any option we may want later. Initially, subscribing to moderated and flame is equivalent to a header solution. For that matter, it *is* a header solution. b) Strictly reduced traffic on toad.com by keeping some on the full list, and others on the reduced list. No need to ever subscribe to any two lists as the full list would show the moderators' decision(s). c) Keeps the two versions of the list more in sync (same delay), making it painless to switch from one version to the other at any time. 'more reading time' vs 'less volume'. d) If the moderators are into that level of dedication and software complication, they *could* now detail their decision: 'grumph, ok', 'mostly drivel', 'drivel', 'utter drivel', etc... ;-) Otherwise, I fully agree that if some are willing to help filter, I would like to be able to use their review (and I would provide reviews myself now and then), Pierre. pierre at rahul.net From dws at intercom.com Sun Jan 5 14:29:51 1997 From: dws at intercom.com (dws) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 14:29:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Message-ID: Jonathan Littman's book on Kevin Poulsen, "The Watchman : The Twisted Life and Crimes of Serial Hacker Kevin Poulsen" is coming out this month, so I checked into Amazon (http://www.amazon.com) to see if it had been released yet. It has an interesting blurb for the book: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Synopsis: Drawing on exclusive interviews with serial killer Kevin Poulsen, who's ^^^^^^ currently serving time in federal prison, journalist Jonathan Littman takes readers along on the wildest, most colorful crime spree in the annals of cyberspace... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Yikes! Seems this book will have more revelations than I had previously thought. Maybe CoS will take down that page with all the bad stuff they say about him (http://www.theta.com/goodman/crime.htm) now that he's out. -- D. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 5 14:30:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 14:30:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: <32CFF251.1058@gte.net> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > I can't resist this any longer. Pity the poor slobs who have me > in the filter. Fags who claim publicly to *plonk* someone usually lie. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 5 14:30:15 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 14:30:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Your Comment Here) In-Reply-To: <199701050915.DAA28552@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <07q3ZD65w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > attila wrote: > > swipe), and then there was Dr. Fred Cohen who attacled Tim on a > > regular basis (but he was easy enough to get rid of after I checked > > his credentials and exposed why he was fired from his professorship), > > > > Why was Dr. Cohen fired from his professorship? John Gilmore is a very vindictive persons and will go to extreme length to punish his "enemies". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From jimbell at pacifier.com Sun Jan 5 14:40:06 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 14:40:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... Message-ID: <199701052239.OAA00478@mail.pacifier.com> At 10:26 AM 1/5/97 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: >jim bell wrote: >> At 10:57 PM 1/4/97 -0800, Toto wrote: >> >Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >> >> I used to be at 212-666-6984 for some 7 years. > >> > Aha! > >> You figured it out, too, huh?!? Take the word "devil," remove the >> vowels and you get dvl. Rearrange slightly, and it's "dlv." > >I can't resist this any longer. Pity the poor slobs who have me >in the filter. > >1. Dale Thorn is very similar to Damien Thorn. >2. The Roman numerals in my name add up to 555. For a 'C' programmer, > this can be the equivalent of 666 for a Basic programmer, taking > one digit at a time. >3. If you sign (with a pen) the name quickly, using counterclockwise > loops only, it will look exactly like 666, which BTW was a significant > paragraph in a lawsuit between myself and a former employer (they > initiated the paragraph). The devil you say! Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From antimod at nym.alias.net Sun Jan 5 14:43:35 1997 From: antimod at nym.alias.net (Against Moderation) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 14:43:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701051939.LAA05342@toad.com> Message-ID: <19970105224324.3104.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> John Gilmore writes: > I agree with Sandy Sandfort and many others that things have gotten > way out of hand on the list. He and I feel that the only proposed > solutions likely to succeed involve inserting human judgement in the > cypherpunks posting process, rather than mere automation. So I am > supporting this experiment, primarily by setting up a few more mailing > lists on Toad and by automatically moving the current set of > subscribers to the moderated list. You will be able to move > yourselves back to the unedited list if you don't want to participate > in the experiment, or if, partway through, you decide you don't like > the results. Have you considered using a system like NoCeM (see http://www.cm.org)? I think such a system has many advantages over centrally controlled moderation. The basic idea of NoCeM is that instead of moderating a newsgroup or mailing list, people post lists of articles to be ignored, and you can configure your mail/newsreader to pay attention to NoCeM's by whichever people you trust. NoCeM would prevent any message delays which moderation might introduce (sure, I might see the last few hours worth of spam, but at least when I come back after a week away I don't have to wade through a week's worth of "Timmy May hurt my feelings, blah blah blah"). This means the more frequently you read the mailing list, the more spam you will see--quite an acceptable trade-off given that people who check the list often are probably those who would want to avoid message delays. NoCeM would also prevent anyone from accusing you of censorship. Even if such accusations are weeded from the list (via moderation), it's still a drag to lend credibility to such asinine accusations by actually blocking those people's posts. NoCeM would ensure that no one is held legally responsible for the contents of someone else's messages. If we continue to get important messages like implementations of the RC2 and RC4 ciphers, a moderator could be found responsible for approving such an article. Obviously there are some issues related to NoCeM. Not all mail- and newsreaders support NoCeM. However, there are definitely solutions to those problems. For instance, a perl script could be used to delay messages and apply NoCeM's, so that people can subscribe to customized filtered versions of the list. I might even be willing to write such software if there is interest. From markm at voicenet.com Sun Jan 5 14:50:40 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 14:50:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701051939.LAA05342@toad.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, John Gilmore, quoting Sandy Sandfort, wrote: > 3) Cypherpunks who wish to read all posts to the list may do so > by taking advantage of either of two optional lists. The first > (cypherpunk-flames at toad.com), will consist solely of messages > expurgated from the main Cypherpunks list. (Those who subscribe > to "flames" will be able to easily monitor my moderating > decisions.) The second (cypherpunks-unedited at toad.com), will > contain all posts sent to Cypherpunks. It will be the equivalent > of the current open, unmoderated list. It will appeal to those > who don't want list moderation. To reduce the load on toad.com, I think it would be better to have just "cypherpunks" and "cypherpunks-unedited". Messages approved for the moderated list would be tagged with an "Approved:" header and sent to both lists. Rejected messages would still go to the unedited list, but would not have an "Approved:" header (this would, of course, require that the moderation software rename or delete "Approved:" headers). The only problem with this is that the lag time for distribution of the unedited list might increase. > 6) Because every message submitted to Cypherpunk will be posted > to two of the three sister lists, I don't intend to lose much > sleep over whether or not this or that moderating decision was > perfect. I will do the best job I can, within the constraints > listed here. If I err, it isn't fatal. Everyone who wants one > will have two Cypherpunk venues for their posts. Sounds fair > enough to me. What do you think? I think it's a good idea. As long as an unedited version continues to be available, it shouldn't effect people who want unfiltered list traffic. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtAw8SzIPc7jvyFpAQGIqwgAhXQ373u94xnUag34nzusF6L6w4b9ml26 IiA4QbdXqtJWq+9wgG7znnobbL+y9EsMc9CzjAslwcyh7WMYTxRPXlM1z1r/m/Jm 8j6MJW5UHbhHZoTZiLdXYJqhBm3saPgSVqUle4+0dJ06pzvG6FrARB1SitFbnxn6 C+lKBLWbBmF1tBVzz/tswetNJLf9hcn1P1NeVLNHgMFOYfr46tZOuxkUqYWM1+UI VSp9i7U79seLAo2C9aopr7t6JyjSMAXA0EG9swwJ4omoQeePQTYRa2URjOgQ0VJx zWHKzX99b34BvhGhenFDyj/cHSDXoHznLNr6eZaRar7381cUkobC7g== =MoCG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From richieb at teleport.com Sun Jan 5 15:12:00 1997 From: richieb at teleport.com (Rich Burroughs) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 15:12:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970105151251.00969b90@mail.teleport.com> At 05:34 PM 1/5/97 -0500, dws wrote: [snip] >Drawing on exclusive interviews with serial killer Kevin Poulsen, who's > ^^^^^^ >currently serving time in federal prison, journalist Jonathan Littman >takes readers along on the wildest, most colorful crime spree in the >annals of cyberspace... >-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- And I thought he just rigged a few radio contests. Maybe there was more in that storage compartment the cops searched than computer stuff... >Yikes! Seems this book will have more revelations than I had previously >thought. Maybe CoS will take down that page with all the bad stuff they >say about him (http://www.theta.com/goodman/crime.htm) now that he's out. BTW, I've see people make links to that article, even on pages purporting to support hackers. That article originally occurred in "Freedom" (sic) magazine, published by CoS (they have a trademark on the word "freedom"...), and it had a few insidious purposes, IMHO: 1) To whip up fear about Internet crime, to aid the CoS strategy of branding the critics who have allegedly violated their copyrights as computer criminals. 2) To smear (or "dead agent" in CoS lingo) Dennis Erlich, a critic that CoS is suing for copyright infringement, by placing him in the company of some of the country's best known hackers. Dennis is not a hacker by any means -- he didn't even use remailers when he posted Scientology "scriptures." 3) To smear Justin Tanner Peterson ("Agent Steal"). It has been rumored that Peterseon did some wiretapping for a CoS-employed PI in L.A. -- they may have wanted to distance themselves from him, and/or to make him less credible in case he reveals any dealings with them. #3 is pure speculation on my part, but the first will be pretty obvious to people who have followed the Scientology campaign against their Net critics. Personally, I would advise people against linking to this article as a resource about computer crime or hacking. Rich ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb at teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause From raiswell at netspace.net.au Sun Jan 5 15:22:44 1997 From: raiswell at netspace.net.au (Ronald Taylor) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 15:22:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Tell me more Message-ID: <32CF8F1D.4C9C@netspace.net.au> how does it work From mwohler at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 5 15:23:56 1997 From: mwohler at ix.netcom.com (Marc J. Wohler) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 15:23:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970105175238.006a3b9c@popd.ix.netcom.com> I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the quality of our list. From ericm at lne.com Sun Jan 5 16:41:58 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 16:41:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <19970105224324.3104.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199701060041.QAA01983@slack.lne.com> Against Moderation writes: > > Have you considered using a system like NoCeM (see http://www.cm.org)? NoCeM doesn't appear to do mail yet. At least not according to the info on the web site > I think such a system has many advantages over centrally controlled > moderation. The basic idea of NoCeM is that instead of moderating a > newsgroup or mailing list, people post lists of articles to be > ignored, and you can configure your mail/newsreader to pay attention > to NoCeM's by whichever people you trust. There's nothing in John and Sandy's proposal that forbids doing that. Just apply it to the cypherpunks-unmoderated list. > NoCeM would prevent any message delays which moderation might > introduce NoCeM for mail would require a delay (for the 'retromoderation' or whatever it's called message to arrive) otherwise you'd see the spam. Unlike news, once email's delivered it can't be deleted by a cancel. > NoCeM would also prevent anyone from accusing you of censorship. The unmoderated version of the list doesn't do that? > If we continue to get important > messages like implementations of the RC2 and RC4 ciphers, a moderator > could be found responsible for approving such an article. If such a message were to arrive and the moderator felt it would be too illegal to post it, it would still go to the unmoderated list. Remember, _everything_ goes to that list, before it's looked at by the moderator. > Obviously there are some issues related to NoCeM. Not all mail- and > newsreaders support NoCeM. It appears that NO mailreaders support it. :-) > However, there are definitely solutions to > those problems. For instance, a perl script could be used to delay > messages and apply NoCeM's, so that people can subscribe to customized > filtered versions of the list. I might even be willing to write such > software if there is interest. I don't mean to sound really negative, NoCeM looks like an interesting solution to the problem of Usenet spam. But it's not ready for mailing lists. We need a solution now, and the proposed solution does not make it any harder to use something like NoCeM when it's ready. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From wireinfo at wire-in.com Sun Jan 5 17:10:47 1997 From: wireinfo at wire-in.com (wireinfo) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 17:10:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists Message-ID: <199701060110.TAA23884@mail.phoenix.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM, dlv at bwalk.dm.com writes: >"Timothy C. May" writes: >> Except for the one of using the versions of majordomo (which exist, as I >> understand things) which only allow posts by subscribed members. This may >> nuke anonymous posts, but so what? The _possibility_ of anonymity, which we >> mostly all support, does not mean that people have to listen to such posts. >> And since the junk from anonymous posts is getting to be a serious >> problem.... >> >> Another possibility is that anonymous posts get kicked into a file for >> later approval or nonapproval by someone. Nothing fancy (that is, no >> "tokens" and complicated accounting systems, such as have been proposed), >> just a manual "moderation" by someone, or some set of volunteers, etc. >> Enough moderation to let the "Red Rackham" sorts of good posts through >> while blocking the "Make Money Fast" and barnyard insults from making it. ah, yes: "good" becomes so well-defined, as the "banyard insults" shoe drops. a lie, my grandmother used to tell me, is halfway around the world before the truth has even got its boots on. >Timmy seems to be VERY bothered by those anonymous posts and would >surely like them to stop - perfectly illustrating why the "cypher punks" >are enemies of free speech. Timmy can killfile anything he doesn't like, >but he wants to prevent everyone else from seeing whatever information >Timmy doesn't want to be disseminated. > >You lose, Timmy. The truth wants to be free. or somewhere around $19.95 a month, anyway. -just another internet MessAge Processor From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 17:33:08 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 17:33:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... (fwd) In-Reply-To: <970105.012718.4D8.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com> Message-ID: <32D055E1.3598@gte.net> Roy M. Silvernail wrote: > In list.cypherpunks, ravage at einstein.ssz.com writes: > > Forwarded message: > >> Date: Sat, 04 Jan 1997 10:24:21 -0800 > >> From: Dale Thorn > >> C'mon Gary, why would anyone want to bother with all of this crap? > >> Chip implants are already in millions of pets. It's simple, cheap, > >> and there's no work for the owner. > I would really like to see some statistics on the number of "lost > children" who have suffered (any given incommodation) exclusively due to > their inability to be positively linked with some True Idendity. Most > of the English-speaking children with which I'm aquainted can answer the > question "What's your name?". Not my point. My point is, you make sure the chips are deep enough that they can't be removed without removing a great deal of body mass (and probably killing the subject). The chip also has to be monitorable externally, so that a number of transponders or whatever positioned in many different places can isolate each chip and ID it, much like police do with auto licence plates. This way, it's vastly more difficult (or impossible) to operate the so-called white-slave rings now sponsored by various elitist groups and protected by corrupt police authorities. From rah at shipwright.com Sun Jan 5 17:41:37 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 17:41:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970104182713.0069a05c@mail.io.com> Message-ID: At 9:38 pm -0500 1/4/97, Greg Broiles wrote: >Some evildoer has been posting messages to Usenet purporting to be from >"cypherpunks at toad.com"; some of the messages posted have been to newsgroups >frequented by the make-spam-fast crowd, so now we've apparently been >identified as within an especially gullible market segment. Wow. Is it really true that all we need is a cancelbot? It can't really be that easy... Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From rah at shipwright.com Sun Jan 5 17:42:23 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 17:42:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment inJan In-Reply-To: <199701051939.LAA05342@toad.com> Message-ID: Sandy writes: >Sounds fair >enough to me. What do you think? I think temporarily moderating c-punks is a good idea. It could be that, if we are indeed the target of a cancelable attack on usenet, all this garbage could go away after a while (he said, wishfully). However, I think our current problems are more a function of the size of the list itself. So, if, in fact, the crap *doesn't* abate over time, it wouldn't be the end of the world if the more abusive behavior here were removed mechanically -- before it went out to almost 2,000 people. Thus, I don't think that moderating the garbage out of cypherpunks is the functional equivalent of a neuticle installation. :-). Measuring the effectiveness of this exercise, with the ability to peek ocassionally into Sandy's sludge pile, keeps the whole thing honest. Frankly, if we could figure out a way for Sandy to easily split the feed into "cypherpunks" and "trash", that would be the best *permanent* solution. Unfortunately, the physical mechanics of list moderation will probably swamp poor Sandy as it is, much less the permanent addition of forwarding the dreck somewhere else at the same time. I hope he understands that he's about to take a shower with a firehose. For instance, it's work enough mechanically for me to filter out the good 40% of cypherpunks, and the 10% average of the 30 or so other lists I follow on a daily basis for e$pam. If I were also responsible for sending the relevant contents of my trash folder to another feed, it would probably be too much to mess with, because I've got other stuff in there besides email list noise. Of course, having an intellegent moderator of cypherpunks also cuts down on the value of e$pam itself... Hmmm... Heavy sigh. ;-). Oh, well, it's all in the cause of a good signal... Go for it, Sandy, and good luck! Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 17:54:34 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 17:54:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Problems are Gay In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970105120913.0069c110@pop.netaddress.com> Message-ID: <32D05B05.7A9D@gte.net> Casey Iverson wrote: > At 06:20 AM 1/5/97 -0500, you wrote: > >Most of the time, the problems are Gay... > >I rest my case. > The arrogant, clueless, ignorant, homophobic Vulis tentacle > has no idea what the problem is. Really? Looks like they (whoever and their tentacles) hit it right on in the predictions regarding Gilmore and the list, re: censorship. Assuming the text below came from Gilmore as is alleged, he is collab- orating with the most offensive and ignorant of all cypherpunks, the veritable king of asininity, Sandy Sandfort. Both of these clowns should climb out of their drunk tanks (or whatever they're called these days) and get some fresh air. Paranoia like these guys are displaying is most unbecoming of a so-called civilised person. > I agree with Sandy Sandfort and many others that things have gotten > way out of hand on the list. He and I feel that the only proposed > solutions likely to succeed involve inserting human judgement in the > cypherpunks posting process, rather than mere automation. [snippo] From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 18:06:09 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 18:06:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D05DB6.252@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Sun Jan 5 17:03:17 1997 > Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) > I agree with Sandy Sandfort and many others that things have gotten > way out of hand on the list. He and I feel that the only proposed > solutions likely to succeed involve inserting human judgement in the > cypherpunks posting process, rather than mere automation.[snippo] > Like many of you, I have become very disenchanted with the > quality of discourse on this list.[mo' snippo] I'll bet Hitler was disenchanted by the declaration against him by the World Jewish Congress. I'll bet Andrew Jackson was disenchanted with the decisions of the Seminole Indian leaders to not just lay down and die. And now Sandy is disenchanted. What a hypocritical asshole. From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 5 18:32:06 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 18:32:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Your Comment Here) In-Reply-To: <07q3ZD65w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > > attila wrote: > > > swipe), and then there was Dr. Fred Cohen who attacled Tim on a > > > regular basis (but he was easy enough to get rid of after I checked > > > his credentials and exposed why he was fired from his professorship), > > > > > Why was Dr. Cohen fired from his professorship? > > John Gilmore is a very vindictive persons and will go to extreme length > to punish his "enemies". So Dr. Cohen did not have tenure? Or is that irrelevant?? n.oksas > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 18:41:21 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 18:41:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: C'punks "moderation" experiment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D064E9.14CB@gte.net> Vin McLellan wrote: > Thank you. I look forward to more of the best of C'punks, without > having the hassle of continually weeding out the vapid bullshit. > Apparently because of your philosophical orientation, you have stayed open > -- and kept the List open -- to this pattern of eggregious harassment far > longer than I would have thought possible. I applaud your patience, but > for myself -- I have had more than enough! Well, Vin, without commenting on your plug for censorship, I can only say that I hope you are *very* fond of Sandy Sandfort, since he becomes YOUR LORD GOD for cypherpunks list purposes. How many other gods do you have, Vin (if that's your real name, Vin)? From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 5 18:42:46 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 18:42:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Will off-topic libertarian bullshit be allowed on the moderated mailing list? Message-ID: <199701060239.UAA03419@manifold.algebra.com> Hello, For a long time, cypherpunks mailing list has been plagued by two types of irrelevant traffic: 1) Flames by Vulis against cypherpunks and by cypherpunks against Vulis. 2) Off-topic rants about libertarian ideology, guns, poverty, Ebonics, etc etc. Both types of messages were equally damaging to the content that I consider worth reading: discussions about applications of cryptography, protocols and crypto-related code. As a result, most of the people who used to talk about cryptosystems do not do so anymore because they moved to other, less noisy, forums. It was very sad to see that nobody except Eric Murray wanted to seriously try to discuss IPG algorithm, which was in my opinion an excellent case study of a home-grown cryptosystem. Eric wrote lots of excellent C code to check the "random" number generator, but no one else was interested. Cypherpunks's uniqueness and appeal is not in the breadth of issues discussed: there are forums dedicated to libertarian issues, guns, languages, terrorism, and so on. The mission of this forum, as I understand it, was to provide amateurs with interest in applying cryptography, and professional cryptographers alike, a good place to discuss crypto-related issues productively. It is understandable that many of those people who subscribe to cypherpunks' credo of digital freedom happen to be devoted libertarians and have strong views on other political subjects. It does not justify bringing every important issue to this mailing list, however. If restrictions on content are to be imposed, it is not only fair but also rational to exclude off-topic political rants as well as flames. Both of these categories add zero value to accomplishing Cypherpunks' mission. - Igor. Appendix: what we all received when we subscribed: Cypherpunks assume privacy is a good thing and wish there were more of it. Cypherpunks acknowledge that those who want privacy must create it for themselves and not expect governments, corporations, or other large, faceless organizations to grant them privacy out of beneficence. Cypherpunks know that people have been creating their own privacy for centuries with whispers, envelopes, closed doors, and couriers. Cypherpunks do not seek to prevent other people from speaking about their experiences or their opinions. The most important means to the defense of privacy is encryption. To encrypt is to indicate the desire for privacy. But to encrypt with weak cryptography is to indicate not too much desire for privacy. Cypherpunks hope that all people desiring privacy will learn how best to defend it. Cypherpunks are therefore devoted to cryptography. Cypherpunks wish to learn about it, to teach it, to implement it, and to make more of it. Cypherpunks know that cryptographic protocols make social structures. Cypherpunks know how to attack a system and how to defend it. Cypherpunks know just how hard it is to make good cryptosystems. Cypherpunks love to practice. They love to play with public key cryptography. They love to play with anonymous and pseudonymous mail forwarding and delivery. They love to play with DC-nets. They love to play with secure communications of all kinds. Cypherpunks write code. They know that someone has to write code to defend privacy, and since it's their privacy, they're going to write it. Cypherpunks publish their code so that their fellow cypherpunks may practice and play with it. Cypherpunks realize that security is not built in a day and are patient with incremental progress. Cypherpunks don't care if you don't like the software they write. Cypherpunks know that software can't be destroyed. Cypherpunks know that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down. Cypherpunks will make the networks safe for privacy. [Last updated Mon Feb 21 13:18:25 1994] From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 5 18:44:56 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 18:44:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970105175238.006a3b9c@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32D066C2.3FAA@gte.net> Marc J. Wohler wrote: > I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the > quality of our list. And I have all the confidence in the world in William Bennett, George Bush, and all their wonderful helpers in helping with the Boys and Girls Clubs of Southern California. Why not re-elect Hitler? From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 5 18:58:28 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 18:58:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701060255.UAA03620@manifold.algebra.com> Robert Hettinga wrote: > > At 9:38 pm -0500 1/4/97, Greg Broiles wrote: > >Some evildoer has been posting messages to Usenet purporting to be from > >"cypherpunks at toad.com"; some of the messages posted have been to newsgroups > >frequented by the make-spam-fast crowd, so now we've apparently been > >identified as within an especially gullible market segment. > > Wow. Is it really true that all we need is a cancelbot? > > It can't really be that easy... ... And we have the cancelbot. Very easy to run, can be set up to robocancel everything from cypherpunks at toad.com, on the spot. - Igor. From jya at pipeline.com Sun Jan 5 19:05:58 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 19:05:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: EAR Amendments Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970106030146.0067cce0@pop.pipeline.com> We have revised the hypertext EAR to include amendments of the four succeeding revisions: License Exceptions, December 4, 1996, which amends Parts 732, 736, 740, 742, 744, 746, 748, 750, 752, 758, and 770. Licensing of Key Escrow, December 13, 1996, which amends Parts 734, 740, 742, 762 and 774. Computer Revisions, December 23, 1996, which amends Parts 740, 770, and 774. And the latest: Encryption Transferred From the USML to the CCL, December 30, 1996, which amends Parts 730, 732, 734, 736, 738, 740, 742, 744, 748, 750, 768, 772, and 774. ----- At the same URL: http://jya.com/eartoc.htm From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Sun Jan 5 19:06:22 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 19:06:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970105175238.006a3b9c@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199701060306.WAA22463@wauug.erols.com> Marc J. Wohler sez: > > I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the > quality of our list. Metoo.... The alternative was to unsub. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 5 19:06:50 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 19:06:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701060302.VAA03686@manifold.algebra.com> Robert Hettinga wrote: > solution. Unfortunately, the physical mechanics of list moderation will > probably swamp poor Sandy as it is, much less the permanent addition of > forwarding the dreck somewhere else at the same time. I hope he understands > that he's about to take a shower with a firehose. For instance, it's work With STUMP robomoderator, the great majority of posts are autoapproved, because they come from preapproved posters. In the newsgroups moderated by STUMP, moderators review only a small fraction of incoming messages. It gives two benefits: 1) Saves lots of potentially billable time for moderators 2) Increases speed with which posted articles reach the public. - Igor. From unicorn at schloss.li Sun Jan 5 19:39:47 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 19:39:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701051939.LAA05342@toad.com> Message-ID: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > [...] > dropped or modified. Even before we start, though, you may > wish to contribute suggestions. > > The following is our general plan. I'm sure there will be > questions that have to be answered as they arise, but the > basis outline is a follows: > > 1) The test will run from January 11 through February 12. > > 2) I will review all incoming messages for purposes of > preserving decorum and reducing obviously unrelated spam. Other > then that, I will not overly concern myself with off-topic posts. > I will, however, expurgate all posts containing flames, insults > and other irrelevant personal attacks, as well as spams, before > forwarding the remaining posts to the Cypherpunk list. A specific statement of what constitutes "flames, insults" and etc. might be a good idea. How will borderline posts be dealt with? Posts that contain a great deal of content and thoughful discussion and still manage to contain flames? Will flames be an automatic boot for a post (zero tolerance), or will they be balanced against post content? What is the threshold which, for example, constitutes an "insult" ? "Louis Freeh couldn't identify a directed well managed crypto policy if it bit him on his pimple speckled ass." "You are so turned around on this issue one is prompted to wonder if you have any background in higher education at all." "For the new members of the list, [insert list member here] has a history of posting idiotic and useless posts, and generally wasting the list's time like an asshole." All of the above? None of the above? > 3) Cypherpunks who wish to read all posts to the list may do so > by taking advantage of either of two optional lists. The first > (cypherpunk-flames at toad.com), will consist solely of messages > expurgated from the main Cypherpunks list. (Those who subscribe > to "flames" will be able to easily monitor my moderating > decisions.) The second (cypherpunks-unedited at toad.com), will > contain all posts sent to Cypherpunks. It will be the equivalent > of the current open, unmoderated list. It will appeal to those > who don't want list moderation. Excellent idea. > 4) During the test month, polite discussion of the test will > always be on topic. In the last few days before the 10th of > February, I will call for opinions as to whether moderation > should be continued, modified or eliminated. John has agreed to > abide by the consensus of the group with one proviso. Because of > the large volume of bandwidth eaten by the lists, he does not > want to maintain both the "flame" and "unedited" versions of the > list. If list members decide to continue to have the list > moderated, one of those lists will probably have to go. I believe the "flames" list should be maintained as long as possible. Continuing checks on the moderator (whoever it may be) are necessary and appropriate. What better way than to directly provide a means to identify what the moderator has excluded? (Also, if the flames and non flames lists are maintained, how is this more bandwidth than the former condition where both flames and nonflames will posted together? In fact, if this has a deterant effect on flames (one of the main reasons for instituting the policy) the bandwidth should be less. Its only more bandwidth if the unmoderated list is maintained. Perhaps the unmoderated list should be eliminated, as subscribing to both the flames and the non-flames will have the same net effect...? > 5) If list members decide on a moderated list, I will be happy > to assist in the ongoing process. Though I will continue to be > available for duty as moderator from time to time, we will need a > set of rotating volunteers to take turns acting as moderator. > Volunteers are always welcome. A diversity of moderators makes a detailed stated policy on moderation an absolute must. > 6) Because every message submitted to Cypherpunk will be posted > to two of the three sister lists, I don't intend to lose much > sleep over whether or not this or that moderating decision was > perfect. I will do the best job I can, within the constraints > listed here. If I err, it isn't fatal. Everyone who wants one > will have two Cypherpunk venues for their posts. Sounds fair > enough to me. What do you think? Excellent until the flames list is eliminated. -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From attila at primenet.com Sun Jan 5 19:43:40 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 19:43:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D066C2.3FAA@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701060345.UAA26890@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <32D066C2.3FAA at gte.net>, on 01/05/97 at 06:43 PM, Dale Thorn said: ::Marc J. Wohler wrote: ::> I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the ::> quality of our list. ::And I have all the confidence in the world in William Bennett, ::George Bush, and all their wonderful helpers in helping with the Boys and ::Girls Clubs of Southern California. what's so far fetched about this; after all, if _any_ of the calculations are correct as to various deals of the master spy maker, the very best since WWII, the great public servant, blah, blah --are you sick yet? --as to the amount of illicit cash controlled by same, why not; at least he can a) pay for the Uzis; b) pay for their funerals; and c) do us all a favour. ::Why not re-elect Hitler? in Southern California? ROTFFL == "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators" --P.J. O'Rourke. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMtB0p704kQrCC2kFAQFN2QQAj7jT7wOwMOQgqwnEGMlZfvm3W0RUhvj9 I5kvzPqHuKyt99y00hs3E6ONAEGyTt34ONLZqNewo44NgYostkMESN4ljpbwD+Py crcuPK9yHKF4wgWMjBWHfdi3Fg0u4/aJH2nve5wbpFXQJ5Ot59AXVMAXb46T+A79 wNFtLxOmyko= =2T5V -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Sun Jan 5 19:56:50 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 19:56:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: High-tech tracking by police raises legal outcry Message-ID: <19970106033902.1417.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> >From The Orange County Register, Front Page, Sunday 1-5-97 Police across the country secretly tail hundres of people each year by attaching high-tech transmitters to suspects' cars and tracking them on squadroom computer screens. Detectives, federal agents and prosecutors routinely conceal use of the technology from defendants, their lawyers and the public, an investigation by The Orange County Register has found. Autorities in Orange County often plant the devices on cars without getting a warrant from a judge. ... The technology, marketed by a company called Teletrac, is simple: A tramsmitter sends a radio signal to a computer, which pinpoints the car's street location. Police with the proper software can follow a transimitter-equipped vehicle in real time as it moves across a street map on a computer screen. ... "Is there any expectation of privacy on the whereabouts of a car on a public street? I suggest there isn't," said [Jeffrey] Ferguson, president of the county's narcotics officer's association. "I've told them they don't need a warrant unless they intend to enter a car." ... The system automatically records the time, date, location and duration of the car's stops. The system could tell police, for example, that the suspect's car stopped on Main Street between 4th and 5th streest for about an hour on Jan. 5. The records help police focus their investigation on places the suspects visits. ------- Obviously, several list members were wrong. Travel GAK is not coming; It is already here.
BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING
From shamrock at netcom.com Sun Jan 5 20:20:12 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:20:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970105202032.00691618@192.100.81.126> At 09:02 PM 1/5/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >With STUMP robomoderator, the great majority of posts are autoapproved, >because they come from preapproved posters. In the newsgroups moderated >by STUMP, moderators review only a small fraction of incoming messages. I like this. Seems that list moderating technology has made some progress. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From shamrock at netcom.com Sun Jan 5 20:20:13 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:20:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Will off-topic libertarian bullshit be allowed on the moderated mailing list? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970105201837.006bd3a4@192.100.81.126> At 08:39 PM 1/5/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >If restrictions on content are to be imposed, it is not only fair >but also rational to exclude off-topic political rants as well as >flames. Both of these categories add zero value to accomplishing >Cypherpunks' mission. I disagree. If you want "straight crypto", subscribe to Coderpunks. This list is first and foremost a political list. Yes, I said it. Cypherpunks is a political list. If it was just a technical list, it would have never become as popular as it did. Nor would it have helped to create such a strong sense of community amongst many of its long time subscribers. As to firearms: Crypto is a weapon. There are very good reasons why governments determined to overstep their bounds are working so hard to restrict access to both crypto and firearms. You can't have one without the other. At least not for long. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 5 20:24:18 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:24:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701060306.WAA22463@wauug.erols.com> Message-ID: <199701060416.WAA04436@manifold.algebra.com> David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states wrote: > Marc J. Wohler sez: > > I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the > > quality of our list. > Metoo.... > The alternative was to unsub. I do not have confidence in Sandy, nor do I have preconceived confidence in anyone else's abilities to be a good moderator. Moderators, like governments, are potential dictators, and a lot of confidence makes them only worse. Moderation may or may not be a good idea, but it is important that readership keeps a close eye on their rulers. - Igor. From rwright at adnetsol.com Sun Jan 5 20:28:46 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:28:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experim Message-ID: <199701060427.UAA15650@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> On or About 5 Jan 97 at 22:38, Black Unicorn wrote: > Excellent until the flames list is eliminated. Yes I want to read this list, flames and all. I guess I'm just used to it by now. I don't filter it myself (except manually) so I don't want to trust someone I don't know to do it. Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 5 20:30:48 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:30:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970105202032.00691618@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <199701060425.WAA04596@manifold.algebra.com> Lucky Green wrote: > > At 09:02 PM 1/5/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >With STUMP robomoderator, the great majority of posts are autoapproved, > >because they come from preapproved posters. In the newsgroups moderated > >by STUMP, moderators review only a small fraction of incoming messages. > > I like this. Seems that list moderating technology has made some progress. > Thanks! Actually the statistics is that in the groups moderated by STUMP, the proportion of autoapproved articles eventually settles around 85-90%. - Igor. From rbarnes at gil.com.au Sun Jan 5 20:56:52 1997 From: rbarnes at gil.com.au (Robert Barnes) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 20:56:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan Message-ID: Congratulations on your decision to moderate this list. My bottom line feeling with respect to this is that we cannot expect freedom unless we are willing to exercise responsibility. It is apparent that the people who are noisiest about freedom of speech and content censoring are working tirelessly to abuse the list and provoke the very opposite of their stated ideals. As for the spammers who have run riot in recent months, moderation will remove the burden of re-transmitting this unwanted garbage from the list server and save us all the time and effort currently wasted dealing with it. From anonymous at miron.vip.best.com Sun Jan 5 21:02:55 1997 From: anonymous at miron.vip.best.com (anonymous at miron.vip.best.com) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 21:02:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701060455.UAA00652@miron.vip.best.com> excellent potential but don't you think some of (most of?) the noise is being generated deliberately in order to fuck up the usefulness of the list --- and the moderators can be easily swamped. well, good luck to us anyway. From azur at netcom.com Sun Jan 5 21:29:54 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 21:29:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: High-tech tracking by police raises legal outcry Message-ID: >>From The Orange County Register, Front Page, Sunday 1-5-97 > >Police across the country secretly tail hundres of people each year by >attaching high-tech >transmitters to suspects' cars and tracking them on squadroom computer screens. > [snip] > >The technology, marketed by a company called Teletrac, is simple: A >tramsmitter sends a >radio signal to a computer, which pinpoints the car's street location. >Police with the >proper software can follow a transimitter-equipped vehicle in real time as >it moves across a >street map on a computer screen. > I'm quite familiar with Teletrac's technology. It consist of a receiver, very similar to a pager, tuned to about 930 MHz and a transmitter (up to a 50 Watt peak power) operating in the unlicensed 902-928 MHz band using direct sequence spread spectrum coding. The service acts by sending out 'ping' messages to mobile devices on the pager channel and triangulating for the their return pulses via a rather dense chain of stations in each city/area covered. This is very similar to how aircraft transponders work. There are at least three straightforward countermeasures to Teletrac. First, look under your car. Teletrac requires a relatively good antenna placement. The box should be visible. Second, a sweep by any professional surveillance service will surely find it. Third, any competent RF person (e.g, an amateur radio operator) can retune any number of narrow band 900 MHz RF comsumer electronic devices (e.g, cordless phone) to jam the Teletrac paging receiver and disable all such devices in your proximity. Please note this is not legal, but your unlikely to get caught. PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear | Internet: azur at netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet and Wireless Development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler From rbarnes at gil.com.au Sun Jan 5 21:30:11 1997 From: rbarnes at gil.com.au (Robert Barnes) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 21:30:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: C'punks "moderation" experiment Message-ID: Dale Thorn wrote: >>Vin McLellan wrote: >>> Thank you. I look forward to more of the best of C'punks, without >>> having the hassle of continually weeding out the vapid bullshit. >>> Apparently because of your philosophical orientation, you have stayed open >>> -- and kept the List open -- to this pattern of eggregious harassment far >>> longer than I would have thought possible. I applaud your patience, but >>> for myself -- I have had more than enough! >> >>Well, Vin, without commenting on your plug for censorship, I can only >>say that I hope you are *very* fond of Sandy Sandfort, since he becomes >>YOUR LORD GOD for cypherpunks list purposes. >> >>How many other gods do you have, Vin (if that's your real name, Vin)? > My understanding was that there would probably be more than one moderator, also as Sandy's moderation decisions will be open to scrutiny by interested members of the list I cannot see the list membership accepting unsuitable moderation decisions, either by Sandy or anyone else. This list has a purpose, lets get back to it. > >-------------------------------------------------------------- >Robert Barnes Phone: +61 7 32529722 > Fax: +61 7 32571403 >Tritronics (Australia) Pty Ltd Email: robertb at tritro.com.au > >PGP Key fingerprint > = 02 A6 22 5E 26 D3 7C 4D E2 91 9E 15 AC EA B1 58 >Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get >a copy of my public key From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 5 21:40:20 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 21:40:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Robert Hettinga writes: > At 9:38 pm -0500 1/4/97, Greg Broiles wrote: > >Some evildoer has been posting messages to Usenet purporting to be from > >"cypherpunks at toad.com"; some of the messages posted have been to newsgroups > >frequented by the make-spam-fast crowd, so now we've apparently been > >identified as within an especially gullible market segment. > > Wow. Is it really true that all we need is a cancelbot? Use mine. It's in Phrack. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From snow at smoke.suba.com Sun Jan 5 21:43:53 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 21:43:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Judge Bork on Ebonics In-Reply-To: <32CF750D.7E9F@disposable.com> Message-ID: <199701060559.XAA00336@smoke.suba.com> > Hello, what's this? I thought the Know-Nothing Party disbanded in > the early 1850's. > Steve Schear wrote: > > The following is from pages 300-307 of Robert Bork's brilliant > > book, "Slouching Towards Gomorrah". This is a book which should > > be read by everyone--and especially by liberals. > I'll pick it out of the library when I'm done with Mein Kampf. I > don't feel inclined to subsidize this ignorant kook with my money. He isn't an ignorant kook--unfortunately. He is a very intelligent facist. Don't dismiss him so lightly--would you turn your back on a man with a gun? > > immigrants to be Americans. The schools were agents of cultural > > unification. They taught patriotism and standards derived from > > European cultures. > What do any of those standards have to do with "European cultures"? > Europe, like every other continent (save Antarctica), has a history > of conflict among ideas and groups. Tell me, who embodies "European > de Man? The mark of a bigot is that he reads history selectively to > find "good" values in his own group, and "bad" values in some other > group. In fact "culture" is a fractal landscape. This isn't a I don't recally him stating that the values from other groups were "bad", but rather that a nation should have a common base set of values to avoid just the kind of fractionalization that we see occuring right now. > > Part of our national lore, and glory, is the fact > > that youngsters speaking not a word of English were placed in > > public schools where only English was used and very shortly were > > proficient in the language. > > Immigrants to the US today learn English twice as fast as did > immigrants to the US at the turn of the century. Greater access to You don't say what percentage of Immigrants learn english v.s. the past. I'd bet that they learn twice as fast today only because the motivated ones bother, the rest just try to force us to learn their language. > There is far less regional differentiation in English dialects around > the country today than there was at the turn of the century. Nearly > all well-educated and socially mobile Americans under age 40 speak > a common "broadcast TV english." All three of them. > Southern and Brooklyn accents are > less pronounced than they were. Well, I can't speak for Brooklyn, but having just come back from trip thru the south (Tn. Ms. Ga. Al. Fl.) I can say that their accents are as thick as a brick. > > That was crucial to the formation of an > > American identity Now, however, the educational system has > > become the weapon of choice for modern liberals in their project > > of dismantling American culture. > Yup, that's us. It's all a conspiracy to drag America into the > gutter. Deeper into the gutter. > > Our egalitarians view every culture (other than European) as equal. > Nope. There is no "European culture." Only idiot collectivists of the > nationalist type group people like this. The cultural differences in Europe are minor compared to the differences between European and Asian for instance. Think of it like Operating Systems. Germany is like SCO, France is AT&T, Italy is BSD, China is Vax/VMS. Turkey is Dos/Windows (well, things do blow up a lot there...), Libya is running CM/VMS on an 3090. Iran is using OS/2 v1. Yes, there are differences between Germanic and French culture, but no where near the difference that exists between French and Libyain. > > Vietnamese and Polish children were put into English-speaking > > classes and were competent into English long before the Hispanics > > in bilingual schools. > No evidence for this assertion exists. Do you live in a large city? Tell you what, Next time you are in chicago let me know, and I'll introduce you to my wife. Her mother was born in poland. My wife speaks standard middle class english. I'll introduce you to her cousins children, their father _still_ has trouble speaking english, yet the children speak standard english, as well as polish. They speak english with almost no accent. Next we'll take a trip to the barrio, and interview as many children as we can find. Want to take bets on how many hispanic children so as well? Hell, those kids (wife's family) go to a neighborhood Catholic School that is mixed polish and hispanic--the polish kids ALL learn english as a primary language (well, almost all) where the hispanic children learn it as a secondary language. Now, I have met hispanic people who do speak good english, but they--or at least their parents--made a commitment to being _american_ rather than expatriots waiting to go "home". > No. I choose to call you on the bullshit assertion that Hispanic > children don't learn English. This prejudice is rooted in the small > but visible segment of the Hispanic population that comprises recent > immigrants. It is indubitably true that illegal immigrants doing odd > jobs and domestic work -- the segment of the Hispanic population most > visible to sensitive anglos -- tend not to speak English. > Extrapolations from this population, though, are invalid. Or the vocal segment who claims that they should have to "give up their cultural heritage" to "fit in with the rest of society". In cities with large hispanic populations sometimes third and fourth generations speak heavily accented spanglish. > Note the only evidence offered by Bork to bolster this straw man > he's building is a similar slew of bald, unsupported assertions by a > friend of his. He might as well be quoting himself. Where as you are just overflowing with statistics and evidence to convince us that he is wrong, rather than leveling ad hominiem attacks on the him. > > in Washington, D.C., in its 1992 'Curriculum Guidelines for Mul- > > ticultural Education.' "It too often demands self-denial, self-hatred, > I see. "Pathetic whine" name-calling in reference to a one-sentence > quote is the best you can do. At least you give a verifiable reference > so that people can see what it really says. He did. More of a reference than is usually found on this list. > > Public dissatisfaction with the linguistic fracturing of society > > that need be done is the abolition of bilingual education and the > > repeal of the Voting Rights Act's requirement of different language > > ballots. > > You'd better hurry, too, so that you can disenfranchise people before > they know about it. How does that disenfrachise people? It just says that if you want to vote (intelligently is left out) you have to have passable english language skills. It is already the case that you must have these skills to vote with any sort of integrity. Most of the debate on national and state issues is conducted in english--in the papers, on radio and tv (what debate there is--your franchise means less than ever when your choices are reduced)--if you can't understand the debate, how can you pick a side? (o.b. crypto-- RNG simulating a coin toss?) > > once they begin to see its results. Immigrant parents want their > > children to learn English and become Americans. The opposition > > to that, manifested in bilingual education, comes from American > > elites who form an adversarial culture, alienated from the culture > > of the West and wishing to weaken it. > Who are these "American elites"? Who's in on the conspiracy? What's > in it for them? Division of the "masses" into groups that can be played off one another. Less competition at the upper levels for them and their children (who you can be sure don't attend public schools). (Ok, never attribute to malice what you can attribute to stupidity so--) It is even possible that these people truely believe that what they are doing is ethically correct, that they truely believe that American culture is evil, and that it needs to be changed or destroyed. I would go so far as to agree with them. I just don't think they are heading in the right direction. > "Less candid"? It's always a sign of trouble when you impugn the > motives and honesty of your opponent without providing contrary > evidence. Yup. Preach it brother. > serious college-level audience that favored "uncritical adulation" of > Columbus. What I believe happened was that the horrors of the two World > Wars woke people up to the dangers of propaganda myths (on all sides; > the anti-German "Hun" stuff from WWI is really disgusting), and Then how do you explain the shit shoveled out of D.C. (and other National Capitols) on a regular basis? > teachers stopped lying to their pupils. Every real historian always No, they haven't. > knew that Columbus was a complex figure. > "Loathing and condemnation" is certainly a tad strong, but Bork and > Bernstein are welcome to their rhetorical excess. These days Columbus _is_ treated to loathing and condemnation. Kids are taught that he treated people like slaves--and not taught that this was common in his time. That he "plundered" the "new world", and not taught a damn thing about the historical context that this "plundering" took place in. > > emphasis on white males, may be seen from the curriculum it > > favors. A curriculum designed to foster understanding of other > > cultures would study those cultures. Multiculturalism does not. > > Courses are not offered on the cultures of China or India or Brazil > > or Nigeria, nor does the curriculum require the study of languages > > without which foreign cultures cannot be fully understood. > > This is bunk. The straw man grows. Which part? In the last two colleges that I attended there were "Black" studies (later renamed to "Africa-America") and _some_ Chinese (at the last college there was also "latino") In the case of the "latino" and "Black" or "African American" it was more a study of that those two groups accomplished _here in america_ than in their "home lands". I should note that the last school I attened was an Art School, and these "muti-cultural" classes were taught from the Art History prespective. And yes, there was (IME) a bit of white male bashing in many of the courses. > > Hence it is that multiculturalists have turned Martin Luther > > King, Jr.'s dream into a nightmare. He asked that his children "not > > be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their > > character," which, as Bernstein says, is the "essential ideal of > > liberalism:' But multiculturalists say, "Judge me by the color of > > my skin for therein lies my identity and my place in the world." > > They're projecting again. Sure some nonwhite racists call themselves > multicultural. Reasonable people see through that. Old bigots who > harken back to a nonexistent "European culture" are just as bad. Look at the fight surrounding Proposition 209 in california. The claim has been made that it is unconstitutional because it seeks to prevent ANY bias in either direction in the basis of race. The "minority" "leaders" are the ones seeking to prevent it's enactment. > Typical BS from someone who doesn't know what he's talking about. So now, > as a result of the "radicals' attack on Stanford's Western Culture > program," what do Stanford students study? Shakespeare, Dante, Locke, > etc. Also Equiano and Buddha. We only gain. Are they studied to the depth that they were before? I doubt it. > What is this "inheritors of a tradition" notion? Who died and left me > Shakespeare, and why? Wether you like it or not, wether you acknowlege it or not, a second rate bullshit artist from the 1400's _has_ worked to shape the character of English Culture, and hence to a lesser degree American culture. Shakespear basically invented the Sit-com. Great huh? > > have been "traditionally excluded" must now reject inclusion. > There is no such teaching. You know what many black peoples objection to Clarence Thomas was? That he was "In the House". > Damn, Bork and Bernstein are projecting *again*. It's not modern > multiculturalist scholarchip that does this, but a bigoted rooting It does it just as much as European history. From spyking at thecodex.com Sun Jan 5 22:46:04 1997 From: spyking at thecodex.com (SpyKing) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 22:46:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: List Moderation Message-ID: <9701060645.AA12503@yod.mne.com> Thank you... *************************************************************************** The Codex Surveillance & Privacy News - http://www.thecodex.com Moderator of "The Surveillance List"...http://www.thecodex.com/list.html The Nets FIRST & ONLY list dedicated to Surveillance Technology... "We don't spy on you... but we DO keep an eye on those that do..." *************************************************************************** From richieb at teleport.com Sun Jan 5 22:49:43 1997 From: richieb at teleport.com (Rich Burroughs) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 22:49:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970105225048.00911a60@mail.teleport.com> At 02:56 PM 1/6/97 +1000, Robert Barnes wrote: [snip] >My bottom line feeling with respect to this is that we cannot >expect freedom unless we are willing to exercise responsibility. >It is apparent that the people who are noisiest about freedom of >speech and content censoring are working tirelessly to abuse >the list and provoke the very opposite of their stated ideals. Hmmm. There has been some of that, but some of use who have spoken about freedom of speech have done so because of legitimate concerns, not just to gain advantage in an ongoing, juvenile campaign. >As for the spammers who have run riot in recent months, >moderation will remove the burden of re-transmitting this unwanted >garbage from the list server and save us all the time and effort >currently wasted dealing with it. Not completely. The plan John mentioned didn't elimainate the full version of the list -- it just added a modertated version. There will still be some garbage floating through Toad Hall, but not as much :) I think the idea of two versions of the list is an excellent one, and it avoids the issues raised by presenting the list in only a moderated form. If people want the spam they can have it, and if they don't they can take advantage of John and Sandy's work, and read a more coherent version of the list. I will certainly choose the latter, but it is nice to know that the choice is mine. John and Sandy -- thanks for getting this rolling. Rich ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb at teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause From unicorn at schloss.li Sun Jan 5 23:06:16 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 23:06:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D066C2.3FAA@gte.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Marc J. Wohler wrote: > > I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the > > quality of our list. > > And I have all the confidence in the world in William Bennett, > George Bush, and all their wonderful helpers in helping with the > Boys and Girls Clubs of Southern California. > > Why not re-elect Hitler? > One knows one has come up with a potent weapon against one's enemies when they begin to panic visibly like this. The smell of fear is in the air. The question is, will the ultimate internet trump card of a distractor (Reference Godwin's law) divert the issue and save poor Mr. Thorn from a policy which is certainly going to be a devastating impact on his public exposure from here on out? It does amuse me that George Bush and William Bennett are thrown out for fear mongering purposes before Godwin's law is invoked. One would think Mr. Thorn had mistaken the list for a liberal stronghold. Then again, no one ever accused Mr. Dale "Snake Oil" Thorn of being afflicted with a strong writer's sense of audience). -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From unicorn at schloss.li Sun Jan 5 23:25:33 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Sun, 5 Jan 1997 23:25:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Will off-topic libertarian bullshit be allowed on the moderated mailing list? In-Reply-To: <199701060239.UAA03419@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Hello, > > For a long time, cypherpunks mailing list has been plagued by > two types of irrelevant traffic: > > 1) Flames by Vulis against cypherpunks and by cypherpunks against > Vulis. > 2) Off-topic rants about libertarian ideology, guns, poverty, > Ebonics, etc etc. > > Both types of messages were equally damaging to the content that I > consider worth reading: discussions about applications of cryptography, > protocols and crypto-related code. As a result, most of the people who > used to talk about cryptosystems do not do so anymore because they moved > to other, less noisy, forums. [...] > Cypherpunks's uniqueness and appeal is not in the breadth of issues > discussed: there are forums dedicated to libertarian issues, guns, > languages, terrorism, and so on. The mission of this forum, as I > understand it, was to provide amateurs with interest in applying > cryptography, and professional cryptographers alike, a good place to > discuss crypto-related issues productively. > > It is understandable that many of those people who subscribe to > cypherpunks' credo of digital freedom happen to be devoted libertarians > and have strong views on other political subjects. It does not justify > bringing every important issue to this mailing list, however. > > If restrictions on content are to be imposed, it is not only fair > but also rational to exclude off-topic political rants as well as > flames. Both of these categories add zero value to accomplishing > Cypherpunks' mission. Disagree strongly. Were you to call for a total restriction on political topics, frankly, your argument would be more convincing. You do not. This suggests, correct or not, that your dispute is with libertarian views specifically. It also demonstrates the danger of allowing that kind of selective moderation, specificially, that it gives rise to interest group politics and issue based censorship. Moderation here is being proposed in (I believe) reaction to the "Tim May sucks (insert reproductive organ of choice here)" posts and flames having not even a tangential attachment to cryptography. If you get into singling out other topics as somehow universally inappropriate I think you get into very deep water. Is finance unimportant to cypherpunks? I think this is a tougher argument to make, but only because financial services and banks are not seen as the kind of political entitites that free market systems generally are. Cypherpunks is an important and distinct list because of the intense cross pollenization between e.g., cryptographers and finance types, cryptographers and bankers, cryptographers and lawyers, cryptographers and polititians. In the same way that crypto types despertly want the rest of the world to become crypto savvy, it is important for crypto types to become political, economicly savvy, and generally understand the larger context of crypto applications. There also exists a forum for pure cryptography discussion already. (2 actually, the cryptography and the coderpunks lists). > - Igor. > > Appendix: what we all received when we subscribed: [All but the last line deleted] > Cypherpunks will make the networks safe for privacy. And how will this happen without having the bankers, lawyers, polititians, brokers, and economists in the boat? -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From dave at kachina.jetcafe.org Mon Jan 6 00:26:46 1997 From: dave at kachina.jetcafe.org (Dave Hayes) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 00:26:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice Message-ID: <199701060826.AAA00355@kachina.jetcafe.org> Dale Thorn writes: > Rich Graves wrote: > > Bill Frantz wrote: > > > At 10:54 AM -0800 12/31/96, Timothy C. May wrote: > > > >Our focus is more radical. We are effectively a cyber-militia, > > > >fulfilling Jefferson's recommendation that a revolution happen > > > >every 20 years. (Funny, there hasn't been one in more than 200 years.[snip] > > >I would say that the street action which effectively eliminated legally > > >mandated racial segregation about 25 years ago qualifies as a revolution.[snip] > > Cryptoanarchy, as envisioned here, is not about people mobbing in the > > streets. It's fundamentally about insulating oneself from the mobs in > > the streets. However, revolutions tend to have unintended consequences.[snip] > Looks like we're coming to the old "irresistable force meets immovable > object" consensus, yes? Interesting. I suspect that all of you have forgotton that in order for there to be a revolution, there has to be something to revolt against. It works the other way too: in order to have elitist rulers, there have to be sheep. If you desire neither, then you have to renounce BOTH positions. It's not easy, but it -always- works. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave at jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet No one can make you feel inferior without your consent. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 00:46:11 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 00:46:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Experiments on Mailing Lists In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D0A08D.62BC@sk.sympatico.ca> Timothy C. May wrote: > (If you think our list is bad, you ought to see lists which are completely > dominated by one-line witticisms and inside jokes....) Or 10,000 messages saying only, "Merry Christmas", followed a few days later by another 10,000 messages saying, "Happy New Year". Anyone who needs 'proof' that I am speaking the truth, here, (and who has a 10Gb hard drive), can just send me their email address, and I would be glad to forward them. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 00:46:27 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 00:46:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: <199701050649.WAA19140@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <32D0A866.349@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > 1. Dale Thorn is very similar to Damien Thorn. > 2. The Roman numerals in my name add up to 555. For a 'C' programmer, > this can be the equivalent of 666 for a Basic programmer, taking > one digit at a time. > 3. If you sign (with a pen) the name quickly, using counterclockwise > loops only, it will look exactly like 666, which BTW was a significant > paragraph in a lawsuit between myself and a former employer (they > initiated the paragraph). Dale, I can see that I'm going to have to lay in an extra supply of garlic and silver bulltets. I suspect that everyone on the CypherPunks list is either an employee of the NSA, or a member of the alleged 'Circle of Eunuchs'. In the words of the author of "Make BIG $$$", "Email everybody, and let Eudora sort them out." Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 00:46:36 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 00:46:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: <199701052239.OAA00478@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <32D0A960.14A8@sk.sympatico.ca> jim bell wrote: > > The devil you say! Jim, I noticed that if I take all of the letters out of your name, and add the letters 'S', 'a', 't', 'a', 'n', that I get a very interesting result. Are you one of 'them'? Toto p.s. - Not many people would have figured this out. I guess I'm just particularly talented with anagrams. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 00:47:22 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 00:47:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Problems are Gay In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D0C2D9.3ADB@sk.sympatico.ca> aga wrote: > > From: Customer Support Mgmt Tickets > > To: postmaster at dm.com > > Cc: abuse at psi.com > > Subject: csm-00974 (ticket update) dns-77660 (ticket update) Can you help? > > > > >I had lunch with Gilmore once. He slurps rather disgustingly when he eats. > > >I suppose he slurps the same way when he sucks big dicks in San Francisco. Hell, now they're selling tickets to this. Do CypherPunks get a discount? Toto From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 00:53:36 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 00:53:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D0BD19.1AB7@gte.net> Black Unicorn wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Marc J. Wohler wrote: > > > I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the > > > quality of our list. > > And I have all the confidence in the world in William Bennett, > > George Bush, and all their wonderful helpers in helping with the > > Boys and Girls Clubs of Southern California. > > Why not re-elect Hitler? > One knows one has come up with a potent weapon against one's enemies when > they begin to panic visibly like this. The smell of fear is in the air. Fear? What fear? I had a long and productive life before I subscribed here, and what with 1,000 or so programming projects awaiting me (and most other competent programmers), I certainly won't be wasting time bemoaning the fact that Sandy Sandfort "won" here, any more than I bemoan the fact that most wars anywhere are won by the bad guys. > The question is, will the ultimate internet trump card of a distractor > (Reference Godwin's law) divert the issue and save poor Mr. Thorn from a > policy which is certainly going to be a devastating impact on his public > exposure from here on out? I'll tell you something else. If I have an opportunity to contribute to a project that can fight censorship of this kind, I will do so eagerly. OTOH, I have no "tentacles", nor will I ever have such things. I am not a communications, security, O/S, or other such kind of programmer/person, and I will not get into those types of applications short of physically saving my life. In other words, if Sandfort/Gilmore cuts me off in the long run, it's doubtful you'd hear from me again unless something is forwarded from Freedom-Knights, and even that is doubtful. > It does amuse me that George Bush and William Bennett are thrown out > for fear mongering purposes before Godwin's law is invoked. One would think you would understand the principle of using examples to illustrate a point. The very idea that those names would automatic- ally inspire fear is amusing. > One would think Mr. Thorn had mistaken the list for a liberal stronghold. Having read a lot of the crap put out by organizations from the KKK to the ADL (all scumbags BTW), I no longer take the naive position that a person is "liberal" (hence, one-dimensional) or "conservative", or any other convenient tag. Some people are liars, hypocrites, and assholes, though, and I prefer to determine that by their actions rather than their speculations. > Then again, no one ever accused Mr. Dale "Snake Oil" Thorn of being > afflicted with a strong writer's sense of audience). You mean I don't tailor my prose to what people want to hear? Better yet, I don't go somewhere else where maybe I would be more welcome with my ideas? I'm embarrassed for you, for your lack of imagination. And if the "snake oil" tag refers to my ideas on crypto software (i.e., PGP), well, you have a long way to go before you provide a serious mental challenge to me. From hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu Mon Jan 6 01:08:11 1997 From: hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu (Robert A. Hayden) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 01:08:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Welp, I've been on this list for a long, long time, since its inception way back when. I haven't posted much, lately; mostly lurking and watching and, occasionally giggling at the foolishness that has gone on in recent months (i'm a sociologist by education, so watch this list as a "culture in motion" may someday make for an interesting paper :-). Ever since the internet was shot in the foot by a pair of lawyers selling green cards, I was waiting for the chaos to reach this list. It's here now. I have no problems with the idea of moderating this list. If people wanna waste my time with SPAM and petty flamewars, they shoudl do it in an appropriate forum. I've been here since the beginning, and continue to be here, because I have an interest in crypto, crypto policy, and the politics surrounding it. Not to irk my system administrator with a daily dose of CypherSPAM coming through her system. And if a don't like the moderation decisions, by golly I can go somewhere else. Nice thing is that anybody else can as well. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: PGP Signed with PineSign 2.2 iQCVAwUBMtClTjokqlyVGmCFAQEZYQP/XUynVmGT0eFCwEAthGO8FcB1Zi76h/Er qG00Q9363cl88yTxj50Jlzmjb4SpIoobtrhCi6fL8s1AabtprALgiTe7KlWQnPva TOLwyTCVtkE7eeY0XtS+eZ18JEV3Z4cHVDIHtIIqIYygBwLyCC5qCmsV9z1Anz8t KU88GDEaeM8= =NDGz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Robert A. Hayden hayden at krypton.mankato.msus.edu -=-=-=-=-=- -=-=-=-=-=- http://krypton.mankato.msus.edu/~hayden/Welcome.html -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.12 GED/J d-- s:++>: a- C++(++++)$ ULUO++ P+>+++ L++ !E---- W+(---) N+++ o+ K+++ w+(---) O- M+$>++ V-- PS++(+++)>$ PE++(+)>$ Y++ PGP++ t- 5+++ X++ R+++>$ tv+ b+ DI+++ D+++ G+++++>$ e++$>++++ h r-- y+** ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 01:23:02 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 01:23:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experim In-Reply-To: <199701060427.UAA15650@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> Message-ID: <32D0C423.C07@gte.net> Ross Wright wrote: > On or About 5 Jan 97 at 22:38, Black Unicorn wrote: > > Excellent until the flames list is eliminated. > Yes I want to read this list, flames and all. I guess I'm just used > to it by now. I don't filter it myself (except manually) so I don't > want to trust someone I don't know to do it. Just one other thing, Ross. Don't assume that the stated purpose and the real purpose are one and the same. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 01:37:01 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 01:37:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: <199701050649.WAA19140@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <32D0C76E.1CC5@gte.net> Toto wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > 1. Dale Thorn is very similar to Damien Thorn. > > 2. The Roman numerals in my name add up to 555. For a 'C' programmer, > > this can be the equivalent of 666 for a Basic programmer, taking > > one digit at a time. > > 3. If you sign (with a pen) the name quickly, using counterclockwise > > loops only, it will look exactly like 666, which BTW was a significant > > paragraph in a lawsuit between myself and a former employer (they > > initiated the paragraph). > Dale, I can see that I'm going to have to lay in an extra supply of > garlic and silver bulltets. I suspect that everyone on the CypherPunks > list is either an employee of the NSA, or a member of the alleged > 'Circle of Eunuchs'. In the words of the author of "Make BIG $$$", > "Email everybody, and let Eudora sort them out." What appears to be and what is, is not necessarily the same. I don't bother normal people, so you shouldn't need the silver or the wolfbane. Actually, the c-punks consist of a lot of "security people". Get some literature on George Wackenhut for an overview of what I'm getting at. From rwright at adnetsol.com Mon Jan 6 02:47:13 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 02:47:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experim Message-ID: <199701061046.CAA22622@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> On or About 6 Jan 97 at 1:21, Dale Thorn wrote: > Ross Wright wrote: > > On or About 5 Jan 97 at 22:38, Black Unicorn wrote: > > > Excellent until the flames list is eliminated. > > > Yes I want to read this list, flames and all. I guess I'm just > > used to it by now. I don't filter it myself (except manually) so > > I don't want to trust someone I don't know to do it. > > Just one other thing, Ross. Don't assume that the stated purpose > and the real purpose are one and the same. Shit, I learned that in the service of my great country. Who's sig-line talks about liberty being taken away little bits at a time? As I said before freedom of speech has a price other than the blood of patriots. That price is the tolerance of IDEAS! Any fucking ideas that happen to come the fuck up!!!!! I'm gonna tolerate who-the-hell-ever I want to! There are not any grey areas when it comes to free speech. You censor one because of bad manners or downright bad taste, then you censor all. And fuck all you guys who *plonked* me over my last flame war with T.M., cause you just missed a great post! (I learned that in film school: you have to like your own work). So my question is: is there going to be a maximum number of times I can say fuck in a good post? Like a 3-fuck limit? Or will you take out the magic marker and draw through them? Ross From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 03:13:34 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:13:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D0DCAB.7AB5@sk.sympatico.ca> I believe that every "EASY $$$ MONEY" posting ought to be forwarded to the webmaster at the site from which it originated. Those who are harboring these generous souls should also be afforded the opportunity to rake in the cash. I can hardly see how anybody could possibly resent being reminded of the wonderful opportuninties they are making it possible for us to learn of. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 03:13:38 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:13:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970105175238.006a3b9c@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32D0DEE3.7248@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Marc J. Wohler wrote: > > I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the > > quality of our list. > > And I have all the confidence in the world in William Bennett, > George Bush, and all their wonderful helpers in helping with the > Boys and Girls Clubs of Southern California. > > Why not re-elect Hitler? "Why can't we just all get along?" (O.J., are you listening, this time?) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 03:13:46 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:13:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experim In-Reply-To: <199701060427.UAA15650@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> Message-ID: <32D0E371.12DD@sk.sympatico.ca> Ross Wright wrote: > Yes I want to read this list, flames and all. I guess I'm just used > to it by now. I don't filter it myself (except manually) so I don't > want to trust someone I don't know to do it. Part of the problem I see is that there are a fair number of postings that include traded insults, but which also contain some excellent commentary and/or information. Perhaps much of the spamming/flaming could be curtailed by John Gilmore announcing that he has stopped sucking cocks. (Or am I 'unclear on the concept', here?) Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 03:13:53 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:13:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Will off-topic libertarian bullshit be allowed on the moderated mailing list? In-Reply-To: <199701060239.UAA03419@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32D0F6F3.70BF@sk.sympatico.ca> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > For a long time, cypherpunks mailing list has been plagued by > two types of irrelevant traffic: > 2) Off-topic rants about libertarian ideology, guns, poverty, > Ebonics, etc etc. I don't consider discussion of ideologies and social issues to be irrelevant to 'any' forum. Numbers have no soul. The development of the Atomic Bomb took place within a closed system where the goal was central and the social implications were, at best, peripheral. The continued development of Atomic Physics remained in the hands of the 'powers that be', with its progress hidden from the public, and with no social discourse on the wide range of issues that would affect the public. We ended up with a bunch of guys sitting in cement rooms, holding keys that would enable them to destroy the world. The 'Star Wars' program would have ended up the same way, except the fools in power were confident enough in their ability to hornswaggle the public and ramrod into place whatever policies they wanted, that they had to 'brag' about it, and open it up for discussion. When Joe Average shouted, "Hey, Shit-For-Brains, I'm sitting here trying to feed my kids, and you're pissing all my money away.", the developers and backers of 'Star Wars' seemed to think that his complaints were 'off-topic', or 'irrelevant'. > Both types of messages were equally damaging to the content that I > consider worth reading: discussions about applications of cryptography, > protocols and crypto-related code. As a result, most of the people who > used to talk about cryptosystems do not do so anymore because they moved > to other, less noisy, forums. I've seen several postings from 'newbies', asking perfectly reasonable questions in regard to cryptography, and saw them get nothing but shit and abuse for answers. I didn't see them ask again. As a matter of fact, the only serious, technical, crypto-related questions I have asked of anyone on this forum, I have asked by private email, after ascertaining that the person seemed both knowledgeable and sincere about cryptography. Perhaps if the 'experts', busy discussing highly-technical areas, were to take the time to educate those seeking to gain a wider knowledge of cryptography, then CypherPunks would have a broader base of active crypto-related postings. The more plants that you have in your garden, the less room there is for weeds. > It was very sad to see that nobody except Eric Murray wanted to > seriously try to discuss IPG algorithm, which was in my opinion an > excellent case study of a home-grown cryptosystem. Eric wrote lots of > excellent C code to check the "random" number generator, but no one else > was interested. Somebody was interested enough to post a question regarding it, but I believe he only got one reply, telling him what an idiot he was. There were also several people interested enough in some 'code' that they received as a result of joining this forum, that they 'ran' it, and had their systems damaged, as a result. They took a 'roasting' on the forum, which was not really totally inappropriate, since it came from 'fuck at yourself.up', but I expected that there would be no shortage of people to help them deal with this problem in this forum. Apparently, I was wrong. I did my best to help one of them, by private email, and what surprised me was that he got no other offers of assistance with his problem, but rather, continued email informing what a 'dweeb' he was. > If restrictions on content are to be imposed, it is not only fair > but also rational to exclude off-topic political rants as well as > flames. Both of these categories add zero value to accomplishing > Cypherpunks' mission. I think that 'political rants' need to cover a wide range of territory in order to deal with an important issue that needs to be kept in mind in regard to the very purpose of cryptography: There is a 'shitload of ratfuckers' out there. I re-read Phil Zimmerman's comments in the PGP documentation every now and again, and although he may say it more concisely than some of those on the forum, he is saying exactly the same thing. I read some of the well-informed postings, in regard to such things as export laws and potential end-runs around various regulations, and they may be fine, but, to me, they represent an incomplete world-view which needs the added input of those who remind us that, in the end, there's a big rat-dick waiting for anyone who bends over too far in order to read the fine-print. I enjoy your postings, I look forward to them in the future. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 03:13:57 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:13:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Privacy/Moderation In-Reply-To: <199701060239.UAA03419@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32D0FACE.741B@sk.sympatico.ca> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Appendix: what we all received when we subscribed: > > Cypherpunks assume privacy is a good thing and wish there were more > of it. Cypherpunks acknowledge that those who want privacy must > create it for themselves and not expect governments, corporations, or > other large, faceless organizations to grant them privacy out of > beneficence. Does 'moderation' relate to 'privacy'? Could this be amended to say: Cypherpunks assume moderation is a good thing and wish there were more of it. Cypherpunks acknowledge that those who want moderation must create it for themselves and not expect governments, corporations, or other large, faceless organizations to grant them moderation out of beneficence. > Cypherpunks do not seek to prevent other people from > speaking about their experiences or their opinions. Is this the 'old' policy? > Cypherpunks love to practice. They love to play with public key > cryptography. They love to play with anonymous and pseudonymous mail > forwarding and delivery. They love to play with DC-nets. They love > to play with secure communications of all kinds. So, if everyone is 'surprised' that somebody has been 'playing' with the CypherPunks email, then they shouldn't be. > Cypherpunks know that a widely dispersed system can't be shut down. But, Lord knows, they'll try. Toto From remy at synx.com Mon Jan 6 03:37:10 1997 From: remy at synx.com (Remy NONNENMACHER) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:37:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crytpo IMPORTATION rules Message-ID: Can someone point me on some ressources about rules for IMPORTING crypto code in US and rules on USING crypto in the US ? (keys len, authorizations needed, etc....). What i search is what i can and can't do. (Context is a private company, using private lines worldwide). TIA. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 03:43:45 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 03:43:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Spam Trading Message-ID: <32D100DD.13EB@sk.sympatico.ca> If anyone is unhappy with the spam they receive on CypherPunks, I am willing to trade some of my spam from other conferences. Send Me: 1 "Jimmy Gilmore is a cocksucker." I Will Send You: 1,000 "Merry Xmas" Send Me: 1 "Timmy May is a cocksucker." I Will Send You: 1,000 "Happy New Year" Send Me: 1 "Help! I ran that file from fuck at yourself.up" I Will Send You: 1,000 "Welcome to the Conference" Send Me: 1 "unsribrive" I Will Send You: 1,000 "Sorry You're Leaving" I can only offer you these amazing deals because one of the conferences I subscribe to is OCD-L (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder List). No need to 'ACT NOW', I'll have plenty of "Merry Xmas" and "Happy New Years" messages continuing to trickle in from the Procrasinators Support list. From m5 at tivoli.com Mon Jan 6 04:39:46 1997 From: m5 at tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 04:39:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: High-tech tracking by police raises legal outcry In-Reply-To: <19970106033902.1417.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Message-ID: <32D0F27E.6AF2@tivoli.com> Secret Squirrel wrote: > > The technology, marketed by a company called Teletrac, is simple: > A tramsmitter sends a radio signal to a computer ... Anybody know the frequencies used? (Anybody willing to guess whether the FCC might quietly introduce prohibitions against scanners that can receive those frequencies?) (Gee, that looks paranoid.) -- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jan 6 05:09:48 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 05:09:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: TCM_log Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970106130524.0066c590@pop.pipeline.com> NYT reports on Net spying, and cites 527 Tim May postings to 32 groups. The "highly regarded privacy and cryptography advocate was less shocked than bemused" by the log. Cypherpunks is named as logged by god's eye. ----- TCM_log From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 6 05:48:42 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 05:48:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Will off-topic libertarian bullshit be allowed on the moderated mailing list? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701060818.CAA07879@manifold.algebra.com> Black Unicorn wrote: > > On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > For a long time, cypherpunks mailing list has been plagued by > > two types of irrelevant traffic: > > > > 1) Flames by Vulis against cypherpunks and by cypherpunks against > > Vulis. > > 2) Off-topic rants about libertarian ideology, guns, poverty, > > Ebonics, etc etc. > > > > Both types of messages were equally damaging to the content that I > > consider worth reading: discussions about applications of cryptography, > > protocols and crypto-related code. As a result, most of the people who > > used to talk about cryptosystems do not do so anymore because they moved > > to other, less noisy, forums. > > [...] > > > Cypherpunks's uniqueness and appeal is not in the breadth of issues > > discussed: there are forums dedicated to libertarian issues, guns, > > languages, terrorism, and so on. The mission of this forum, as I > > understand it, was to provide amateurs with interest in applying > > cryptography, and professional cryptographers alike, a good place to > > discuss crypto-related issues productively. > > > > It is understandable that many of those people who subscribe to > > cypherpunks' credo of digital freedom happen to be devoted libertarians > > and have strong views on other political subjects. It does not justify > > bringing every important issue to this mailing list, however. > > > > If restrictions on content are to be imposed, it is not only fair > > but also rational to exclude off-topic political rants as well as ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > flames. Both of these categories add zero value to accomplishing > > Cypherpunks' mission. > > Disagree strongly. > > Were you to call for a total restriction on political topics, frankly, > your argument would be more convincing. You do not. This suggests, > correct or not, that your dispute is with libertarian views specifically. Thanks for your comments. I apologize for not being clear. I do call for a total restriction on political discussions not related to privacy and cryptography. It so happens that the vast majority of off-topic political ranters on this list are of libertarian persuasion, that's why I used word "libertarian" to identify what I was talking about. Of course, I consider any discussion of politics not related to the cypherpunks charter to be inappropriate for the list. For example, if in the future a socialist joins this list and starts advocating gun control, he should be censored just as well. I do not advocate censoring any particular political view more than any other. Another question is, how do we tell an on-topic political discussion from an off-topic discussion? My suggestion for such litmus test would be to ask: do different political alternatives being discussed have immediate ramifications for digital privacy and use of encryption? For instance, discussion of ITAR regulations obviously passes the litmus test. Discussion of machine gun laws, to the contrary, has nothing to do directly with any encryption issues or privacy issues, and should therefore be banned. Some may argue that they can build a logic chain that would imply that more machine guns means more encryption or something like that, and use this as an argument in favor of allowing machine gun discussions. This is not a correct approach because the logical chain would not be "direct" in the sense above. > It also demonstrates the danger of allowing that kind of selective > moderation, specificially, that it gives rise to interest group politics > and issue based censorship. Moderation here is being proposed in (I This is absolutely correct. I do not believe that this problem has a universal and perfect solution. One of the possible remedies would be to write a charter that restricts moderators' ability to censor messages, and have a diverse moderator board. > believe) reaction to the "Tim May sucks (insert reproductive organ of > choice here)" posts and flames having not even a tangential attachment to > cryptography. If you get into singling out other topics as somehow > universally inappropriate I think you get into very deep water. We may be in very deep water already. Lately we had a discussion about a token-based protocol for identifying posters. Someone raised an issue of preserving anonymity of remailer users, and brought up a point that in certain cases the list maintainer should be "trusted". Vulis followed up with a message insulting Gilmore, and said that Gilmore should not be trusted in that cryptographic protocol. Is that about cryptography? And if we answer no, why is our answer different from the answer for a discussion about machine guns? If we answer yes, we'd have no way to legitimately prevent other annoying insults. > Is finance unimportant to cypherpunks? I think this is a tougher argument > to make, but only because financial services and banks are not seen as the > kind of political entitites that free market systems generally are. Again, some aspects of finance -- for example, ensuring integrity and secrecy of electronic transactions -- are. Some, like whether blacks should pay higher rates in consumer loans, or why investment bankers make more than computer programmers -- are not. The litmus test should be the same. > Cypherpunks is an important and distinct list because of the intense cross > pollenization between e.g., cryptographers and finance types, > cryptographers and bankers, cryptographers and lawyers, cryptographers and > polititians. > > In the same way that crypto types despertly want the rest of the world to > become crypto savvy, it is important for crypto types to become > political, economicly savvy, and generally understand the larger context > of crypto applications. This is an excellent argument. I am not sure if my answer to it is any good, but do we want to make this a general education forum that is meant to be a free replacement for college and books? Probably not. "Political savviness for cypherpunks" probably does not mean that cypherpunks should learn here how to run campaigns. Financial savviness probably does not imply that cypherpunks should expect to learn here the methods of derivatives pricing, negotiating M&A deals, and security analysis. There are better places to do that. You are mentioning learning the "context of crypto applications", and that is very close to the answer that I had in mind. Discussions of all disciplines -- law, finance, politics -- are very important and relevant here as long as they are giving us the "context of crypto applications", and irrelevant beyond that. > > Cypherpunks will make the networks safe for privacy. > > And how will this happen without having the bankers, lawyers, polititians, > brokers, and economists in the boat? Having all these interesting people here does not contradict my proposals in any way. - Igor. From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jan 6 05:49:45 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 05:49:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: High-tech tracking by police raises legal outcry Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970106134505.00668844@pop.pipeline.com> On prohibitions against surveillance countermeasures: Here's a provocative distinction in "compromising emanations" (TEMPEST) from the Commerce Control List of the EAR: "List of Items Controlled 5A002.d Equipment designed or modified to suppress the compromising emanations of information-bearing signals; Note: 5A002.d does not control equipment specially designed to suppress emanations for reasons of health and safety." Wonder how much dangerous EMR the regs allow to keep the snoops happy. Reminds me of the brain-cancer-crypto NSA imposed on cellular phone intentional radiators. From aga at dhp.com Mon Jan 6 06:12:35 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 06:12:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: John Gilmore, 58, dead of AIDS In-Reply-To: <15448.852480953@zelkova.qualcomm.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Paul Pomes wrote: > |Somebody said it was a lie, but has anybody really SEEN this queer lately? > > Why do you care so much about Mr Gilmore's sexual orientation? Could there > be some internal conflict about your own that you'd like to share with us? > It would make a nice change from your usual rantings. > We care about his sexual orientation because it supports the proposition that MOST of the problem people currently on UseNet are "confirmed" homosexuals. Here is a list of three of the biggest problem people, and they are ALL problem people. J.D. Falk Peter Berger John Gilmore Of course, tale and Chris lewis have not been confirmed as homosexuals, so the percentage of "homos per.problem humanoids" will decline. > /pbp > -- > Fire mission ... battery one round ... rifle company in the open. Fire for > effect. (6 105mm rounds later) Add four hundred, left two hundred, > battalion six rounds. Fire for effect. > -- Lt Allen Bell, Chorwan Valley, Korea 1951 > > Nonetheless, the inordinately high percentage of homosexuals in the newsgroup administration is probably explained by the same social factors as the extremely high number of jews in the medical and legal professions and the high number of blacks in sports. From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jan 6 06:26:12 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 06:26:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: SPI_nRx Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970106142148.00682fc0@pop.pipeline.com> 01-04-97: "Commerce Official Sees Little Chance of Encryption Bill" Reinsch said it's unlikely Congress will pass legislation to change new encryption export policy. He defended new export policy and said that Supreme Court ultimately will decide constitutionality of regulations. And another spin on DoD's defensive IW. ----- SPI_nRx From aga at dhp.com Mon Jan 6 06:37:59 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 06:37:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Problems are Gay In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970105120913.0069c110@pop.netaddress.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Casey Iverson wrote: > At 06:20 AM 1/5/97 -0500, you wrote: > >Most of the time, the problems are Gay... > > > >I rest my case. > > > The arrogant, clueless, ignorant, homophobic Vulis tentacle > has no idea what the problem is. > HA! HA! Just who is this Casey Iverson asshole? Is this another faggot? -"Vulis tentacle" From vin at shore.net Mon Jan 6 06:39:36 1997 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 06:39:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: C'punks "moderation" experiment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dale Thorn melodramatically stalked in from Stage Right. >Well, Vin, without commenting on your plug for censorship, I can only >say that I hope you are *very* fond of Sandy Sandfort, since he becomes >YOUR LORD GOD for cypherpunks list purposes. >How many other gods do you have, Vin (if that's your real name, Vin)? When I get jumped by a guy like you, Dale (that your real name, btw?) I am all but overwhelmed by the urge to snarl in response. (It makes me wonder if _everything_ from _everyone_ hits you this way? That would explain a lot.) And I generally enjoy weirdness. Many Gods? Real names? As usual -- I swear by all the Gods;-) -- I haven't the faintest fucking idea what you are fussing, hinting, and going into a hissing fit all about! Where, pray tell, is your "censor" when a moderator is merely identifying a selection of the List's traffic as substantive? (While you and others of strong stomach are allowed to wallow in all the rest to your heart's content?) I'd be willing to defend a far less liberal mechanism against the slander of censorship. No one signed up to be force-fed this crap! (You need a audience, Dale, earn it -- don't try to trap the C'punks.) On any day in the past two years, John G. could have selected his proxy moderators by blind lottery from among the C'punks' subscribers... and 90 percent of the slime-balls and empty rants (and most of Thorne) would have been filtered out without going near a gray area. Personally, I don't mind the flames and smoke -- I just want a little meat somewhere on the grill too. (Yeah, priceless prose like this post might not make the cut either -- but I feel bad about enriching Dale's therapist further anyway.) I wish it wasn't necessary, but I think it is. (I know maybe 8 folks who fled the List in recent months.) I'm also heartened and impressed by the balance of process and human judgment that will inform the moderation. Suerte, _Vin Vin McLellan + The Privacy Guild + 53 Nichols St., Chelsea, MA 02150 USA <617> 884-5548 From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU Mon Jan 6 06:53:05 1997 From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 06:53:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: List of reliable remailers Message-ID: <199701061450.GAA27916@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu> I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = " cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{'alpha'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{'nymrod'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle ?"; $remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"death"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent post"; $remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; catalyst at netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth at ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura at replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 6 Jan 97 6:49:24 PST remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- weasel config at weasel.owl.de ++++++++++++ 1:06:21 99.99% nym config at nym.alias.net #*####***#*# :44 99.98% lucifer lucifer at dhp.com ++++-++++++* 36:39 99.95% middle middleman at jpunix.com -----------+ 2:15:55 99.95% mix mixmaster at remail.obscura.com +++++++++++* 49:01 99.94% balls remailer at huge.cajones.com ** +****+*** 3:49 99.93% squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de +++++++++++ 1:07:31 99.93% exon remailer at remailer.nl.com #** *# #**#* :50 99.76% cyber alias at alias.cyberpass.net **+++*+++*+ 29:19 99.75% haystack haystack at holy.cow.net *#+#+*#+ ### 1:23 99.69% dustbin dustman at athensnet.com .-*+-+-+_.- 14:53:49 99.51% winsock winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net .- _-------+ 6:37:01 99.49% replay remailer at replay.com -** +.-*+* * 1:16:47 99.13% reno middleman at cyberpass.net ----+- - --* 3:03:51 97.27% extropia remail at miron.vip.best.com -- ------- 5:42:33 96.37% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 07:12:57 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:12:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D11621.26@gte.net> Robert A. Hayden wrote: > Welp, I've been on this list for a long, long time, since its inception > way back when. [snippo] > I've been here since the beginning, and continue to be > here, because I have an interest in crypto, crypto policy, and the [mo' snippo] > And if a don't like the moderation decisions, by golly I can go somewhere > else. Nice thing is that anybody else can as well. Then why the hell don't you get off your ass and just "go somewhere else" now? Can you believe this bozo? Must be a Sandy tentacle. From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Mon Jan 6 07:29:14 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:29:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Double crypt strength Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970106102811.009d3af0@gateway.grumman.com> I am curious as to the strength of Un*x crypt when used upon itself. I was thinking of was to obfuscate passwords and a few came to mind (obviously not original): 1. Use a hashed passphrase. 2. Encrypt your original password and then used that as your password. (Or triple, quadruple, ad inifinitum...) Re #1: I know that a good hash will take a pass phrase and reduce it to a statistically random sequence. I'm not intending to use the hash for verfication, but for two reasons: 1. Get a nice random jumble 2. Come out with something shorter than I came in with. Re #2: This I thought might help spoil a dictionary attack. Granted, if the attacker knows that you are doing this, it only adds one step in his process, but if he doesn't it turns his attack into plain brute force. Plus, for Un*x users, it's right there on the command line and only adds a few seconds to the entire procees of changing passwords. The added benefit with both of these is that the user does not have to remember some cryptic string, but can remember his normal password/phrase. By this, it is obviously not a commercial-use scheme, but one for individual users. (If everyone used the same algorithm, it'd be kinda pointless, right?) So with everyone (hashing down/reencrypting) their (passphrases/passwords) with different algorithms, all attacks are reduced to brute force. Either that, or the attacker has to figure out what algorithm the user used, still making a dictionary attack that much harder. So what are the comments on a system like this? Obviously, they are not original ideas, but I would like to know what has been said about them. Rick Osborne / osborne at gateway.grumman.com / Northrop Grumman Corporation ------------------------------------------------------------------------- What the hell, it's only 4 month's grant - I can live in a cardboard box, and catch pigeons for food. After all, I've got raytracing to do! From aga at dhp.com Mon Jan 6 07:29:59 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:29:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: The FAGGOT list In-Reply-To: <199701060811.AAA08005@kim.teleport.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Wm_Wallace wrote: > Blow me!! > That is another FAGGOT coming out of the woodwork! > > > > > > > In article , aga > wrote: > > > On Thu, 2 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 10:50:21 -0500 (EST) > > > From: Chris Rapier > > > To: spam-list at psc.edu > > > Subject: regarding the minutes for the filtering meeting... (fwd) > > > Message-Id: > > > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > > Sender: owner-spam-list at psc.edu > > > Precedence: bulk > > > Reply-To: spam-list at psc.edu > > > > > > Hello all, > > > > > > These are the minutes from the informal meeting we had at IETF. As you can > > > see the focus of the work shifted from a narrowly defined anti-spam > > > concept to a more generalized mail filtering routine. I, and others, have > > > come to believe that shifting the focus like this will be more effective > > > in the long run. > > > > > > This is not to say that this is the only way to combat spamming. However, > > > at the present time it does seem the most promising and most likely to > > > garner IETF support. > > > > > > I'll be making some annnouncements with regards to direction and focus and > > > other resources in the next couple of days. I'm also going to start > > > working on a proposed Charter for this. If all goes well there is a > > > possibility we can have a real honest to goodness official type BOF in > > > Memphis. > > > > > > Chris Rapier > > > Systems Programmer/Cabin Boy 2nd Class > > > Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center The Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center is a well known FAGGOT operation, with both Peter Berger and the dyke Esther Felderman working there to hire FAGGOTS exclusively for future positions. > > > 11EE > > > > This guy said he was not a faggot, but I am not too sure > > any more. I am going to have to see this Chris Rapier personally > > in the next few months, and straighten the boy out. This little boy > > needs a Pittsburgh Education. > > > > > > > > Chaired: Chris Rapier > > > Minutes: Jack De Winter > > > > > > > Now it appears we have another problem gathering of faggots here. > > Just how many KNOWN faggots are on this list? > > > > > > > Attended: > > > Jack De Winter > > > Kirpal Khalsa > > > Benjamin Franz > > > Steve Hole > > > David Morris > > > Yaron Y. Goland > > > Chris Rapier > > > Rob Earheart > > > Sam Weiler > > > Chris Neumann > > > Randy Gellens > > > Lyndon Nerenberg > > > Matt Wall > > > John Meyers > > > Neal A Dillman > > > Ned Freed > > > Dan N. > > > Peter Taylor > > > John Noremburg > > > Neal McBurnett > > Most of the above men are apparently FAGGOTS, since they conspire to censor Freedom Of Speech on the InterNet, under the guise of "spam elimination." Actually, is all a front for censorship by homosexuals on the InterNet. > > All of these who are faggots must be labeled > > and watched, as we know that faggots are the worst censors. > > > > Let's all hope that John Gilmore fucks Peter Berger up > > the ass before he dies. > > > > Does anyone know this last guy from Bell Labs? > The question is does Bell Labs knowingly hire faggots? From roy at sendai.scytale.com Mon Jan 6 07:35:28 1997 From: roy at sendai.scytale.com (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:35:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: An observation on the moderation thread. Message-ID: <970106.070952.6C5.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Of passing interest: I'm seeing the majority of complaints about list moderation only as they are quoted in others' replies, because the origional complainents are already in my killfile. Carry on, Sandy and John. - -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy at scytale.com DNRC Minister Plenipotentiary of All Things Confusing, Software Division PGP Public Key fingerprint = 31 86 EC B9 DB 76 A7 54 13 0B 6A 6B CC 09 18 B6 Key available from pubkey at scytale.com, which works now -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtD6Phvikii9febJAQEYywP9GrCx0/UQJNns2kdwvyK2UcdGrETObWDG JeFc8ob+pEvX3mm89astZ2c6AF8tb77pGYofbGJu3qyLtsOFnQ+BJPBusZNta5wv 4NJ4I79rp5uioxyg/8mQbvoaMffYuuvAWVTzmI53eHXRl605Za8fkRlejXah2HSH iefACIE5pIw= =oeKw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From AJN at fs4.ucc.on.ca Mon Jan 6 07:52:43 1997 From: AJN at fs4.ucc.on.ca (DAVID ARTHUR) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 07:52:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <448BC8529D@fs4.ucc.on.ca> unsribrive From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 6 08:10:42 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:10:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Problems are Gay In-Reply-To: <32D0C2D9.3ADB@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <3L74ZD1w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Toto writes: > > > > > > > >I had lunch with Gilmore once. He slurps rather disgustingly when he eat > > > >I suppose he slurps the same way when he sucks big dicks in San Francisc > > Hell, now they're selling tickets to this. > Do CypherPunks get a discount? > > Toto > > I don't know, I'm not a "cypher punk". (Fortunately.) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From richieb at teleport.com Mon Jan 6 08:21:53 1997 From: richieb at teleport.com (Rich Burroughs) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:21:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experim Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970106082256.009bcc80@mail.teleport.com> At 02:54 AM 1/6/97 -0800, "Ross Wright" wrote: [snip] >So my question is: is there going to be a maximum number of times I >can say fuck in a good post? Like a 3-fuck limit? Or will you take >out the magic marker and draw through them? 5 fucks. Rich p.s. Has anyone mentioned censoring the word "fuck," besides Ross? ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb at teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause From grantham at ucsu.Colorado.EDU Mon Jan 6 08:25:22 1997 From: grantham at ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Jeff Grantham) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:25:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: '96 Act Tech Fund Message-ID: <32D09B34.603@ucsu.colorado.edu> Greetings, I am a researcher at the University of Colorado and I am looking for information on the Technology Fund mentioned in Section 552 of the Telecom Act. I have had little success in getting information on this fund perhaps because the v-chip has replaced it. This fund was supposed to be a voluntary effort by industry to come up with an alternative to the v-chip. The top 4 networks pledged $2 Million to this fund before the act was passed, but now it seems dead. The original legislation was proposed by Rep. Coburn (R-OKLA). This part of the telecom act is much milder than the v-chip stuff, but nobody knows what happended. If you have any information, web sites, new groups or articles that might be useful it would be very valuable to me. I am willing to share whatever information I find and post the final reserach on my web page. Thanks, Jeff Grantham From richieb at teleport.com Mon Jan 6 08:28:08 1997 From: richieb at teleport.com (Rich Burroughs) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:28:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970106082902.009394e0@mail.teleport.com> At 03:06 AM 1/6/97 -0800, toto at sk.sympatico.ca wrote: >I believe that every "EASY $$$ MONEY" posting ought to be forwarded >to the webmaster at the site from which it originated. > Those who are harboring these generous souls should also be afforded >the opportunity to rake in the cash. I can hardly see how anybody >could possibly resent being reminded of the wonderful opportuninties >they are making it possible for us to learn of. Be careful when mailbombing in retribution for spam. Often the aricles are forged, and sometimes it's with the direct intention of getting someone else mailbombed. I traded some email with a system administrator a few days ago in this boat -- they had cancelled a customer's account, and to get revenge the former customer sent out a bunch of spam that was forged to look like it came from this sys admin's domain. Even if the site wasn't literally mailbombed, the system administrator had to spend a lot of time, I'm sure, delaing with unhappy recipients of the spam, like myself. Mailbombing is almost always a bad plan, IMHO, besides being a denial of service attack and probably illegal in a lot of places. Rich ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb at teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 6 08:49:18 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:49:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anonymous Post Control Message-ID: <852567534.56897.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > Well the obvious answer seems to me to stop majordomo at toad.com > > accepting ANY messages from anonymous sources but let pseudonyms > > post, pseudonymous posting allows the owner of the nym to accumulate > > reputation capital without disclosing his or her true identity. > > Paul Bradley accumulated oodles of reputation capital with his > obscene rants about "brute force attacks on one-time pads". I do not see what was remotely "obscene" about a slip up of this kind, and please refrase from using the plural where it is not appropriate, I posted such a mistake once and immediately realised what I had said and retracted it. > > Now he wants more censorship. If you had cared to comment in the rest of my posting to your reply you would have seen that immediately after stating this solution I confirmed that I do not encourage this or condone it as it is censorship, but that it was merely a solution, not a good one granted but still worthy of mentioning. For those who (ahem) overlooked that part of my posting here it is again. >Bear in mind of course that this is a purely technical answer and I >happen not to believe that anonymous posting should be stopped. But of course you chose not to comment this in as it allowed you to credibly rant about me wanting censorship, at least argue with someone you have a dispute with rather than just randomly picking people and quoting parts of their posts out of context then flaming them. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Mon Jan 6 08:59:12 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 08:59:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: $$$ for IP plan..... Message-ID: <199701061659.LAA26346@wauug.erols.com> X-within-URL: http://rs.internic.net/arin/ AMERICAN REGISTRY FOR INTERNET NUMBERS PROPOSAL {chop} Below is the proposed plan for the organization structure and fee schedule. The organization will have more detailed bylaws which will be ratified by the Board of Trustees. _________________________________________________________________ An annual membership fee of $1,000 will be charged to all entities joining the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN). Membership is open to any entity/individual wishing to join, regardless of whether the entity/individual receives address space directly from ARIN. Membership is not a requirement for receiving address space from ARIN. _________________________________________________________________ SECTION 2.3 ISP REGISTRATION FEE If an ISP moves from a Small to a Medium category (for example) in the same year, the ISP will be charged the difference. Small $2500/year /24 - /19 Medium $5000/year >/19 - /16 Large $10K/year >/16 - /14 X-Large $20K/year >/14 ================================ Anyone care to calculate the total dollars? -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From sunder at brainlink.com Mon Jan 6 09:05:32 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:05:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Robert A. Hayden wrote: > I have no problems with the idea of moderating this list. If people wanna > waste my time with SPAM and petty flamewars, they shoudl do it in an > appropriate forum. I've been here since the beginning, and continue to be > here, because I have an interest in crypto, crypto policy, and the > politics surrounding it. Not to irk my system administrator with a daily > dose of CypherSPAM coming through her system. Erm, you mean "If people wanna waste my time with SPAM... they should NOT do it." :) If they spam your email from elsewhere it is still spam. If you don't want noise, I run a free filtered list. To get help on it, send a private message (do not reply to this one, or it will be ignored by the bots if it comes through cypherpunks) with the >SUBJECT< "fcpunx help" (the body of the message is ignored.) =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "If you're gonna die, die with your|./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|boots on; If you're gonna try, just |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |stick around; Gonna cry? Just move along|\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |you're gonna die, you're gonna die!" |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| --Iron Maiden "Die With Your Boots on"|..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jan 6 09:48:46 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 09:48:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: IWD_ism Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970106174418.00665a90@pop.pipeline.com> 1-6-96. "Information-Warfare Defense Is Urged" The Defense Science Board said the Pentagon should launch counterattacks against computer hackers by injecting the attackers' computers with "a polymorphic virus that wipes out the system, takes it down for weeks." The report largely sidesteps as irrelevant the continuing controversy about the export of encryption codes. ----- IWD_ism From antimod at nym.alias.net Mon Jan 6 10:08:08 1997 From: antimod at nym.alias.net (Against Moderation) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:08:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19970106180747.6966.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> "Mark M." writes: > To reduce the load on toad.com, I think it would be better to have > just "cypherpunks" and "cypherpunks-unedited". Messages approved > for the moderated list would be tagged with an "Approved:" header > and sent to both lists. Rejected messages would still go to the > unedited list, but would not have an "Approved:" header (this would, > of course, require that the moderation software rename or delete > "Approved:" headers). The only problem with this is that the lag > time for distribution of the unedited list might increase. Other people are suggesting things like this. I think it is a bad idea to tag the -unedited version of the list with moderation decisions, because then even the -unedited versions of messages would be delayed until a moderation decision had been made. Some people already have suitable mail/news filters, and would rather make their own article selections. Please don't make those people wait for moderation decisions. Instead, moderation summaries (for instance in NoCeM format) could be posted to another list, for those who want to know about moderation decisions. No matter what happens, there should definitely be some address through which people can receive a completely unedited, undelayed, unmoderaded copy of the mailing list. So if you want a tagged version of the list, there should also be a cypherpunks-raw or something. From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Mon Jan 6 10:27:34 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:27:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: IWD_ism In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970106174418.00665a90@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: <32D143DE.35B5@vail.tivoli.com> John Young wrote: > > ... injecting the attackers' computers with "a polymorphic > virus that wipes out the system, takes it down for weeks." Looks to me like somebody's trying to land a job writing X-Files scripts. - "Mulder, are you saying that virus was ... polymorphic? And that's what wiped out the system?" - "We both know a virus like that can take a system down for weeks. Now I'm just worried about what it'll do next." - "I didn't think anybody had actually made a successful polymorphic virus?" - "They haven't. Until now." ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From nobody at replay.com Mon Jan 6 10:43:33 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:43:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701061835.TAA00200@basement.replay.com> Toto wrote: > > (If you think our list is bad, you ought to see lists which are completely > > dominated by one-line witticisms and inside jokes....) > > Or 10,000 messages saying only, "Merry Christmas", followed a few days > later by another 10,000 messages saying, "Happy New Year". > Anyone who needs 'proof' that I am speaking the truth, here, (and who > has a 10Gb hard drive), can just send me their email address, and I > would be glad to forward them. Thanks for your kind offer. Please send the material to: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Better send several copies of each message to make sure none get lost.) I can also get mail at: aga at dhp.com Might as well send to both accounts. Thanks again! From trei at process.com Mon Jan 6 10:47:17 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:47:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #5 Message-ID: <199701061847.KAA28453@toad.com> DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #5 6 January 1997 Well, the New Year brings changes.... 1. I'm astonished at the low level of reaction RSA's announcement that they will be sponsoring a DES Challenge, with a $10,000 cash prize. I've been working with people at RSA to get this set up. It looks like there'll be an ascii-plaintext challenge (we won't know the full plaintext - just that it's ascii, and long enough to be unambigious), and the full prize will go the first person who emails them the key. This is pretty much what we need to recruit a large number of otherwise dis-interested people, and their machines. The code will be a tad slower than for an attack where we know the full plaintext of the block sought, but not much. 2. As for my code for WinTel machines - it's very close to an initial alpha release (squashing a few last bugs). I intend this to be used only for identifying porting issues. The first 'real' version is a couple weeks away. Once the alpha is out, I'll be looking at the new assembly language code from Eric Young and Svend Mikkelsen to see how it compares with mine. Since Eric independently matched my speed in the DES round, I want to see if he is using any different tricks than I. When it's released, my code will be able to: 1. Run a validity and speed test. 2. Accept a specified 32 bit 'chunk' of the keyspace to test. When it finishes a chunk, it appends information about whether it found the key to a results file, and also any half-matches it found along with a checksum. The latter two items help make cheating and sabotage more difficult. 3. Read it's input (plaintext, IV, etc) from a file. After the actual DES Challenge is announced, I'll hardwire that challenge into the program. 4. Periodically checkpoint it's status to a file. This is so that the program can be stopped at any time neccesary, without losing more than a few minutes work. At startup, it looks in this file for where to continue searching, unless instructed otherwise. It will NOT run as a screen saver. It's actually more efficient to run as a low-priority task in the background - that way it soaks up unused cycles even when a screen saver is not in operation. If someone else want's to incorporate it into an SS, go ahead. The alpha will run in a DOS box under Win95 and WinNT. A GUI interface may come along later. It will NOT talk to a keyspace server, though the format of the input and output should make it possible to add this in the future. I don't have time to develop both myself, and while people on the lists have proposed any number of complex schemes for setting up and managing a server, no one in the US seems willing to do the work (I'm worried about violating ITAR/EAR). I have a pretty good idea what needed in a server. At very least, I'd like to have people register the fact that they are taking part, so we get some idea of the level of effort being expended. The very first time it is started up on a given machine, if it is not given a specific chunk at which to start, it will pick one at random. The checkpointing scheme means that on later runs, it will pick up where it left off, advancing to the next chunk as it completes each one. For this purpose, we don't need cryptographically strong PRNG, just one that provides a fairly smooth distribution of results. This means that the search *will* complete, but the time is not as good as a carefully doled-out keyspace would provide. If you want to do the math, go ahead, but I think it will average about twice as long as a purely doled-out search to search the whole keyspace, and somewhat less to search half the keyspace. Peter Trei trei at process.com From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Mon Jan 6 10:48:37 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:48:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" Message-ID: <199701061848.NAA27186@wauug.erols.com> It might have been interesting to instead announce that Sandy & John were starting a NEW list..... It just happened to have the old name. And the old list? Still there at ....... After all, the end result is the same. [One problem -- does this mean SternFUD will be back?] -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 6 10:57:02 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:57:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Spam Trading In-Reply-To: <32D100DD.13EB@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: Toto writes: > 1 "Jimmy Gilmore is a cocksucker." It's John Gilmore of EFF. He's running for the Internet Society. let's shaft the fucking censor. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From nobody at replay.com Mon Jan 6 11:21:01 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 11:21:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] ZKP Message-ID: <199701061912.UAA03960@basement.replay.com> Tim Mayo is the living proof that anal sex causes pregnancy. /\ _ /\ | | 0 0 |-------\== \==@==/\ ____\ | \_-_/ _|| _|| From cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com Mon Jan 6 11:22:39 1997 From: cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com (cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 11:22:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970105175238.006a3b9c@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199701061924.LAA15159@count04.mry.scruznet.com> Please as soon as possible... make this into a moderated list... then I can kiss this noise goodbye... cheers a cypherpunk From blancw at microsoft.com Mon Jan 6 12:40:29 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 12:40:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Will off-topic libertarian bullshit be allowed on the moderated mailing list? Message-ID: From: Toto (from the thread "ONE MILLION CHILDREN.....") I can see that I'm going to have to lay in an extra supply of garlic and silver bulltets. I suspect that everyone on the CypherPunks list is either an employee of the NSA, or a member of the alleged 'Circle of Eunuchs'. In the words of the author of "Make BIG $$$", "Email everybody, and let Eudora sort them out." ..................................................... You're just tooooo funny, Toto. Fortunately you also have some agreeably accurate & serious things to say as well, such as: Perhaps if the 'experts', busy discussing highly-technical areas, were to take the time to educate those seeking to gain a wider knowledge of cryptography, then CypherPunks would have a broader base of active crypto-related postings. The more plants that you have in your garden, the less room there is for weeds. A broad base of different types of posters makes the list interesting; a serious consideration of the actual focal subject gives it credibility and respect. Of course, a forum is for conversation; some people who are extremely focused on their work don't want to talk all that much about it, and those who have a lot to say aren't necessarily engaged directly in the actual work involved. It's also much easier to make many small comments on a thread than to present a developed, coherent presentation of one's view. (I credit Tim May for often posting just such messages as these.) As a non-cryptographer my interest in the subject has to do with the role it plays in the context of maintaining/expanding "liberty" and of having tools to employ for privacy and independence from indiscriminate "regulators". Reading only about the code wouldn't keep me super-enthralled. But seeing the effects of it on all aspects of our regulated social existence, with the list as a starting point for understanding, is highly engaging. .. Blanc > From aaron at herringn.com Mon Jan 6 13:20:30 1997 From: aaron at herringn.com (aaron at herringn.com) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 13:20:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: IWD_ism In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970106174418.00665a90@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: >John Young wrote: >> >> ... injecting the attackers' computers with "a polymorphic >> virus that wipes out the system, takes it down for weeks." > >Looks to me like somebody's trying to land a job writing X-Files >scripts. [funny bit sadly removed] Ditto. Is there a URL I can go to for this report? From lefteris at kom.forthnet.gr Mon Jan 6 13:26:47 1997 From: lefteris at kom.forthnet.gr (L. A) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 13:26:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: JOIN US IN THIS NEW PROGRAM Message-ID: <199701062120.XAA24556@info.forthnet.gr> =================================================================== IF YOU'RE NOT INTERESTED IN THIS KIND OF BUSINESS, PLEASE FORGIVE ME FOR THE INTRUSION INTO YOUR MAIL BOX !!!! I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE A SECOND JOB, WHICH WILL GIVE ME - AND YOU OFCOURSE - A SECOND INCOME !!! =================================================================== WELCOME TO I.D.E.A. CONCEPTS, INC !!! If you have not yet heard about IDEA nor joined us in this powerful income producing opportunity for 1997 THEN please read the below and I think you will decide to join us as we take our I.D.E.A. around the world!! This I.D.E.A. will propel you into financial security for 1997 and beyond!! I am willing to bet that this one product alone will bring more people into I.D.E.A. than any other product that is currently available right now. It is our VITAMIN "O" and it is called "SYNTRA-GEN" . Below are some interesting facts surrounding the use of "Stablilized Liquid Oxygen" as reviewed in the Bio/Tech News that is readily available for YOUR review when you visit us at: www.ideaconcepts.com/ Stablilized Liquid Oxygen as reviewed in the Bio/Tech News is "One of the most important new health giving, disease preventing and life extending breakthroughs of the entire 20th century" Increases oxygen uptake at the cellular level; Dramatically boosts energy levels; Strengthens the Immune System; Quickly heightens concentration and alertness; Has a calming effect on the nervous system; Allows the body to focus plenty of oxygen on it's primary metabolic functions without having to draw down oxygen reserves to fight illness and disease; Rapidly kills infectious bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites without harming the beneficial microorganisms needed by the body; Gives the body the added oxygen it needs to oxidize and eliminate built up toxins and poisons in the cells, tissues and bloodstream; Greatly enhances uptake of vitamins, minerals, amino acids, proteins, enzymes and other essential nutrients from either natural food sources or from dietary supplements....... All of the above are very important BUT the one that really made its mark on me was THE LAST! Every vitamin/mineral/amino acid, etc will be enhanced as to its value to my family's health. This is VERY EXCITING NEWS! Now visit : www.multi-level.com/millennium/lefty.html join us, and visit : www.ideaconcepts.com/ through the links on it !! And you haven't even heard about the 60% payout on your 1st three levels yet plus "infinity bonuses". Then there is "NETmax" to handle all of your advertising needs for 1997. Prepare yourself for almost more excitment that you could ever have expected this early in 1997! Make I.D.E.A. Concepts, Inc your catalyst to Health & Wealth in 1997!! Join us NOW !!! YOU WON'T REGRET IT, THAT'S SURE !!!! From thad at hammerhead.com Mon Jan 6 13:45:16 1997 From: thad at hammerhead.com (Thaddeus J. Beier) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 13:45:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: IWD_ism Message-ID: <32D172D6.2781@hammerhead.com> John Young wrote: > > 1-6-96. > > "Information-Warfare Defense Is Urged" > > The Defense Science Board said the Pentagon should > launch counterattacks against computer hackers by > injecting the attackers' computers with "a polymorphic > virus that wipes out the system, takes it down for weeks." > This is completely unbelievable, who are these people? I believe that the polymorphic virus is originally from the classic "Shockwave Rider" and was seen as an impossible fiction even in that book of improbable fiction. -- Thaddeus Beier thad at hammerhead.com Visual Effects Supervisor 408) 287-6770 Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/people/thad From lefteris at kom.forthnet.gr Mon Jan 6 13:58:20 1997 From: lefteris at kom.forthnet.gr (L. A) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 13:58:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: JOIN US IN THIS GREAT PROGRAM Message-ID: <199701062157.XAA27506@info.forthnet.gr> =================================================================== IF YOU'RE NOT INTERESTED IN THIS KIND OF BUSINESS, PLEASE FORGIVE ME FOR THE INTRUSION INTO YOUR MAIL BOX !!!! I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE A SECOND JOB, WHICH WILL GIVE ME - AND YOU OFCOURSE - A SECOND INCOME !!! =================================================================== WELCOME TO I.D.E.A. CONCEPTS, INC !!! If you have not yet heard about IDEA nor joined us in this powerful income producing opportunity for 1997 THEN please read the below and I think you will decide to join us as we take our I.D.E.A. around the world!! This I.D.E.A. will propel you into financial security for 1997 and beyond!! I am willing to bet that this one product alone will bring more people into I.D.E.A. than any other product that is currently available right now. It is our VITAMIN "O" and it is called "SYNTRA-GEN" . Below are some interesting facts surrounding the use of "Stablilized Liquid Oxygen" as reviewed in the Bio/Tech News that is readily available for YOUR review when you visit us at: www.ideaconcepts.com/ Stablilized Liquid Oxygen as reviewed in the Bio/Tech News is "One of the most important new health giving, disease preventing and life extending breakthroughs of the entire 20th century" Increases oxygen uptake at the cellular level; Dramatically boosts energy levels; Strengthens the Immune System; Quickly heightens concentration and alertness; Has a calming effect on the nervous system; Allows the body to focus plenty of oxygen on it's primary metabolic functions without having to draw down oxygen reserves to fight illness and disease; Rapidly kills infectious bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites without harming the beneficial microorganisms needed by the body; Gives the body the added oxygen it needs to oxidize and eliminate built up toxins and poisons in the cells, tissues and bloodstream; Greatly enhances uptake of vitamins, minerals, amino acids, proteins, enzymes and other essential nutrients from either natural food sources or from dietary supplements....... All of the above are very important BUT the one that really made its mark on me was THE LAST! Every vitamin/mineral/amino acid, etc will be enhanced as to its value to my family's health. This is VERY EXCITING NEWS! Now visit : www.multi-level.com/millennium/lefty.html join us, and visit : www.ideaconcepts.com/ through the links on it !! And you haven't even heard about the 60% payout on your 1st three levels yet plus "infinity bonuses". Then there is "NETmax" to handle all of your advertising needs for 1997. Prepare yourself for almost more excitment that you could ever have expected this early in 1997! Make I.D.E.A. Concepts, Inc your catalyst to Health & Wealth in 1997!! Join us NOW !!! YOU WON'T REGRET IT, THAT'S SURE !!!! From gary at systemics.com Mon Jan 6 14:13:52 1997 From: gary at systemics.com (Gary Howland) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:13:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency In-Reply-To: <01ID64VQ21UOAEL9VT@mbcl.rutgers.edu> Message-ID: <199701062213.XAA20921@internal-mail.systemics.com> "E. Allen Smith writes: > Privately-produced currencies, with a few (unfortunately minor) > exceptions, are currently more of a free market economist idea than a reality; > current governments are quite close on keeping their monetary powers (witness > the protests in Europe against going the opposite way, to a common currency; > also witness governmental attempts at keeping the free market from determining > exchange rates). I would argue that it is the people, not the governments, that don't want a common currency in Europe. Of course it's a different story with the poor EU countries.... > It is possible that private digital currencies will solve > this problem, since they are much cheaper to produce than paper money is to > print and can be traded privately much easier. But digital currencies will never become fiat currencies, let alone legal tender, unless governments say they are. So why should they worry? (OK, OK, they will worry about tax evasion etc. etc.) > There are likely to still be > some legal problems with them, although A. selecting the proper country to > base an issuer out of and B. not actually making avaliable through the issuer > the reverse transaction - privately produced money to governmental money - > only transactions for governmental money to privately produced money and > privately produced money for services and/or goods may do the trick. You seem to be forgetting that trade is a two way operation. > Greater spendability refers to that when this bond is converted to > government-backed dollars, most businesses will currently accept such dollars. > This is unlikely to be the case for the first few years for a private > currency, although an increased ease of exchange of a digital (as opposed to > governmental paper) currency may make up for this difficulty. I doubt this - I'm sure companies as well as people are more inclined to trust some private organisations than they are governments. Of course there will always be a cost attached to the risk and ease of use. > I doubt that most of the governmental types involved in making this > decision know about privately produced currencies... but some may, and may > have encouraged central bankers et al (and those who oppose Greenspan for > his (quite admirable) opposition to inflation, like numerous politicians) to > encourage this idea; assuming complete innocence of a particular motive on > the part of any large organization is generally about as ignorant (and often > stupid) as assuming complete guilt. Moreover, government competition with > the private sector is rarely beneficial; in this particular area, I'd point > out that it isn't reducing the cost of borrowing, it's increasing it - when > lenders can lend to the government, they're _not_ lending to private > businesses and others who can make far better use of the money. This factor, > in a large part, is why most economists are in favor of a reduction in the > government deficit. Since you mentioned Greenspan, I thought I'd use the opportunity to quote him: "Regulation - which is based on force and fear - undermines the moral base of business dealings. It becomes cheaper to bribe a building inspector than to meet his standards of construction. A fly-by-night securities operator can quickly meet all the S.E.C. requirements, gain the inference of respectability, and proceed to fleece the public. In an unregulated economy, the operator would have had to spend a number of years in reputable dealings before he could earn a position of trust sufficient to induce a number of investors to place funds with him. Protection of the consumer by regulation is thus illusory." -- Alan Greenspan > P.S. Sorry about the lateness of this reply, but I'm just getting around to > some of my earlier mail. Likewise. Gary From cman at c2.net Mon Jan 6 14:33:49 1997 From: cman at c2.net (Douglas Barnes) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:33:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts on moderation Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970106143122.00d9d5d4@gabber.c2.net> Some thoughts -- 1) I've known Sandy for a couple of years, and I trust him to use good judgement as a moderator. It will be important to develop guidelines so that the job can be rotated, but it's also important that the moderator be someone who doesn't have any major axe to grind. Sandy has his personal likes and dislikes, but I don't think he'll ever stoop to tossing out opinions that he disagrees with. 2) I don't think that a post should be tossed out simply because it contains an ad-hominem attack, but only if it is entirely or almost entirely an ad-hominem attack. (Timmy May sucks cock, or John Gilmore dead of AIDS, or found drowned in his hot tub, or whatever...) I'd hate to see an otherwise substantive post get pitched out because it referred to Dorothy Denning as the Wicked Witch of the East or somesuch. 3) I agree that maintaining the list of posts that are tossed out is important as a check against abuse by the moderator. 4) I think that anyone who confuses the editing of a list with censorship is a complete fool, and should be sentenced to running a free counterculture newspaper in which he or she is compelled to publish whatever fevered ramblings enter the head of the members of the "community" without editing. [This is the voice of experience speaking here -- you don't want to do this.] Freedom of the press belongs to those that own presses. The Internet makes it a lot easier to own a "press", but it doesn't make them grow on trees, nor does it give you any special rights to appropriate someone else's press. (I'm assuming that the peurile lamers -- oops,ad-hominem alert -- who are arguing so strongly against editing the list also believe in property rights, yes?) FWIW, Doug From ericm at lne.com Mon Jan 6 14:41:07 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:41:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: IWD_ism In-Reply-To: <32D172D6.2781@hammerhead.com> Message-ID: <199701062240.OAA13379@slack.lne.com> Thaddeus J. Beier writes: > > > "Information-Warfare Defense Is Urged" > > > > The Defense Science Board said the Pentagon should > > launch counterattacks against computer hackers by > > injecting the attackers' computers with "a polymorphic > > virus that wipes out the system, takes it down for weeks." > > > > This is completely unbelievable, who are these people? > I believe that the polymorphic virus is originally from > the classic "Shockwave Rider" and was seen as an impossible > fiction even in that book of improbable fiction. And a virus that "wipes out the system, takes it down for weeks" is even more improbable- how long does it take to reinstall an OS? But the objective of this exercise is not computer science it is political science. All that's needed is something that sounds super-high-tech enough that (technically ignorant) members of Congress will buy into it and fund it. It doesn't have to actually work. This tactic has been successful for the military-industrial complex since before the end of WWII. They're just extending it in the new "information age". What do you want to bet that we will soon be hearing about needing "first strike" InfoWar capability in order to be able to "fight on two fronts at once" for "mutually-assured cyber-destruction". The first US Army counter-virus will be called the "peacemaker". :-) -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Mon Jan 6 14:49:58 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:49:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... Message-ID: <199701062248.OAA01889@peregrine.eng.sun.com> What did cypherpunks do to get so much spam? From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Mon Jan 6 14:57:32 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 14:57:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme Message-ID: <199701062255.OAA02600@peregrine.eng.sun.com> How about this simple policy scheme: 1) posts from known list members forwarded to list automatically 2) posts with "approval cookie" also forwarded automatically 3) otherwise, forwarded only after approval by moderator, whose charter only permits spam filtering. People who don't want to use their own name in a post, and also don't want to be bothered with creating a cookie are the only ones whose posts are delayed. From rbarnes at gil.com.au Mon Jan 6 15:10:26 1997 From: rbarnes at gil.com.au (Robert Barnes) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:10:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan Message-ID: Rich Burroughs wrote: >At 02:56 PM 1/6/97 +1000, Robert Barnes wrote: >[snip] >>My bottom line feeling with respect to this is that we cannot >>expect freedom unless we are willing to exercise responsibility. >>It is apparent that the people who are noisiest about freedom of >>speech and content censoring are working tirelessly to abuse >>the list and provoke the very opposite of their stated ideals. > >Hmmm. There has been some of that, but some of use who have spoken about >freedom of speech have done so because of legitimate concerns, not just to >gain advantage in an ongoing, juvenile campaign. I would say that there had been a lot more than "some of that". I believe that moderation as proposed does not really limit anyones Freedom of Speech. After all the list is intended as a forum to discuss the topic of cryptography and it's use by society, the list is not advertised as a free for all abuse forum or an unlimited conduit for spam. If you want Freedom of Speech go stand on a soapbox in your local town square. Would you complain that people who choose to walk on by and not listen to you are violating your right to Free Speech? Cypherpunks has the right to say "Enough, take the raves, rants and spam somewhere else". You are free to say what you want, but if it is off-topic, I don't want to see it in my inbox. > > >I think the idea of two versions of the list is an excellent one, and it >avoids the issues raised by presenting the list in only a moderated form. >If people want the spam they can have it, and if they don't they can take >advantage of John and Sandy's work, and read a more coherent version of the >list. I will certainly choose the latter, but it is nice to know that the >choice is mine. John and Sandy -- thanks for getting this rolling. You will certainly be in the minority, but you are right, the choice is yours to make and everyone else's as well. > >Rich >______________________________________________________________________ >Rich Burroughs richieb at teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb >U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state >dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause -------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Barnes Phone: +61 7 32529722 Fax: +61 7 32571403 Tritronics (Australia) Pty Ltd Email: robertb at tritro.com.au PGP Key fingerprint = 02 A6 22 5E 26 D3 7C 4D E2 91 9E 15 AC EA B1 58 Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key From markm at voicenet.com Mon Jan 6 15:25:50 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:25:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <19970106180747.6966.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 6 Jan 1997, Against Moderation wrote: > Other people are suggesting things like this. I think it is a bad > idea to tag the -unedited version of the list with moderation > decisions, because then even the -unedited versions of messages would > be delayed until a moderation decision had been made. > > Some people already have suitable mail/news filters, and would rather > make their own article selections. Please don't make those people > wait for moderation decisions. The problem with making an undelayed, unedited version of the list available is that it would increase the burden on toad.com. I suppose someone could run a mail exploder that would receive the raw version and mail it out to all subscribers. I don't see the increased lag as much of a problem. If an automatic moderation program is used, the lag should be insignificant for most posts. > Instead, moderation summaries (for instance in NoCeM format) could be > posted to another list, for those who want to know about moderation > decisions. This would not only increase the load on toad.com, but would also make it more difficult for people who want to receive the moderated version and monitor the moderators decisions. Mail filtering can be done simply on many mail programs, but checking a list of moderation decisions against the mailing list traffic would be just too complicated. NoCeM is a nice idea, but most people on this list probably do not have the platform needed to run the software. > No matter what happens, there should definitely be some address > through which people can receive a completely unedited, undelayed, > unmoderaded copy of the mailing list. So if you want a tagged version > of the list, there should also be a cypherpunks-raw or something. This would cause the same amount of load as having the three separate mailing lists. In fact, it would be even worse if cypherpunks-raw was treated as a completely separate mailing list instead of being aliased to the spam and moderated lists. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtGKxSzIPc7jvyFpAQE/lgf/W8sUlvNHYUUOoGwVNlNJpJeQ/PH7z3EA bu7hNEDVFmV4igSjcnGLQF3EiMaPVM8d3VWMkT6NHXs2OzLomsJqgKkaSV6l6GG7 fcYazsht9rtjo04ru/mYhl5EpZUbFUo/G2QC2giIcvaW1zyEYuQBXaRHD1hf0UuM 5H4U9b+nnzYOBVY22MmFI8b9xsOjOPTYV+tB9lKEOXNnZJeq6s37ainElh63eiXZ Ur90sX7StVQqWiXLJb62vIINBJd0/rkoHtAVQIrJxaqudOKgqQLv/vPGAhscy1Up 4/JKdzPobG37984/AwkpfbuV1jMO4tcyJVWQjawnxlNHxOW2L+mvRg== =kzCe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From richieb at teleport.com Mon Jan 6 15:54:18 1997 From: richieb at teleport.com (Rich Burroughs) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 15:54:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, Robert Barnes wrote: > I would say that there had been a lot more than "some of that". > I believe that moderation as proposed does not really limit > anyones Freedom of Speech. I'm all for the moderation experiment. Perhaps I didn't make that clear :) Rich _______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb at teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/ See my Blue Ribbon Page at http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/blueribbon/ dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause/ From antimod at nym.alias.net Mon Jan 6 16:23:31 1997 From: antimod at nym.alias.net (Against Moderation) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 16:23:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan Message-ID: <19970107002313.2511.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:29:51 -0500 (EST) > From: "Mark M." > > The problem with making an undelayed, unedited version of the list > available is that it would increase the burden on toad.com. I > suppose someone could run a mail exploder that would receive the raw > version and mail it out to all subscribers. I don't see the > increased lag as much of a problem. If an automatic moderation > program is used, the lag should be insignificant for most posts. Why do you think that load is a problem? I mean most people are not going to want to subscribe to multipel versions of the mailing list, right? So why are three mailing lists with a total of ~3,000 users any more of a load than 2 mailing lists with a total of ~2,000 users? Hell, I'll even volunteer to run the cypherpunks-raw list on my own hardware (thus blowing my nym, if it's really necessary) if I can get the articles as they are submitted in real time. > This would not only increase the load on toad.com, but would also > make it more difficult for people who want to receive the moderated > version and monitor the moderators decisions. Mail filtering can be > done simply on many mail programs, but checking a list of moderation > decisions against the mailing list traffic would be just too > complicated. NoCeM is a nice idea, but most people on this list > probably do not have the platform needed to run the software. 1. How would this increase the load? I don't see how multiple mailing lists cause more load if it doesn't mean more subscribers. 2. Even if it did mean more subscribers, why is load a problem? I mean, even sendmail can easily handle the current load of cypherpunks, and there are many packages way faster than sendmail (exim should be particularly good at this kind of load, for instance. Qmail is also generally way more efficient than sendmail). And don't tell me these are hard or a pain to install, because I'm willing to set this up and run it on my hardware if that's what it takes to get an unedited, unmoderated cypherpunks list. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtGXboCHQnqYPZ9VAQHzcwQArv9i3yiYlqRxqM1zAN/lhS8z9biL1guM 5YQJRGX8MFdh7IxYBkCvsV6r3qfmpfRKJuF/GqZZ0boYfwIF0BRPT3PGV/qoh1IR 5ltGMAaj/k5fpSIxRBk4NdtWR5RhpvMJSdqo7WDNWBuZtYCozno2G8BXwKPkZ5a2 Phqjs68VswE= =WWIq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From thad at hammerhead.com Mon Jan 6 16:54:47 1997 From: thad at hammerhead.com (Thaddeus J. Beier) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 16:54:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation Message-ID: <199701070055.QAA11918@hammerhead.com> I think that this is a completely fabulous idea, an commend John and Sandy for doing this. Let me add my own suggestion. This will fail if flames migrate from cypherpunks-flames to cypherpunks, I would attempt to prohibit threads that only exist in cypherpunks-flames being continued into the moderated list. This'll be hard to do, Sandy, I know, but if you could think of a way to do this, I think that your experiment is more likely to succeed. Phrases like "As I said in the letter that only got sent to cypherpunks-flames" should cause the whole article to be yanked, IMHO. thad -- Thaddeus Beier thad at hammerhead.com Visual Effects Supervisor 408) 287-6770 Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/people/thad From lucifer at dhp.com Mon Jan 6 16:56:43 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Mixmaster) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 16:56:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme Message-ID: <199701070052.TAA17597@dhp.com> >The proposal to limit "noise" posts by using re-usable tokens is >interesting because it has the effect of filtering and at the >same >time remains responsive because the "moderator" passes judgement >after posting has occurred. > >In essence, the poster is betting that the moderator will approve >the post retroactively. > >The purpose of limiting the tokens available is to give them >value >so that there is a cost associated with losing the bet. > >However, distribution of the tokens has the same problems that >centrally >planned economies have distributing bread. Should people wait in >line, >receive bread at random, or get their bread through connections? > None of >these solutions is attractive. > >The right way to implement the scheme is to use dollars for >tokens >because the USG has already solved the problem of giving the >tokens >value. > >The "moderator" returns the money to people when posts are >worthwhile >and keeps it otherwise. This means that the "bet" can be quite a >bit >larger than a dollar because responsible posters will get their >money >back. Starving graduate students will not be discouraged from >posting. >Abusive posters, anonymous posters, or spam artists will have to >pay >a substantial fee for the privilege. > >Of course, there's no reason to have just one moderator on the >list. >A moderator could just be an e-mail account that forwards mail to >the list if valid payment is received. (Moderators should PGP >sign >their messages so mail forging won't work.) Readers could filter >on which moderators have approved the kinds of posts they want to >read. > >The effect of this scheme is to allow newcomers, infrequent >posters, >or anonymous posters to get through killfiles without taking the >time and effort to develop a reputation. > >Peter Hendrickson >ph at netcom.com Why the FUCK don't we just find the antichrist or call on GOD to kill all spammers and then buy a gun and shot holes in the computer?? this whole isssue will never be solved without action get a fuckin real job!!!!!! From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jan 6 17:08:13 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:08:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970106170333.006c0d5c@192.100.81.126> At 02:55 PM 1/6/97 -0800, Ed Falk wrote: > >How about this simple policy scheme: > > 1) posts from known list members forwarded to list automatically > 2) posts with "approval cookie" also forwarded automatically > 3) otherwise, forwarded only after approval by moderator, whose charter > only permits spam filtering. Seems this is what the STUMP scheme we read about yesterday does. I suggest Sandy and John take a good look at it. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From haystack at cow.net Mon Jan 6 17:08:15 1997 From: haystack at cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:08:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <9701070051.AA17090@cow.net> Tim C. May's aberrant sexual life has negatively impacted his mental integrity. o)__ (_ _`\ Tim C. May z/z\__) From pclow at extol.com.my Mon Jan 6 17:16:24 1997 From: pclow at extol.com.my (pclow) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:16:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: IWD_ism Message-ID: <97Jan7.172538gmt+0800.21889@portal.extol.com.my> >John Young wrote: >> >> ... injecting the attackers' computers with "a polymorphic >> virus that wipes out the system, takes it down for weeks." > >Looks to me like somebody's trying to land a job writing X-Files >scripts. I beg to differ! Sounds more like Independence Day to me. Is Jeff Goldbum on the list? From cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com Mon Jan 6 18:19:22 1997 From: cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com (C Matthew Curtin) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:19:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701060306.WAA22463@wauug.erols.com> Message-ID: <199701070209.VAA04413@goffette.research.megasoft.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> "Igor" == Igor Chudov @ home writes: Igor> Moderation may or may not be a good idea, but it is important Igor> that readership keeps a close eye on their rulers. I certainly agree, and would venture a guess that Sandy would also agree. After all, doesn't the proposal also include a completely unfiltered version of the list, as well as a list made up of messages that the moderator rejected? Some of the most interesting projects to combat spam and other nonsense recently have tended to focus on ways to allow folks the ability to choose whose judgement they want to trust, and/or ignore the rants and spews of idiots without actually silencing them. These seem to be the solutions with the greatest potential for dealing with the problem without introducing lots of other social ramifications. I, for my part, will read the moderated version, and watch the list of rejects for things that Sandy's criteria for rejectable might be different from mine. I expect these differences to be few and far between, if they exist at all. If you prefer to read the list completely without moderation, that is your prerogative, and the proposed requirements for a moderated list (i.e., availability of an unmoderated list) allows that. What isn't clear to me is why some seem so interested in the (pointless) name-calling and opposition to the availability of the list in moderated format. - -- Matt Curtin Chief Scientist Megasoft, Inc. cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com http://www.research.megasoft.com/people/cmcurtin/ I speak only for myself Hacker Security Firewall Crypto PGP Privacy Unix Perl Java Internet Intranet -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Have you encrypted your data today? iQEVAwUBMtGwPH6R34u/f3zNAQHvIgf+NUc0+a/BXxuYdqBC7+3LLrur4tYB4EQE ZJNmx++nMiHr6c3vIxlWxxK/i+jvJrOxsMl6Cn1kyALFOURpz3Bh8oJ8m8jsSaBQ uc20CXhy8x4JWlK1UZBSRSlfSLLyq584Iav6DtTPnas2sFHP9JQUSPrNtj82ab71 O7Zct+GFZ7EuSdf8otRDx5Yo+wElNxCYOtZvLGTXEgEL8kaXdm7JtTKHLpujU5Kx JpBqODyXiplt5+sy4F/0svFoH2pKFcDGKCsap0+er4t185yz6a1G/xkki+whrrG2 xJ9vAEc3HtDYZsE6PGQUdikOZXKXQeZ0qeGg7ffOxrmAagJB4Wscug== =mfvS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com Mon Jan 6 18:25:35 1997 From: cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com (C Matthew Curtin) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:25:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701070216.VAA04417@goffette.research.megasoft.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> "Dale" == Dale Thorn writes: Dale> I'll tell you something else. If I have an opportunity to Dale> contribute to a project that can fight censorship of this kind, Dale> I will do so eagerly. OK, Dale, you oppose censorship. If you don't like the moderated version of the list, subscribe to the unmoderated version. As long as an unmoderated version is available, what, exactly, is the problem? - -- Matt Curtin Chief Scientist Megasoft, Inc. cmcurtin at research.megasoft.com http://www.research.megasoft.com/people/cmcurtin/ I speak only for myself Hacker Security Firewall Crypto PGP Privacy Unix Perl Java Internet Intranet -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Have you encrypted your data today? iQEVAwUBMtGx/H6R34u/f3zNAQHgHAf7Bvmh0dzKaVMuo3vPTOJWYVKNIeIbN6OZ fa0ZW4Z3pqkPPXB33PLHR6gr3VZKqLMV0KA2FOx3jyp0kVZz4O6BxjZdo0jQtdvX t2XR+oE8XbFZ8oW7A/U5iPO0S7qgOMZiTNNiQdpzNaEVOnrlZWqMIHyTWgVIfyuY DNd3ruTRKRdY7gGe2pr7lU6fkPerJQUnfyga6CRqzaeY+s8xuuLmLoGhPrdCnpRd lCWagMgOl7UTYDhdz52HgAvQ+Zq0n7kjAfhA3YRD1YQYGKPhAr+zW/TwRVpumDsZ zDmEPzfIq+Jlw9gqgUCUNtEr3T3ThFfKBF3/pVyxVpUE7Au5grF6xw== =8OKB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From rcgraves at disposable.com Mon Jan 6 18:31:17 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:31:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D1B505.13D4@disposable.com> I like it. My take on the issues I see here: 1) Moderator liability and anonymous posting. The open nature of the list means that "copyright violations" threads and the like are thought more or less safe for the people who own toad.com. With moderation, this is less likely to be as "safe." Without calling for a blanket assault on copyrights (I do have friends who make their living as writers), and speaking only selfishly, I think it would be a shame to lose the "copyright violations" posts. So I think we need a way to diminish or at least distribute moderator liability. Let's revisit the "Member of Parliament Problem" thread of a month or so ago for solutions. Presumably STUMP or some other moderation tool could be modified to support a secure anonymous- approval protocol. 2) "Vote of confidence in Sandy." No. I agree with Igor Chudov. Absolute power corrupts; confidence, and particularly votes of confidence (this isn't a popularity contest), are the wrong way to go. Try "trust, but verify." As many of you know, I'm still barred from a list run by another cypherpunks subscriber for reasons I consider totally invalid. While I have confidence in much of what this person writes, and don't mind if other people have full confidence in him (because he's usually on the right side), this content-based censorship, and particularly the lack of transparency about it (his list never had this kind of discussion, nor do most of his subscribers even know that some people are banned), bugs me. 3) Full v. filtered v. flame lists. I'd choose to dump the full list, keeping the flame & filtered. People who want to can simply subscribe to both, and filter them into the same incoming mailbox, for the same effect. Only minor problem I'd forsee is that the flame list might propagate faster than the filtered list because it would have fewer subscribers. 4) "Qui custodiet ipsos custodes." When I first saw that thread title, I thought it pertained to the moderation proposal. It could. That's why I'd like to see the rejected messages archived, at least for a while, as they are with Chudov's STUMP. What I'd like best, since I don't particularly want to waste bandwidth or my disk space with what would, by definition, be mostly crap, is a hks.lists.cypherpunks.flames on the open nntp port I'm using to read cypherpunks today. As some of you have noticed, I'm not on the list now, because most of it is junk; I just point Netscape at HKS Inc's open port whenever the whim strikes me, and grab the few messages that look interesting. I'd like to do the same with the "flame" list, every couple days. Of course, HKS and the other public archives would make that decsion, and I thank them for the free service they've provided me so far. 5) "[Mostly libertarian] off-topic political junk." As someone who disagrees with a lot of, variously, Tim's, Lucky Green's, and attila's politics, I strongly agree with them that that's what I'm on cypherpunks for. The alternative is not just coderpunks, but also Perry's cryptography at c2.net, which is dedicated to the issues that cypherpunks were apparently originally about. (I can't really say for sure, because the majority of messages have been off-topic since about January 1996, and I only joined in October 1995.) I don't think it's a capitulation to admit that cypherpunks has evolved/devolved to a forum that bears little resemblance to its original charter. What we are is a bunch of mostly (but not all) libertarian ranters and ravers who are, for various and not necessarily consistent reasons, interested in the theme that ubiquitous strong crypto is a good thing. (I just edited the previous sentence to change "believe that it's a good thing" to "are interested in" because I wouldn't mind having a Denning or a Sternlight here.) Not all threads need have *anything* to do with that theme for the forum to be useful to me. This happens to be the only place I get to hear people like Lucky Green and Tim May rant and rave about all sorts of other topics (I mean that in a good way; I read most of what they write, and while I don't always agree with it, it's always important). I don't want to lose that unique opportunity just because it's "off-topic." -rich From will at bbsi.net Mon Jan 6 18:35:12 1997 From: will at bbsi.net (will) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:35:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: PWL's how ? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970102213451.00691d6c@pophost.bbsi.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 481 bytes Desc: not available URL: From markm at voicenet.com Mon Jan 6 18:40:44 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:40:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <19970107002313.2511.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 7 Jan 1997, Against Moderation wrote: > Why do you think that load is a problem? I mean most people are not > going to want to subscribe to multipel versions of the mailing list, > right? So why are three mailing lists with a total of ~3,000 users > any more of a load than 2 mailing lists with a total of ~2,000 users? I guess we will have to see how the "experiment" goes. The original list did say that one of the non-moderated lists would be discontinued. Anyone who wants to receive the full list but be able to sort according to moderator's approval will have a difficult time doing this without subscribing to more than one list. If one of the two non-moderated lists gets dropped, the only way to do this would be to subscribe to two lists receiving duplicate messages. > 2. Even if it did mean more subscribers, why is load a problem? I > mean, even sendmail can easily handle the current load of cypherpunks, > and there are many packages way faster than sendmail (exim should be > particularly good at this kind of load, for instance. Qmail is also > generally way more efficient than sendmail). And don't tell me these > are hard or a pain to install, because I'm willing to set this up and > run it on my hardware if that's what it takes to get an unedited, > unmoderated cypherpunks list. Bandwidth is a problem. This list distributes about 50 2K messages to 1500 subscribers per day (this is just an estimation, but I don't think it's too far from reality). This amounts to 150Mb per day. I'm sure compute cycles aren't too much of a problem. Anyway, I'm just basing most of this on the original announcement. I don't know to what extent this will effect toad. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtG4gCzIPc7jvyFpAQEPowgAnnAKh+RxpAEBxcxFS5hMjtaWJXOZYiXa +KRpmdHSZDxJ0N6JtFr9KCk+w9FOmCkgNGa8xo/D7GNMkHOBxMjoamVRhwWhklwu roiUbPB7pMuTrnEeh2m+csC58wY7DSQjgIm8XrIKcwkDCWWYJ9fk93j1EBKdjTW9 SSrjzzEMwjjPzoWh6x4nyyGW4A/sgzdhTosPjdjHJd7M//SXDkCJ2UUe3jUF+buS Hz7iiEzsx+9zmwWxE8zcv5b2jBqIOCGjmRmQjvxfLAQwU6HuD80DZMpDaBVUIGwe qO5CQsv6sQ9LgVwcPHv3viyeFIWO9NXGNdQ9NOI+Ha0Xq1Hy0TlQ5w== =pq8e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mpd at netcom.com Mon Jan 6 18:56:59 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 18:56:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge Message-ID: <199701070256.SAA00819@netcom8.netcom.com> Peter Trei (trei at process.com) writes: > 1. I'm astonished at the low level of reaction RSA's > announcement that they will be sponsoring a DES Challenge, > with a $10,000 cash prize. I'm certainly jumping up and down and cheering. I said a while back that the life expectancy of DES would be about two weeks if anyone forked over serious cash. I'm also pleased to see they will be offering prizes for trying to break Ron Rivest's new RC5 cipher, which scrambles using data dependent rotates as its only non-linear operation. This is very speedy, and if it turns out to be robust, will be a nice fast efficient drop-in replacement for most other popular block ciphers. > I've been working with people at RSA to get this set up. It looks > like there'll be an ascii-plaintext challenge (we won't know the > full plaintext - just that it's ascii, and long enough to be > unambigious), and the full prize will go the first person who > emails them the key. Ick. Why overly complexify things? A known plaintext attack would be far more straightforward. After all, the goal is to recover the key, not the message. Having to find a key which decrypts to something having all high bits clear will discourage people who might want to take a crack at this independent of the canned program you are going to distribute. [snip] > It will NOT run as a screen saver. Too bad. The screensaver paradigm is something the unwashed masses can easily understand. > The very first time it is started up on a given machine, if > it is not given a specific chunk at which to start, it will > pick one at random. The checkpointing scheme means that on > later runs, it will pick up where it left off, advancing to > the next chunk as it completes each one. This is VERY IMPORTANT. Unlike factoring problems, where the data supplied by people can be checked in a small fraction of the CPU time used to generate it, searching a keyspace is very vulnerable to sabotage or stupidity on the part of the people doing the searching. It is well worth the extra factor of 2-3 to guarantee that the exercise will eventually terminate. Sounds good, but I would prefer matching plaintext and ciphertext with the goal of recovering the key. This is really the situation that would exist for someone tapping financial data on a line, and knowing the plaintext of a transaction he deliberately generated for testing purposes. K.I.S.S. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 6 19:10:26 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:10:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: <199701061924.LAA15159@count04.mry.scruznet.com> Message-ID: <0L45ZD3w165w@bwalk.dm.com> cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com writes: > > > Please as soon as possible... make this into a moderated list... > > then I can kiss this noise goodbye... > > cheers > a cypherpunk I'm glad I'm not a "cypher punk" and oppose censorship. Comrade Goen is not a real person. He's another Timmy May tentacle. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 6 19:10:33 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:10:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme In-Reply-To: <199701062255.OAA02600@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) writes: > How about this simple policy scheme: > > 1) posts from known list members forwarded to list automatically > 2) posts with "approval cookie" also forwarded automatically > 3) otherwise, forwarded only after approval by moderator, I.e., libel from Timmy May, Ray Arachelian, and the rest of the gang is approved automatically, and when a victim tries to defend himself and to point out that Timmy May is a liar, the response is delayed and probably rejected by the moderator. It's been said that the best response to speech one doesn't like is more speech. "Cypher punks" want to take away the victim's ability to respond to the lies being posted on their mailing list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 6 19:12:08 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:12:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why hate David Lesher..... In-Reply-To: <199701061659.LAA26346@wauug.erols.com> Message-ID: <1045ZD6w165w@bwalk.dm.com> "David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states" writes: Why are you hated by RBOC's in 5 states? I think I saw you at a DC punks meeting last August and you didn't look like a kind of guy capable of generating much hatred. :-) Also, are these 5 separate RBOC's, or the same RBOC servicing 5 states? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 6 19:12:14 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:12:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Ray Arachelian writes: > If you don't want noise, I run a free filtered list. To get help on it, > send a private message (do not reply to this one, or it will be ignored > by the bots if it comes through cypherpunks) with the >SUBJECT< "fcpunx > help" (the body of the message is ignored.) When Ray Arachelian posts lies to this mailing list, he also forwards them to his censored mailing list. When the victims of Arachelian's libel refute his lies, Ray does not forward their responses to his mailing list. Sandy liked this setup so much, he wants the whole "cypher punks" mailing list to be censored this way. No wonder - "cypher punks" are opposed to wide availability of crypto, privacy, secure communications, and free speech in general. As they keep saying, free speech should only be available to the "elite" who will use it "responsibly" - no free speech for Jews or homophobes. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From Raymond at advcable.com Mon Jan 6 19:19:04 1997 From: Raymond at advcable.com (Raymond Mereniuk) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:19:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why This List Should Be Moderated Message-ID: The following message is a very good reason why this list should be moderated. I keep writing rules (filters) to catch and delete such messages but the sender keeps changing something and I must write a new rule. The moderation proposal sounds great and I would like to thank the moderators in advance for stopping messages like the following from reaching my mailbox. Also, could Mr. Haystack please advise the group of his current medication(s), we don't want anyone to suffer the same side-effects. >>> Bovine Remailer 1/6/97, 04:51pm >>> Tim C. May's aberrant sexual life has negatively impacted his mental integrity. o)__ (_ _`\ Tim C. May z/z\__) From unicorn at schloss.li Mon Jan 6 19:22:03 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:22:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D0BD19.1AB7@gte.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Black Unicorn wrote: > > On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Marc J. Wohler wrote: > > > > I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the > > > > quality of our list. > > > > And I have all the confidence in the world in William Bennett, > > > George Bush, and all their wonderful helpers in helping with the > > > Boys and Girls Clubs of Southern California. > > > Why not re-elect Hitler? > > > One knows one has come up with a potent weapon against one's enemies when > > they begin to panic visibly like this. The smell of fear is in the air. > > Fear? What fear? I had a long and productive life before I subscribed > here, and what with 1,000 or so programming projects awaiting me (and > most other competent programmers), I certainly won't be wasting time > bemoaning the fact that Sandy Sandfort "won" here, any more than I > bemoan the fact that most wars anywhere are won by the bad guys. Uh, Mr. Thorn, you already have wasted time in exactly that way. > > The question is, will the ultimate internet trump card of a distractor > > (Reference Godwin's law) divert the issue and save poor Mr. Thorn from a > > policy which is certainly going to be a devastating impact on his public > > exposure from here on out? > > I'll tell you something else. If I have an opportunity to contribute to > a project that can fight censorship of this kind, I will do so eagerly. Calling the moderation plan on the table "censorship" is quite a stretch. I'm sure it serves your rhetorical purposes, but other than that it is merely hot air. > OTOH, I have no "tentacles", nor will I ever have such things. I am not > a communications, security, O/S, or other such kind of programmer/person, > and I will not get into those types of applications short of physically > saving my life. In other words, if Sandfort/Gilmore cuts me off in the > long run, it's doubtful you'd hear from me again unless something is > forwarded from Freedom-Knights, and even that is doubtful. > > > It does amuse me that George Bush and William Bennett are thrown out > > for fear mongering purposes before Godwin's law is invoked. > > One would think you would understand the principle of using examples > to illustrate a point. When those examples are chosen in a logical and directed way to accomplish the intended association, yes. You, however, have failed on both accounts here. > The very idea that those names would automatic- > ally inspire fear is amusing. Your propaganda knowledge is sorely lacking for one who would aspire to influence thought by invoking Hitler and Bush in consecutive sentences. I admire your honesty in admitting yourself that those names were poorly chosen, however. > > One would think Mr. Thorn had mistaken the list for a liberal stronghold. > > Having read a lot of the crap put out by organizations from the KKK to > the ADL (all scumbags BTW), I no longer take the naive position that a > person is "liberal" Seems your reading habits and choice of material have twisted your psyche a bit beyond the point of reason. > (hence, one-dimensional) or "conservative", or any > other convenient tag. Some people are liars, hypocrites, and assholes, > though, and I prefer to determine that by their actions rather than > their speculations. You're batting 0 for 5. > > Then again, no one ever accused Mr. Dale "Snake Oil" Thorn of being > > afflicted with a strong writer's sense of audience). > > You mean I don't tailor my prose to what people want to hear? I mean you have no clue what prose is appropriate and what is not. Selling snake oil on this list, for example. > Better yet, I don't go somewhere else where maybe I would be more > welcome with my ideas? That you don't flaunt ideas clearly flawed to the experts in the field would be a better example. > I'm embarrassed for you, for your lack of > imagination. And if the "snake oil" tag refers to my ideas on > crypto software (i.e.., PGP), well, you have a long way to go > before you provide a serious mental challenge to me. The bathroom is at the end of the hall. It's not a long walk. -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From demo at offshore.com.ai Mon Jan 6 19:50:51 1997 From: demo at offshore.com.ai (Vince) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 19:50:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypherpunks moderator robot In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970105202032.00691618@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: Lucky Green: > At 09:02 PM 1/5/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >With STUMP robomoderator, the great majority of posts are autoapproved, > >because they come from preapproved posters. In the newsgroups moderated > >by STUMP, moderators review only a small fraction of incoming messages. > > I like this. Seems that list moderating technology has made some progress. The cypherpunks moderator robot should check PGP signatures for the "preapproved posters" - it is just too easy to forge email. And the human moderator should be willing to put any regular posters onto the list of "preapproved posters". Any preapproved who mutated into a flamer would be removed from the list. Newbies would have to be around for a bit to get on. Should work well enough. -- Vince From declan at well.com Mon Jan 6 20:15:44 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:15:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Foreign spies snoop the Net, from The Netly News Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:14:17 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Foreign spies snoop the Net, from The Netly News The Netly News http://netlynews.com/ SPY VS. SPY January 6, 1997 By Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com) Move over, James Bond. Take your last bow, Maxwell Smart. Modern spies are jacked into the Net, a recent report from the multiagency National Counterintelligence Center says. It claims the Internet is now the "fastest growing" means for foreign governments and firms to gather information about U.S. businesses. The eight-page quarterly report says that malevolent "foreign entities" are sorting through web sites, pounding on search engines and firing off e-mail queries to U.S. defense contractors in hopes of winnowing out sensitive data. "Use of the Internet offers a variety of advantages to a foreign collector. It is simple, low cost, non-threatening and relatively 'risk free' for the foreign entity attempting to collect classified, proprietary, or sensitive information... We also know foreign intelligence and security services monitor the Internet," says the report, which is distributed to government agencies and contractors. Search engines apparently serve spies well. Want a copy of something you shouldn't be able to get? Perhaps it was left in an unprotected directory; try Altavista. "Foreign intelligence services are known to use computers to conduct rudimentary on-line searches for information, including visits to governments and defense contractors' on-line bulletin boards or web sites on the Internet. Access to Internet advanced search software programs could possibly assist them in meeting their collection requirements," the NACIC briefing paper says. Beware of spam from spies, it warns: "These foreign entities can remain safe within their borders while sending hundreds of pleas and requests for assistance to targeted US companies and their employees." Of course! This is any e-mail spammer's modus operandi: Flood an astronomical number of addresses at an infinitesimal cost. Then hope that at least some recipients will respond with the information you want. This isn't the first time that the Clinton administration has painted economic espionage as a dire threat. Last February, FBI director Louis Freeh warned the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence of the possible harm. He said foreign governments are especially interested in "economic information, especially pre-publication data" including "U.S. tax and monetary policies; foreign aid programs and export credits; technology transfer and munitions control regulations... and proposed legislation affecting the profitability of foreign firms acting in the United States." Note to Freeh: That information already is online. For proposed legislation, try Thomas -- or for munition regulations, the White House web site is a good bet. But forget Freeh's rhetoric. The White House isn't serious about halting the overseas flow of American secrets over the Net. If it were, President Clinton would lift the crypto export embargo. Strong encryption is the most effective way for companies to fend off foreign data-pirates, but current regulations allow U.S. multinational firms to use only the cipher-equivalent of a toy cap gun. Worse yet, last week the Commerce Department moved further in the wrong direction by releasing its new encryption export regulations that continue to keep American businesses at a competitive disadvantage compared to their foreign competitors, which generally are less hampered by crypto export rules. "The new regulations are worse" than the old, says Dave Banisar, a policy analyst at the Electronic Privacy Information Center. Sure, France and Britain spy on us for economic purposes. But we're just as guilty. We snooped on the French -- and got several U.S. "diplomats" kicked out of France two years ago. We peeked at Japanese secrets during automobile trade negotiations -- and got caught then, too. Especially under President Clinton, economic intelligence has become part of the mission of our spy agencies. Yet if we complain about other countries while doing it ourselves, we become hypocrites. Stanley Kober, a research fellow at the Cato Institute, argues in a recent paper that it's "folly" for the U.S. to continue such spying and risk alienating political allies: "The world is still a dangerous place, and it would be folly for the democracies to engage in nasty intramural squabbles. Yet that is the danger that economic espionage against other free societies poses." "Washington ought to consider that it may need the cooperation of Paris (or other Western capitals) to help deal with a mutual security threat" from terrorism, Kober writes. I asked Kober what he thought of the NACIC report. "It strikes me as a normal security reminder," he says. "The specifics are fairly slim. It's not the sort of thing that's sent to everyone. It's sent to their clients, the people who have government contracts. Since the Internet is new, they're telling people to be careful." Indeed, netizens must be careful. It's common sense, really, and defensive driving for the Net. Encrypt that e-mail. Use the anonymizer at least once a day. Let paranoia be your watchword. That e-mail from your mother may come from the KGB. When you're not watching it, your monitor may be watching you. Be afraid, Maxwell Smart. Your shoe phone may be listening back. ### From wb8foz at netcom.com Mon Jan 6 20:52:54 1997 From: wb8foz at netcom.com (wb8foz at netcom.com) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:52:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Germany Passes Sweeping Cyberspace Legislation 01/06/97 (fwd) Message-ID: <199701070452.UAA23628@netcom11.netcom.com> BONN, GERMANY, 1997 JAN 6 (NB) -- By Sylvia Dennis. The German government passed a major round of legislation in the runup to Christmas that aims at regulating the Internet and protecting user privacy. No surprise there.... {} The law also prohibits the use of "cookies," software applets that trace a user's path across the Internet and recording the data they view. This is, to me! -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From steve at edmweb.com Mon Jan 6 20:57:31 1997 From: steve at edmweb.com (Steve Reid) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 20:57:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge In-Reply-To: <199701070256.SAA00819@netcom8.netcom.com> Message-ID: > > It looks like there'll be an ascii-plaintext challenge (we won't > > know the full plaintext - just that it's ascii, and long enough to > > be unambigious) > > Ick. Why overly complexify things? A known plaintext attack would be > far more straightforward. After all, the goal is to recover the key, > not the message. I think a completely known-plaintext attack would not impress the masses. Consider how often crypto illiterate programmers implement ciphers (such as Vigenere variants) which are obviously vulnerable to known-plaintext attacks. The idea seems to be that if you know the plaintext, what do you need the key for? _We_ may know better, but I think we are in the minority. For a slight increase in the computational requirements, we could end up with a break that the "DES is good enough" people would have a _much_ harder time downplaying. From trei at ziplink.net Mon Jan 6 21:04:50 1997 From: trei at ziplink.net (Peter Trei) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:04:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES Key Recovery update Message-ID: <199701070504.AAA03538@zip1.ziplink.net> Gah. I should know better than to post before my sources give their official position. It will be a known plaintext attack. :-) I hope I'm not made regret jumping the gun again. Please DON'T bug RSA about this. Peter Trei ptrei at acm.org trei at process.com From intaus2 at ois.net.au Mon Jan 6 21:20:36 1997 From: intaus2 at ois.net.au (Neil Tunnicliffe) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:20:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: PWL's how ? Message-ID: <199701070519.NAA00657@hawk.ois.net.au> At 21:34 2/01/97 -0500, you wrote: >How has the Windows PWL's been de-crytped ? > >Also I don't like to seem too much like a rookie, but was is a polymorphic >virus ? > . Marc Theriault * . * + > * . * Email: WILL at BBSI.NET * . * . > .+ ___ . > . * + ___....-----'---'-----....___ . . > ========================================= + * > * . ___'---..._______...---'___ * . . > Read this for an understanding of a polymorhphic virus: ����������������������������������������������������������������ͻ � A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODS BEHIND A POLYMORPH ENGINE � ����������������������������������������������������������������ͼ A small glossary of terms: �������������������������� ENCRYPT = Transform from it's original form to an altered form. DECRYPT = Transform from it's altered form to it's original form. KEY = The register or value used to encrypt/decrypt with. SLIDING KEY = A KEY value that is INCREASED or DECREASED on each loop. COUNT = The number of bytes in the encrypted code or data. INDEX = A pointer to the encrypted code or data. SIGNATURE = A unique group of bytes that can be used to check against a programs content in the hope of detecting a particular program. HEURISTIC = A set of well defined rules to apply to a problem in the hope of achieving a known result. Question: What is a Polymorph? ������������������������������� Answer: Well, the Longman English Dictionary defines it as: "POLYMORPHOUS also POLYMORPHIC adj fml or tech. EXISTING IN VARIOUS DIFFERENT FORMS." In other words, something that has the ability to change it's shape. Other ways to describe such a thing might be; Mutable, Metamorphic, Etc... Question: What is a Polymorph Engine? �������������������������������������� Answer: A program with the abilities to encrypt (or jumble up) another program or data and provide a unique decryptor for it, it must do this in such a way that no two encryptions of the same program or data will look alike. Example: Take the following ultra-simple decryptor: MOV SI,jumbled_data ;Point to the jumbled data MOV CX,10 ;Ten bytes to decrypt main_loop: XOR BYTE PTR [SI],55 ;XOR (un_scramble!) a byte INC SI ;Next byte LOOP main_loop ;Loop for the 9 remaining bytes This small program will XOR the ten bytes at the location pointed to by SI with the value 55. Providing the ten bytes were XORed with 55 prior to running this decryptor the ten bytes will be restored to their original state. If you are unsure as to why this is, brush up on your XOR logic!! Ok, so you might say that if you change the KEY value on each generation it will become Polymorphic? Well, yes and no! If you did that, the encrypted portion would be Polymorphic, but the decryptor would still remain mostly the same, the only change begin the KEY value! So, a signature scanner that allows WILDCARDS (and most do!) would still be able to find your decryptor! One way you could fool some signature scanners is to swap around some of the instructions. So, with this in mind, the above decryptor might look like: MOV CX,10 MOV SI,jumbled_data main_loop: XOR BYTE PTR [SI],55 INC SI LOOP main_loop As you can see, still not much of a change, not really enough to fool some of the better signature scanners. "GET TO THE POINT! WHAT IS A TRUE POLYMORPH?", I hear you cry! ��������������������������������������������������������������� Well, a "true" Polymorph would be a decryptor that looks completely different on each generation! Take the following decryptor: MOV CX,10 NOP NOP MOV SI,jumbled_data NOP main_loop: NOP NOP XOR BYTE PTR [SI],55 NOP INC SI NOP NOP NOP NOP LOOP main_loop This decryptor is the same as the one before it, but it has has a few random NOP instructions peppered throughout itself. On each generation you would vary the amount of NOPs after each instruction. This is a Polymorph in it's simplest form. Still, most of the good signature scanners would have no problem with such a simple Polymorph. They would simply skip the NOPs, thus having a clear view of the decryptor, to which they could apply a signature! No, a "true" Polymorph has to be far far more complex then this! Instead of peppering NOPs throughout the decryptor it would pepper totally random amounts of totally random 8086 instructions, including JUMPS and CALLS. It would also use a different main decryptor (possibly from a selection of pre-coded ones) and would alter all the registers that the decryptor uses on each generation, making sure that the JUNK code that it generates doesn't destroy any of the registers used by the real decryptor! So, with these rules in mind, here is our simple decryptor again: MOV DX,10 ;Real part of the decryptor! MOV SI,1234 ;junk AND AX,[SI+1234] ;junk CLD ;junk MOV DI,jumbled_data ;Real part of the decryptor! TEST [SI+1234],BL ;junk OR AL,CL ;junk main_loop: ADD SI,SI ;junk instruction, real loop! XOR AX,1234 ;junk XOR BYTE PTR [DI],55 ;Real part of the decryptor! SUB SI,123 ;junk INC DI ;Real part of the decryptor! TEST DX,1234 ;junk AND AL,[BP+1234] ;junk DEC DX ;Real part of the decryptor! NOP ;junk XOR AX,DX ;junk SBB AX,[SI+1234] ;junk AND DX,DX ;Real part of the decryptor! JNZ main_loop ;Real part of the decryptor! As you should be able to see, quite a mess!! But, still executable code. It is essential that any junk code generated by the Polymorph Engine is executable, as it is going to be peppered throughout the decryptor. Note, in this example, that some of the junk instructions use registers that we are using in the decryptor! This is fine, providing the values in these registers aren't destroyed. Also note, that now we have random registers and random instructions on each generation it makes signature scanning (even for the clever signature scanners) impossible! Instead, an HEURISTIC method must be used, which can lead to false alarms. So, a Polymorph Engine can be summed up into three major parts: ��������������������������������������������������������������� 1 .. The random number generator. 2 .. The junk code generator. 3 .. The decryptor generator. There are other discrete parts but these three are the ones where most of the work goes on! How does it all work? Well, SMEG goes about generating random decryptors in the following way: 1 .. Chooses a random selection of registers to use for the decryptor. Leaving the remaining registers as "junk" registers for the junk code generator. 2 .. Chooses one of the compressed pre-coded decryptors. 3 .. Goes into a loop generating the real decryptor, peppered with junk code. To understand how the selected registers are slotted into the decryptors and the junk code you must look at the 8086 instructions from a binary level: XOR AX,AX = 00110001 11000000 XOR AX,CX = 00110001 11001000 XOR AX,DX = 00110001 11010000 XOR AX,BX = 00110001 11011000 You should be able to see a pattern in the binary code for these four 8086 instructions? Well, all 8086 instructions follow logical patterns, and it is these patterns that tell the 8086 processor which registers/addressing mode to use for a particular instruction. The total amount of instruction formats and the precise logic regarding the patterns is too complex to go into here. However, all good 8086 tutorials/reference guides will explain in full. SMEG exploits this pattern logic to generate junk code and decryptors with random registers, as the patterns directly relate to the registers Etc. SMEG generates junk code in the following way: ���������������������������������������������� Inside SMEG there is a table of the basic binary patterns for all of the 8086 instruction set, but with one important difference, all the register/address mode bits are zero. This is called the SKELETON INSTRUCTION TABLE. The table also contains various other bytes used by SMEG to determine the relevant bit positions to "plug in" the register bit patterns. These patterns are plugged in via the logic processes OR and AND. Using this method, SMEG can generate endless amounts of random 8086 instructions without destroying any of the registers used by the decryptor proper. SMEG also contains some discrete logic for producing false CALLS to dummy subroutines and also false conditional JMPS around the junk code. SMEG generates the decryptor proper in the following way: ��������������������������������������������������������� Inside SMEG there is a table containing a selection of common 8086 instructions used in decryptors, such as XOR [index],reg Etc. These are, again, stored in SKELETON FORM with some control bytes used by the decryptor generator. Also, inside SMEG, there are several pre-coded decryptors stored in a compressed form. On average, a complete decryptor can be described to the decryptor generator in as few as 11 bytes and adding to the list of pre-coded decryptors is both painless and economical with space! SMEG generates the Polymorphed decryptor in the following way: �������������������������������������������������������������� First it chooses, at random, one of the pre-coded compressed decryptors. Next it goes into a loop uncompressing each decryptor instruction, plugging in the required registers, storing it and then generating (for each real instruction) a random amount of random instructions. This loop repeats until the complete decryptor has been constructed. The final result is a random size, random register, random patterned decryptor! It should also be noted that whenever SMEG generates an INDEXed instruction it uses either SI, DI or BX at random, also it sometimes uses a random offset. For example, say the encrypted code started at address 10h, the following could be used to index this address: MOV SI,10h ;Start address MOV AL,[SI] ;Index from initial address But sometimes SMEG will generate something like the following, again based on the encrypted code starting at address 10h: MOV DI,0BFAAh ;Indirect start address MOV AL,[DI+4066h) ;4066h + 0BFAAh = 10010h (and FFFF = 10h)!! These indexed and initial values are picked at complete random, and the examples of 0BFAAh and 4066h are valid, but next time they will be completely different! The following are two decryptors that were generated with my SMEG Polymorph Engine. It should be noted that I generated 4000 examples with no two alike! Unfortunately I ran out of hard drive space! But it is fairly safe to say that the total number of decryptor combinations would run into the BILLIONS! All the lines marked with ";junk" in the following listings indicate random junk instructions that were inserted throughout the actual decryptor, note that SMEG has the ability to generate junk CALLS to false SUBROUTINES, as well as general junk conditional jumps! All lines marked with a * indicate an actual part of the decryptor proper. I chose the two generations shown because their sizes were similar, 386 and 480 bytes. SMEG produces decryptors ranging in size from as little as 288 to as much as 1536 bytes. Even if two decryptors are generated that are the same size the chances of them being the same are, literally, billions to one! Neil Tunnicliffe. From wisby at ultra.net.au Mon Jan 6 21:25:39 1997 From: wisby at ultra.net.au (Marjorie Wisby) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:25:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: The FAGGOT list Message-ID: <2.2.16.19970107154254.256f802c@mailhost.ultra.net.au> At 10:29 AM 6/01/97 -0500, aga wrote: >On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Wm_Wallace wrote: > >> Blow me!! >> > >That is another FAGGOT coming out of the woodwork! > >> >> In article , aga >> wrote: >> >> > On Thu, 2 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >> > > Date: Thu, 2 Jan 1997 10:50:21 -0500 (EST) >> > > From: Chris Rapier >> > > These are the minutes from the informal meeting we had at IETF. >> > > Chris Rapier >> > > Systems Programmer/Cabin Boy 2nd Class >> > > Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center > >The Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center is a well known FAGGOT >operation, with both Peter Berger and the dyke Esther Felderman >working there to hire FAGGOTS exclusively for future positions. > >> > > 11EE >> > > >> > >> > Now it appears we have another problem gathering of faggots here. >> > Just how many KNOWN faggots are on this list? > >Most of the above men are apparently FAGGOTS, since they >conspire to censor Freedom Of Speech on the InterNet, under >the guise of "spam elimination." Actually, is all a front >for censorship by homosexuals on the InterNet. > >> > All of these who are faggots must be labeled >> > and watched, as we know that faggots are the worst censors. >> > >> > Let's all hope that John Gilmore fucks Peter Berger up >> > the ass before he dies. >> > >> > Does anyone know this last guy from Bell Labs? >> > >The question is does Bell Labs knowingly hire faggots? With such witty argument, clarity of expression and well reasoned rebuttal, you certainly have convinced *me*. I never thought the day would come when I would actually think that, however much I disagree with them, the pro-censorship people may have some small arguments on their side - but that was before I saw the sort of trash you continually spew. If you have something to say that is of interest, maybe you may gain some credibility. As it is, I won't be holding my breath, waiting for such a reversal of form. Flames welcomed, from such fools as you obviously are. While you are attacking me, remember your form. Don't let ignorance or reality stop you. My killfile is quite empty at the moment. TTYL, Marjorie ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ Marjorie N. Wisby From every mountain-side ~ ~ wisby at ultra.net.au Let Freedom ring. ~ ~ http://www.ultra.net.au/~wisby - Samuel Francis Smith ~ ~ (_America_) ~ ~ Have you noticed that people who are most unwilling to accept ~ ~ responsibility for their own actions, are the most keen to regulate ~ ~ everyone else's? ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 21:49:49 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:49:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D1E39F.44A9@gte.net> Black Unicorn wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Black Unicorn wrote: > > > On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > Marc J. Wohler wrote: [Much Unicorn drivel snipped] > The bathroom is at the end of the hall. It's not a long walk. You must be in bed with Sandfort. I can't believe you would waste all that energy replying point-by-point to something you consider nonsense. Of course, your claims of "nonsense" etc. are to be expected of a security-crazed control freak who desperately wants cypherpunks subscribers to believe in him. I have to reject all of your contentions because: 1. You're not sincere. 2. You're not credible. 3. Your sense of history is strictly corporate, i.e., Mickey Mouse and Elmer Fudd. From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 6 21:54:55 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:54:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypherpunks moderator robot In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701070549.XAA02730@manifold.algebra.com> Vince wrote: > Lucky Green: > > At 09:02 PM 1/5/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > >With STUMP robomoderator, the great majority of posts are autoapproved, > > >because they come from preapproved posters. In the newsgroups moderated > > >by STUMP, moderators review only a small fraction of incoming messages. > > > > I like this. Seems that list moderating technology has made some progress. > > The cypherpunks moderator robot should check PGP signatures for the > "preapproved posters" - it is just too easy to forge email. And the human > moderator should be willing to put any regular posters onto the list of > "preapproved posters". Any preapproved who mutated into a flamer would be > removed from the list. Newbies would have to be around for a bit to get > on. > > Should work well enough. > A good note. Checking PGP signatures for all messages from preapproved posters is one of the possible modes of running STUMP (you have to define WHITELIST_MUST_SIGN=YES). This may be appropriate on cypherpunks, but for regular newsgroups it is rarely practical, because the users are dumb and clueless. On Cypherpunks that may work well and even add some cool flavor to the whole process, as well as help popularize PGP. Another advantage of robo-verification of signatures is that people reading cpunks will know that PGP signed messages really are signed, without the need to keep PGP keys of everyone. That is, of course, if you trust the robomoderator. This is all described at STUMP page. STUMP means Secure Team-based USENET Moderation Program, by the way. - Igor. From rcgraves at disposable.com Mon Jan 6 21:58:22 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 21:58:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation In-Reply-To: <199701070055.QAA11918@hammerhead.com> Message-ID: <32D1E682.4BDC@disposable.com> Thaddeus J. Beier wrote: > > This will fail if flames migrate from cypherpunks-flames to > cypherpunks, I would attempt to prohibit threads that only exist in > cypherpunks-flames being continued into the moderated list. This'll I disagree. I think it's quite conceivable that a serious point could arise from the flames. If a moderator can't be challenged based on what happened with the reject list, what's the point of having a reject list in the first place? Anyway, I don't think such a rule is possible to implement, nor would it protect the moderator from other forms of denial-of-service attack even if it were implemented. -rich From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 6 22:14:52 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:14:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <32D1B505.13D4@disposable.com> Message-ID: <199701070610.AAA02851@manifold.algebra.com> Thanks, Rich, for a thoughtful post. Rich Graves wrote: > My take on the issues I see here: > > 1) Moderator liability and anonymous posting. The open nature of the > list means that "copyright violations" threads and the like are > thought more or less safe for the people who own toad.com. With > moderation, this is less likely to be as "safe." Without calling > for a blanket assault on copyrights (I do have friends who make > their living as writers), and speaking only selfishly, I think it > would be a shame to lose the "copyright violations" posts. So I > think we need a way to diminish or at least distribute moderator > liability. Let's revisit the "Member of Parliament Problem" thread > of a month or so ago for solutions. Presumably STUMP or some other > moderation tool could be modified to support a secure anonymous- > approval protocol. I hope that lawyers here could comment on this, and I hope that it is relevant to the cupherpunks issues at hand. You gave us another example of why charters that restrict moderators' ability to reject posts are good. In soc.culture.russian.moderated we had a similar problem (now resolved completely), when certain anonymous posters posted articles that looked like articles from newspapers. After long thinking, moderator board has come with the following solution: 1) We do not know for sure if a certain post violates some copyrights or not 2) We do not have a duty to verify copyrights or check whether posts are libelous. Verifying it is not very practical. 3) Our co-moderators reside in different countries and these countries may have different copyright laws 4) Since the moderation is done by many people, it is hard to say (as long as you did not see our logs which we regularly delete) who really approved the questioned article 5) Our charter does NOT give us a permission to reject copyright violations (which may be and are freely posted to unmoderated groups and lists anyhow). There is also a related issue of moderators' responsibility for libel. Our position was the following: libel involves some lies that damages people's reputations. We cannot verify truthfulness of articles, therefore we cannot tell libel from non-libel. A classical example was the following: we have an Orthodox Jewish poster. Suppose someone else posts an article where he describes that poster as eating pork regularly. Such an article can, in theory, be rather damaging for that person, and would be libelous if untrue. We are not necessarily aware that Jewish customs involve prohibition on eating swines, and so we cannot know that the post could be damaging. Nor do we have any practical way of checking what that person eats. We are required to reject flames if we consider them harassing, but we do not accept responsibility for telling libel from non-libel. We also add the following header fields to each article: X-SCRM-Policy: http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/index.html X-SCRM-Info-1: Send submissions to scrm at algebra.com X-SCRM-Info-2: Send technical complaints to scrm-admin at algebra.com X-SCRM-Info-3: Send complaints about policy to scrm-board at algebra.com X-Comment: moderators do not necessarily agree or disagree with this article. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ X-Robomod-Version: STUMP 1.1, by ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov) > 4) "Qui custodiet ipsos custodes." When I first saw that thread > title, I thought it pertained to the moderation proposal. It > could. That's why I'd like to see the rejected messages archived, > at least for a while, as they are with Chudov's STUMP. What I'd > like best, since I don't particularly want to waste bandwidth or > my disk space with what would, by definition, be mostly crap, is > a hks.lists.cypherpunks.flames on the open nntp port I'm using > to read cypherpunks today. As some of you have noticed, I'm not > on the list now, because most of it is junk; I just point > Netscape at HKS Inc's open port whenever the whim strikes me, > and grab the few messages that look interesting. I'd like to do > the same with the "flame" list, every couple days. Of course, HKS > and the other public archives would make that decsion, and I > thank them for the free service they've provided me so far. STUMP also regularly (once a week if so instructed) creates really pretty WWW archives of rejected articles, like this: http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/archive/maillist.html (see also http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/index.html) - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 22:19:22 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:19:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D1EA88.7C4F@gte.net> C Matthew Curtin wrote: > >>>>> "Dale" == Dale Thorn writes: > Dale> I'll tell you something else. If I have an opportunity to > Dale> contribute to a project that can fight censorship of this kind, > Dale> I will do so eagerly. > OK, Dale, you oppose censorship. > If you don't like the moderated version of the list, subscribe to the > unmoderated version. As long as an unmoderated version is available, > what, exactly, is the problem? This is cool. I get to respond to a literate question. How unusual. 1. Sandfort is the person who would never drop an argument, no matter how long, until he had the last word. I know since I went rounds with him a time or two. As far as I can tell (not being a profess- ional psychologist), Sandy has some emotional limitations that would make him a poor choice to moderate such an intense list as this. Certainly the moderated list would still be quite intense, since the intent is to be a political/social forum. Sandfort unfortunately appears to be a special friend of Gilmore's, and I don't think John has taken the time to consider the outcome. 2. The only possible scheme that could work long-term would be a moderated list plus a deleted (excised?) list of posts which didn't make the moderator's cut. Having a moderated list and a full unmoderated list is certain to fail, and I'm not too sure that they don't have this in mind already. 3. Not making the unmoderated list first-up (i.e., cutting posts first, then making the "full" list available later) is suspicious, or at least a bad idea. 4. Moving everyone to the moderated list and then having people who want the full list unsubscribe and resubscribe is more evidence of bad faith. If what Sandy says is true (I don't believe it), the vast majority of posts (excluding obvious spam, probably 75 or more a day) will be in the moderated list, therefore I think anyone can see that merely cutting the spam and bad flames is not the ultimate intent. To do that, all they would have had to do is announce a bucket where they're dropping the excisions, and let whoever wants them to pick them up from there. Maybe they thought that would make them look bad, but before this is over (if they continue on their present course), they're going to look much worse. I just can't believe Gilmore wants to have Sandfort do this. There's gotta be someone he can trust who has a viable reputation. Then again, who with a decent reputation would want to moderate cypherpunks? BTW, thanks for the literate reply. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 22:26:54 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:26:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: <199701061924.LAA15159@count04.mry.scruznet.com> Message-ID: <32D1EC42.65B2@gte.net> cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com wrote: > Please as soon as possible... make this into a moderated list... > then I can kiss this noise goodbye... Could you please (!) state for the record: 1. Why you can't use filters? 2. Why you want your news censored? Do you think when (if) you pick up your favourite big-city newspaper, that having a "Times Staff Writer" edit (rewrite) all the stories is better than getting them straight off the wire, i.e., AP, UPI, etc.? I'll bet you do, you budding little fascist. From vin at shore.net Mon Jan 6 22:30:26 1997 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:30:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Relative Strength of 40-bit Crypto Implementations Message-ID: A client asked me today about where he could find evidence of the relative strength of different encryption algorithms, when all are restricted to 40-bit keys. He assumed dot-Gov was going to restrict his export product to the 40-bit limit, but he wanted to provide the strongest security he could within that limitation. How should I have answered him? Vin McLellan + The Privacy Guild + 53 Nichols St., Chelsea, MA 02150 USA <617> 884-5548 From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 22:36:54 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:36:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts on moderation In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970106143122.00d9d5d4@gabber.c2.net> Message-ID: <32D1EEB0.38F8@gte.net> Douglas Barnes wrote: > 1) I've known Sandy for a couple of years, and I trust him to > use good judgement as a moderator. It will be important to > develop guidelines so that the job can be rotated, but it's also > important that the moderator be someone who doesn't have any > major axe to grind. Sandy has his personal likes and dislikes, > but I don't think he'll ever stoop to tossing out opinions that > he disagrees with. Wishful thinking, Doug. Sandy will take an emotional (non-objective) position on an issue, and argue it beyond any reasonable limit. I wish I had all his replies to things I've said - you'd see what I mean. Not to promote anyone who I might not be a friend of, but, there are people on this list who are "well respected" who are light-years ahead of Sandy in areas that are important for a list moderator. Maybe Gilmore should have publicly announced for a moderator, and then let the subscribers pick.... From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 22:39:40 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:39:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency In-Reply-To: <199701062213.XAA20921@internal-mail.systemics.com> Message-ID: <32D207B6.34E8@sk.sympatico.ca> Gary Howland wrote: > But digital currencies will never become fiat currencies, let alone legal > tender, unless governments say they are. So why should they worry? (OK, OK, > they will worry about tax evasion etc. etc.) Exactly. How can they claim, on one hand, that something does not qualify as currency, or as legal tender, and then turn around and tax it? If I have 10 Million UNITS that aren't considered to legally be of value, then I'm certainly not going to 'go easy' to tax court. Any currency that becomes sufficiently distributed and traded will find itself becoming a 'legal entity' in some form or another. Once it has been 'entityenized' (don't bother looking for that word in the dictionary), it will be a short step for it to achieve a quantifiable status among other currencies. The bottom line has always been that anything which manages to reach a sufficient level of use that it causes the government to want a 'piece of the pie' becomes regulated, taxed, and enters the mainstream of the economic system. There has been a card-game going on in Texas for close to a hundred years which works on a personal credit system and the IRS, to this point, has been able to do no better than require the players to 'report' as income any credits that become translated into hard goods or taxable services. If this card game involved sufficient revenue to make a serious impact on this country's economic system, then there would undoubtedly already be an act of congress addressing the issue of drawing to an inside straight. > "Regulation - which is based on force and fear - undermines the moral base > of business dealings. > -- Alan Greenspan I hope that the IRS didn't take this as a personal attack. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 22:39:48 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:39:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme In-Reply-To: <199701062255.OAA02600@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <32D209CD.CA6@sk.sympatico.ca> Ed Falk wrote: > People who don't want to use their own name in a post, and also don't > want to be bothered with creating a cookie are the only ones whose posts > are delayed. As well as people who fail to include their SIN and their mother's maiden name. (for verification purposes only, of course) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 22:39:57 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:39:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D20B26.71E0@sk.sympatico.ca> Robert Barnes wrote: > I believe that moderation as proposed does not really limit > anyones Freedom of Speech. ' Neither does wearing a yellow 'Star of David' on one's clothing. From snow at smoke.suba.com Mon Jan 6 22:44:22 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:44:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: PWL's how ? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970102213451.00691d6c@pophost.bbsi.net> Message-ID: <199701070659.AAA06593@smoke.suba.com> > Also I don't like to seem too much like a rookie, but was is a > ffff,0000,0000polymorphic > virus ? It inserts shit like this: ffff�0000�0000 into email. It also tends to cause oversized .signature files. HTH. HAND. Petro, Christopher C. petro at suba.com snow at smoke.suba.com From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 22:54:24 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 22:54:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: ONE MILLION CHILDREN..... In-Reply-To: <199701062248.OAA01889@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <32D1F05A.F87@gte.net> Ed Falk wrote: > What did cypherpunks do to get so much spam? They did what all huns do - they ruthlessly eradicated those who were dissidents, and now they're gonna bring their collective boots down on the necks of whoever is left. Does this mean the little moustache is coming back into fashion? I hope not. It's bad enough having Reno, Gore, and the rest of those bozos running around free. Go search out a list called net.scum (or something similar) and see who's there, and why. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 23:04:27 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:04:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: High-tech tracking by police raises legal outcry In-Reply-To: <19970106033902.1417.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Message-ID: <32D1F51A.5EA9@gte.net> Mike McNally wrote: > Secret Squirrel wrote: > > The technology, marketed by a company called Teletrac, is simple: > > A tramsmitter sends a radio signal to a computer ... > Anybody know the frequencies used? > (Anybody willing to guess whether the FCC might quietly introduce > prohibitions against scanners that can receive those frequencies?) The newer scanners are apparently moving more of their "intelligence" to EEPROM (or Flash memory), which makes a permanent fix extremely difficult for the feds. From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 6 23:06:51 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:06:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: To pay credit when it's due Message-ID: <199701070650.AAA03188@manifold.algebra.com> Dear Cpunks, I forgot to mention that during the design phase of my robomod I have received a number of thoughtful and helpful advices from Dr. Dimitri Vulis KOTM, mostly regarding authentication protocols, as well as some other programming matters. For example, a suggestion to add an option requiring all preapproved posters to sign their articles was originally made by him. - Igor. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 23:07:12 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:07:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Divide and Conquer Message-ID: <32D21270.1241@sk.sympatico.ca> From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 6 23:07:21 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:07:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Divide & Conquer II Message-ID: <32D212B6.1A38@sk.sympatico.ca> ibid. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 23:26:52 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:26:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: An observation on the moderation thread. In-Reply-To: <970106.070952.6C5.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com> Message-ID: <32D1FA5C.6D04@gte.net> Roy M. Silvernail wrote: > Of passing interest: I'm seeing the majority of complaints about list > moderation only as they are quoted in others' replies, because the > origional complainents are already in my killfile. So this jerk (number ???) admits the problem is already solved, then goes on to say "yeah, Sandy, block some more, just in case my killfile misses one". You would have loved Hitler. When he got wound up, everyone stood up and cheered. Public TV still celebrates Henry Ford, one of Hitler's idols. Schools for children in America still celebrate Andrew Jackson, genocidal racist though he was. You're nothing new, Roy. Just another fascistic voice calling for the Final Solution. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 6 23:31:05 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 23:31:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation In-Reply-To: <199701070055.QAA11918@hammerhead.com> Message-ID: <32D1FB50.321D@gte.net> Thaddeus J. Beier wrote: > I think that this is a completely fabulous idea, an commend John and > Sandy for doing this. Let me add my own suggestion. > This will fail if flames migrate from cypherpunks-flames to cypherpunks, > I would attempt to prohibit threads that only exist in cypherpunks-flames > being continued into the moderated list. This'll be hard to do, Sandy, > I know, but if you could think of a way to do this, I think that your > experiment is more likely to succeed. > Phrases like "As I said in the letter that only got sent to > cypherpunks-flames" should cause the whole article to be yanked, IMHO. Ooh, the iron boot is descending fast. (Better just yank 'em all, huh?) From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jan 7 00:36:33 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 00:36:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Relative Strength of 40-bit Crypto Implementations Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970107003544.006c2808@192.100.81.126> At 01:29 AM 1/7/97 -0500, Vin McLellan wrote: > A client asked me today about where he could find evidence of the >relative strength of different encryption algorithms, when all are >restricted to 40-bit keys. He assumed dot-Gov was going to restrict his >export product to the 40-bit limit, but he wanted to provide the strongest >security he could within that limitation. The best answer you can possibly give him is to move production overseas. Any 40 bit cipher is garbage. Period. It is easy to produce crypto overseas. Many medium sized companies are doing so today. Insiders claim that larger companies, such as Netscape, are in the process of setting up shop abroad as well. Clearly, one can't produce software containing crypto in the US and stay competitive at the same time. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Tue Jan 7 00:55:35 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 00:55:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Secure envelopes Message-ID: <199701070811.AAA10533@sirius.infonex.com> Timothy C. May's aberrant sexual life has negatively impacted his mental integrity. /\ o-/\ Timothy C. May ///\|/\\\ / /|\ \ From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jan 7 00:57:19 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 00:57:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970107005752.006c3c48@192.100.81.126> At 06:56 PM 1/6/97 -0800, Mike Duvos wrote: >Peter Trei (trei at process.com) writes: > >Ick. Why overly complexify things? A known plaintext attack >would be far more straightforward. After all, the goal is to >recover the key, not the message. Having to find a key which >decrypts to something having all high bits clear will discourage >people who might want to take a crack at this independent of the >canned program you are going to distribute. I agree. A real life crack of DES can almost always assume a know plain text. Why should the demo crack take the 10% hit? >[snip] > > > It will NOT run as a screen saver. > >Too bad. The screensaver paradigm is something the unwashed >masses can easily understand. I have been running the distributed prime search software (see my .sig) for about two months now. [2^1398269-1 is prime!] If you haven't tried this software, I'd urge you to do so now. Not only because it might make you famous, but because it will give you some ideas how a distributed DES crack might work. I always liked the screen saver idea, but a crack using screen savers only works while the screen saver is active. The mersenne prime program runs on the lowest priority thread under Win95/NT/Linux. It works even while you are working, using all the idle cycles it can find, while at the same time having no effect at all on any of the work you do. Install it and forget about it. It's better than a screen saver. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From jimbell at pacifier.com Tue Jan 7 00:57:43 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 00:57:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: High-tech tracking by police raises legal outcry Message-ID: <199701070856.AAA15300@mail.pacifier.com> At 06:39 AM 1/6/97 -0600, Mike McNally wrote: >Secret Squirrel wrote: >> >> The technology, marketed by a company called Teletrac, is simple: >> A tramsmitter sends a radio signal to a computer ... > >Anybody know the frequencies used? > >(Anybody willing to guess whether the FCC might quietly introduce >prohibitions against scanners that can receive those frequencies?) > >(Gee, that looks paranoid.) This wouldn't do a great deal of good. The systems were already described as frequency-hopping. The hops are probably fast enough to outwit a scanner's receiver. However, it turns out that there is a comparatively simple way to detect such transmitters: An old-fashioned diode detector using modern components. Take a loop of wire (about a foot in diameter), add a microwave-capable signal diode to rectify the signal and send it to a small capacitor and then go to a DVM. (digital voltmeter.) (Sensitivity can be dramatically increased by also inserting a blocking capacitor in the loop and adding enough DC voltage to barely forward-bias the diode.) A momentary (or continuous) increase in output voltage indicates that the diode is rectifying AC, which indicates a transmitter. Buffering the DC-level signal and sending it to a set of earphones will indicate a pulsed transmitter. Interestingly, this is probably more or less the circuit that was originally used in 1970's Fuzzbuster-type radar receivers before the heterodyne systems were developed. The "disadvantages" of that circuit, in microwave-radar detection, are either not disadvantages or are in fact advantages in hidden-transmitter hunting. The first "disadvantage" was that this receiver was EXTREMELY broadband, practically "DC-to-daylight," or at least up to the rectification capability of the diode chosen. (I've implemented systems that will do 20 gigahertz easy, and I was using old diodes!) False triggers were a common result, due to hard-to-avoid rectification of CB and ham radio transmissions for example. In the case of transmitter hunting, that disadvantage is a solid advantage, because you don't need to know what frequency the transmitter is at. The second disadvantage, comparatively low sensitivity, was a problem if you're trying to detect a 100 milliwatt radar transmitter 300 meters away, but if you know you only have to search a car from a meter away, the inverse-square law indicates that you're going to see a signal with around 100,000 times the power level all other things being equal. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From whgiii at amaranth.com Tue Jan 7 01:09:10 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 01:09:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypherpunks moderator robot In-Reply-To: <199701070549.XAA02730@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <199701070911.DAA09527@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701070549.XAA02730 at manifold.algebra.com>, on 01/05/97 at 01:49 AM, ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) said: >A good note. >Checking PGP signatures for all messages from preapproved posters is one >of the possible modes of running STUMP (you have to define >WHITELIST_MUST_SIGN=YES). This may be appropriate on cypherpunks, but >for regular newsgroups it is rarely practical, because the users are dumb >and clueless. On Cypherpunks that may work well and even add some cool >flavor to the whole process, as well as help popularize PGP. >Another advantage of robo-verification of signatures is that people >reading cpunks will know that PGP signed messages really are signed, >without the need to keep PGP keys of everyone. That is, of course, if >you trust the robomoderator. >This is all described at STUMP page. STUMP means Secure Team-based >USENET Moderation Program, by the way. I would have to disagree on this. IMHO I see using a 3rd party sig verification defeating the purpose of PGP. One really needs to have the keys on ones own keyring and verify keys for those he communicates with on a regular basis. Other wise the "web of trust" is never built. I have designed a system that will automate most of the more dificult aspects of managing PGP and buliding a "web of trust". It's based on the user obtaining a copy of the keyring from one of the pgp servers and uptating it on a regular basis. This is automated by using both e-mail request and http request from the pgp servers. The user then uses 3 keyrings: pubring.pgp -- Small keyring contianing the most used keys mainly key used for encryption. sigring.pgp -- Medium size keyring containing keys used only for verifying sigs. master.pgp -- Copy of pubring.pgp from pgp key server. Logs are kept of all signatures verified. After the same signature has been verified X number of times the public key is added to the sigring.pgp. If a key has not been used in X number of days it is removed from the sigring.pgp. A simmilar log can be kept for encryptions & moving keys in and out of the pubring.pgp. If the user not verifying a large number of sigs. the sigring.pgp & the pubring.pgp can be combined. There should also be some type of mechanisim to remind the user to verify keys that he frequently uses. All the above is handled transparently to the user after the inital set-up via a GUI install program. Most of the mechanics are handled through a colection of e-mail filters/scripts and a few small EXE's that I have written. I have most of the code written and am in the process of working the kinks out. The whole ideal of this is to keep the minimum # of keys in the users pubring & sigring for usability while still having the master keyring as a backup. I still need to develop a means of insuring that a key that is "trusted" by association on the master keyring retains that trust when transfered to the pubring.pgp. I think I can develop somthing along the lines of the ATT PathServer and calculate what keys need to be copyed along with the target key that is being copied to the pubring.pgp. As soon as I have a working model I will write somthing up in greater detail and make it available on my web page. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: This marks Logical End-Of-Message. Physical EOM follows -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtISZI9Co1n+aLhhAQFAvQQAiakA24txxJ2mZJU/lhb2bqdm1G2nBj50 b4ONi7y8F4fGrsC+nWwoeh1ta5iu3aOQLr+3mYWtafvEUjxvP4mDvke3ToD9riD8 dKU9MKxZd6CG0sZA6TX199gOkY0Ep8fSyJMKQSgddFe+LpahJpxs7dm7bP6pWDbF oOj+2J61IOc= =kgSh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com Tue Jan 7 01:10:56 1997 From: cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com (cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 01:10:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: <32D1EC42.65B2@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701070913.BAA17074@count04.mry.scruznet.com> soon you too will disappear :) as to the budding facist comment I got death threats and called traitor when I published PGP 1.0 and I endured 5 long years of federal harassment to listen to YOU??? no I dont think so... PLEASE consider this an official request to MODERATE the cypherpunks list kelly goen - Publisher PGP 1.0 June 5 1991 now it seems not only a traitor but a budding facist... BTW this account is being deleted tonite and I will gladly resubscribe to a moderated list under a different name and host.domain than cypherpunk From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Tue Jan 7 01:49:16 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 01:49:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge Message-ID: <85263054520588@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> Orbital mind control lasers made mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) write: >Peter Trei (trei at process.com) writes: >>1. I'm astonished at the low level of reaction RSA's announcement that they >>will be sponsoring a DES Challenge, with a $10,000 cash prize. >I'm certainly jumping up and down and cheering. I said a while back that the >life expectancy of DES would be about two weeks if anyone forked over serious >cash. I'm still a bit nervous about what the reaction will be though - won't the US government (and anyone else pushing DES) be able to say "It took 10,000 Pentiums several weeks, noone would bother doing that, so it's safe" (with a possible side order of "Safer-SK64 is 256 times as secure, anyone we really like can use that provided they hand over the keys in advance"). Peter. From Success at midlex.com Tue Jan 7 02:16:25 1997 From: Success at midlex.com (Success at midlex.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 02:16:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701071014.CAA22007@lithuania.it.earthlink.net> �������������������������������������������������������������A��;4�!H@��ʁC�ЀE��P�6 5 �PP*��LE�,3@$0� From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 7 02:23:16 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 02:23:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: <199701070913.BAA17074@count04.mry.scruznet.com> Message-ID: <32D223C1.7852@gte.net> cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com wrote: > soon you too will disappear :) > as to the budding facist comment > I got death threats and called > traitor when I published PGP 1.0 and I endured > 5 long years of federal harassment to listen to YOU??? > no I dont think so... > PLEASE consider this an official request > to MODERATE the cypherpunks list > kelly goen - Publisher PGP 1.0 June 5 1991 > now it seems not only a traitor but a budding facist... > BTW this account is being deleted tonite and I will gladly resubscribe > to a moderated list under a different name and host.domain than cypherpunk So you endured the Nazi persecution, and then you became one of them. Congratulations. From beta at eb.com Tue Jan 7 03:50:06 1997 From: beta at eb.com (Beta Test) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 03:50:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Special Discount for Pathfinder Users Message-ID: <9701071149.AA10277@eb.com> Dear Pathfinder Free Trial Participant, Thank you for participating in the free trial offer of Britannica Online. Although your free trial has now ended, you can continue accessing one of the world's most reliable sources of information by becoming a subscriber. For a limited time only Pathfinder users can purchase Britannica Online at a special discounted rate -- $14.95 a month or $149 a year. As a subscriber, you'll enjoy all that Britannica Online has to offer, from its ease of use... to its in-depth articles... to its high quality Internet links. And now with our latest release there's even more to enjoy! Britannica Online 97 includes many new features: * Almost 1,000 new graphics, for a total of over 4,200 graphics * Over 5,400 related Internet links, plus approximately 50 new links added each week, hand-selected by our editors * Miniature versions of images within articles and the Index that can be enlarged with just one click. * A spell-checking device that runs automatically when you conduct searches and, of course, * Updated content. In addition to updates for the formal releases (2 or 3 times per year), Britannica Online articles are updated by our editorial department as frequently as world events dictate. Our editors also select new articles each week to provide you with background on today's world events. And don't forget the spotlight features of Britannica Online. Our recent addition, "The American Presidential Election," has been updated to include results from the recent election and features audio clips, presidential and vicepresidential biographies, and even links to the White House. To sign-up for Britannica Online -- * Access the registration form at http://www.eb.com:195/bol/ and select either the monthly or annual subscription option. * Enter PTF149A in the promotion code box for an annual subscription of $149 (our normal $25 registration fee will be waived for Pathfinder users) OR Enter PTF149M in the promotion code box for a monthly subscription of $14.95. * Review to make sure the information is complete and accurate, then submit. Don't let this special offer pass you by. We look forward to welcoming you as a Britannica Online subscriber. Sincerely, Lisa Girolimetti Marketing Manager, Online Products Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. http://www.eb.com ------------------------------------------------------------------ To remove yourself from our mailing list simply hit the reply button and add the text "Pathfinder Unsubscribe" to the body of the message. Reply messages sent to beta at eb.com will NOT be read. If you would like to offer feedback or ask a question please e-mail us at comments at eb.com. ------------------------------------------------------------------ From robbieg at mich.com Tue Jan 7 04:19:26 1997 From: robbieg at mich.com (robbieg at mich.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 04:19:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Partner with Dr's to Earn a Dr's Salary Message-ID: <199701071210.HAA24222@server1.mich.com> "Live the Lifestyle of your Dreams . . . And help those you care about to do the same." ********************************************************************** To the Online explorer who just might appreciate an opportunity when it smacks them in the face . . . WARNING! this is not your ordinary junk E-mail . . . ********************************************************************** Do you currently love what you do for a living? Are you currently being paid exactly what you�re worth? If so then you are one of the fortunate and privileged few. However, if this is not the case for you, then how would you like to "Escape The Rat Race"? If you are willing to invest a few hours a week and are success driven and self-motivated, then you may be one of the key people that I am looking to PARTNER with. I am looking for ambitious business-minded individuals who would like to have more out of life. My program will help you create a part-time, home based business of unlimited income potential. You have the choice! Work hard for the next 2-4 years to develop a million dollar asset of unlimited income potential or . . . stay in corporate America . . . working at a job that may not even exist next year . . . for the right to retire on a pension that's 1/3 of what wasn't enough during your most productive working years.. This opportunity is Your Invitation to: � Be Your Own Boss � Create Unlimited Residual Income � Develop a Rewarding Business by Helping Others as you Help Yourself � Select Both the Hours You Work and the People You Work With � Take Advantage of Lucrative Tax Benefits � Live a Lifestyle of Freedom and Fulfillment From the cover of Success Magazine, the headline announces that "We Create Millionaires!!" 10 REASON YOU NEED TO CALL NOW!!!! 1. YOU WILL CATCH CRITICAL MASS: Our growth has doubled for each of the past two years. We have our best growth years ahead of us. 2. YOU WILL HAVE ONE OF THE FINEST SPONSORSHIP LINES IN THE COMPANY: You will get the training and assistance to win. You�ll get help with presentations, 3-way calls, camera ready ads, 6 levels of the best leadership support in the company and a chance to participate in our national ad co-ops. 3. YOU WILL BE PROUD AND FEEL SECURE WORKING WITH OUR COMPANY: This company has been in business for the past 13 years and we�ll still be there for you in the year 2020. You�ll take pride in our integrity and honesty and the fact that we are one of the highest rated companies in our industry. You�ll get the security of building a business that you can leave to your grandchildren 4. YOU WILL LOVE OUR PRODUCTS: Not because you buy them to get a check but because you wouldn�t think of spending a day without them. And because they are all-natural and environmentally sensitive, you�ll feel good about what they are doing for our planet. 5. YOU WILL MAKE WHAT YOU ARE REALLY WORTH: From your first days in the business with the most innovative marketing plan in the industry. One that rewards you for helping your people to be successful with healthy retail profits, Fast Track bonuses, organizational bonuses and leadership lifestyle bonuses 6. YOU WILL HAVE CONSISTENT INCOME: Because you�ll have the highest monthly consumption and re-order rate you�ve ever experienced. Not only do we have superior products but they are priced like REAL products that REAL people buy at REAL prices. Also there are no buy-ins, front end loading or any other nonsense. 7. YOU WILL BE GIVEN A PROVEN DUPLICABLE SYSTEM: You will be trained in a complete Step by Step program. You�ll have at your disposal first class marketing materials, Fast Start Kits, sponsoring materials and company provided training and support. 8. BECAUSE YOU ARE TIRED OF GETTING IN ON THE GROUND FLOOR ONLY TO FIND OUT THERE�S A BASEMENT! You�ve learned that the "hot" new deals of today aren�t around tomorrow. You�ve been there. . . done that. . and are now ready to build a business that will last your lifetime. 9. BECAUSE IF YOU DON�T CALL TODAY...IN 60 DAYS SOMEONE WILL BE CALLING YOU. 10. BECAUSE THE SUSPENSE IS KILLING YOU! To further explore the possibilities, please E-mail a day/evening phone number with the best time to call so I can fill you in on all of the exciting details Looking forward to hearing from you Robbie Goldenberg robbieg at mich.com PS For just a moment. . . . Close your eyes and look back over the past 5 years? What do you see that's worked? What do you see that hasn't worked? What would you like to change? What would you keep the same? Now look forward to the next 5 years. If you have nothing in place to alter the future picture of your life, then isn't it reasonable to expect the future to be a duplicate picture of the past. My definition of insanity is doing the same things over and over again expecting different results. If you are truly committed to making a significant change in your life, please take the time to give me a call to see if this opportunity is a fit for you. You have everything to gain! From amp at pobox.com Tue Jan 7 04:55:56 1997 From: amp at pobox.com (amp at pobox.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 04:55:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970107005752.006c3c48@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: > > > It will NOT run as a screen saver. > > > >Too bad. The screensaver paradigm is something the unwashed > >masses can easily understand. > > I have been running the distributed prime search software (see my .sig) for > about two months now. [2^1398269-1 is prime!] If you haven't tried this > software, I'd urge you to do so now. Not only because it might make you > famous, but because it will give you some ideas how a distributed DES crack > might work. > > I always liked the screen saver idea, but a crack using screen savers only > works while the screen saver is active. The mersenne prime program runs on > the lowest priority thread under Win95/NT/Linux. It works even while you > are working, using all the idle cycles it can find, while at the same time > having no effect at all on any of the work you do. Install it and forget > about it. It's better than a screen saver. I agree with Lucky. It may not be as easy for the great unwashed to comprehend, but the low-pri thread is the best way to go to maximize cpu time on the project. I too am running the Mersenne software on my system (and 5 others), but that project will go on hold once a stable version of the DES cracker is available. Btw: the person implementing the software may want to take a look at the software the GIMPS search is using. It is simple, yet effective. amp ------------------------ Name: amp E-mail: amp at pobox.com Date: 01/07/97 Time: 06:51:34 Visit http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum EARTH FIRST! We'll strip mine the other planets later. ------------------------ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 7 05:07:56 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 05:07:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: At the risk of getting flamed :) In-Reply-To: <199701041746.JAA11844@count04.mry.scruznet.com> Message-ID: [CC'd to 2 mailing lists] Kelly G. writes: > Hi Dimitri, > did the freon tape cleaner work out on those > papers that had gotten soaked?? you hadnt let me know the results.. Thanks - I passed on your advice, but I think they decided to get rid of almost everything... It's better to keep stuff on optical storage anyway. > I caught your article in phrack. Hmm you do indeed know how > to abuse mail and news protocols... I made the cancelbot publicly available because I don't believe in "security by obscurity". Usenet cancels are broken and should be ignored. I find it indicative that what I call outing a well-known and widely abused security hole, you call abuse. > have you any got any > ideas of how to get cypherpunks back on track and at least > eliminate the commercial spamming of the list that is occurring Cypherpunks have been forging Usenet posts from "freedom-knights at jetcafe.org" to alt.business.* et al, asking for business opps in e-mail. I'm thinking of forwarding the resulting spam on f-k back to cypherpunks. In this case, the best way to prevent unsolicited junk e-mail is not to forge solicitations for such e-mail in the names of the people you disagree with in the first place. > n.b. I still class you as a cypherpunk even though you have a private > war going on with most of the rest of the list.. You're wrong. I happen to advocate absolute freedom of speech, privacy, anonymity for everyone, including those I don't agree with. These principles are totally alien to "cypher punks". I also happen to have done a lot to bring computer networks and privacy technology to places and people who still wouldn't have had it otherwise - perhaps more than any "cypher punk". "Cypher punks" are a primarily gay social club who advocate privacy for themselves, but not to their many enemies. Do you read the traffic on their mailing list? "Crypto is only for the elite." "Freedom of speech is only for those who use it responsibly." I think Dale Thorn hit the nail right on the head when he described "cypher punks" as security people. Their interest is not the wide deployment crypto technology (that's my agenda). They're more interested in silencing the "homophobes" (meaning, anyone disagreeing with a "cypher punk", irrespective of whether it has anything to do with homosexuality). They want privacy technology only for their paying customers, and only if the customers use it "responsibly", i.e. don't say something the 'punks find objectionable. Take a look at Sameer's net.scum web page for some examples. When he got sued by SPA because his customers pirated software, he claimed that he doesn't censor based on content. At the same time he pulled a plug on an account used to display a web page critical of Tim May, calling it "libel". No wonder Sandy now whores for this pimp. John Gilmore complaint to the upstream sites of his many "enemies" when he's outed as a cocksucker (clearly content-based), while claiming (through his mouthpiece Timmy May) that he only censors based on volume, not content. > also note that sandys offer earlier of flying you out here to meet us > was quite real and your safety was assured..(I would have guarenteed > your safety myself) , we just often find out here on the west coast that > conflict resolution happens best face-to face in quiet discussion. > After all you know me face to face and personally! Re-read some of the shit Sameer's whore has been posting to c-punks. People who voluntarily submit to censorship by Sandy deserve pity. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From jya at pipeline.com Tue Jan 7 05:42:06 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 05:42:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: FTC Online Privacy Report Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970107133736.00682ea0@pop.pipeline.com> The Federal Trade Commission released yesterday: "Consumer Privacy on the Global Information Infrastructure" http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/privacy/privacy1.htm Reuters 1-6-97: The Federal Trade Commission, which last year held a conference on privacy issues, said participants at the gathering agreed that businesses have four ways to protect consumer privacy: -- Notify consumers about how personal information collected online is used. -- Give consumers a choice about whether and how their personal information is used. -- Ensure the security of personal information is protected. -- Give consumers access to their own personal information to ensure its accuracy. From merriman at amaonline.com Tue Jan 7 06:02:47 1997 From: merriman at amaonline.com (David K. Merriman) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 06:02:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet Draft : keyserver protocol Message-ID: <199701071402.GAA03562@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: coderpunks at toad.com Date: Tue Jan 07 08:15:10 1997 My proposal for a realtime keyserver protocol/system has been made available. I would welcome any comments/discussion regarding it. It may be found at: ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-merriman-realtime-key-00.txt Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtGxtMVrTvyYOzAZAQFsVQP+LpTOyQjdNH3dMpUBG0DMHQ8jIM+cENs+ nK+r/9uKYAWKHkTwENNHwIn9mwxKi2GhgnXdJf7zUMdkNgK2w6Im7yOHzMhsZFfm KQJlY+qzQbNOdf+LjOnbhy16u0h/0zgP6+NzITFqeXOToGC9KkImWmdaROe+enIX 3v1LYz4jHEM= =tIT+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Tue Jan 7 06:08:33 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 06:08:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Double crypt strength Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970107090728.00a14310@gateway.grumman.com> At 04:33 PM 1/6/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > Pardon my ignorance, but I seem to be missing something here. > If you use an encryption as your password, do you not need to 'store' >it somewhere in order to use it in the future (to 'pass' it to the >decryption program)? I was thinking something as simple as running crypt and then the next thing you do is run passwd. That way, the encrypted string will probably still be right there on the screen (assuming your passwd util doesn't clear the screen first). Granted, it still means that you have to remember a pseudo-random string, but the string is always one step away if you used a logical password/phrase to generate it. Sorry, I guess I wasn't too clear on that (fingers can't keep up with the mind and all that...) -Rick Rick Osborne / osborne at gateway.grumman.com / Northrop Grumman Corporation ------------------------------------------------------------------------- "And when exactly did all this happen?" 'When we rewrote the dictionary.' From bad at uhf.wireless.net Tue Jan 7 06:09:41 1997 From: bad at uhf.wireless.net (Bernie Doehner) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 06:09:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > I think a completely known-plaintext attack would not impress the > masses. Consider how often crypto illiterate programmers implement > ciphers (such as Vigenere variants) which are obviously vulnerable to > known-plaintext attacks. The idea seems to be that if you know the > plaintext, what do you need the key for? _We_ may know better, but I > think we are in the minority. You have got to be kidding! Where are you getting this "idea" from? Since when is recovering the plaintext following and preceeding the known plaintext not of _any_ interest? In regards to known ciphertext. Can't you just calculate the time required to successfuly perform known ciphertext only attack from the time to successfuly break known plaintext? I agree with earlier posters. I am glad RSA putting up some real money for this and as such I respect their design of the contest. What I am curious about is wether the chaining mode will be "given" as part of the contest, but I'll gladly wait till AFTER Peter is done with his program to get an answer. Regards, Bernie Doehner From Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com Tue Jan 7 06:47:47 1997 From: Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen Patrick) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 06:47:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Polymorph engine (was:RE: PWL's how ?) Message-ID: Where did you get the following text on polymorph engines? Is it available somewhere? Where can I get other information on similar topics (Please resist the urge to mention web search engines; I'm looking for specific recommendations :-) Thanks! - Patrick _______________________________________________________________________________ From: Neil Tunnicliffe on Tue, Jan 7, 1997 6:08 Read this for an understanding of a polymorhphic virus: E#234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234#>> #188# A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE METHODS BEHIND A POLYMORPH ENGINE #188# E#234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234##234#* A small glossary of terms: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ENCRYPT = Transform from it's original form to an altered form. DECRYPT = Transform from it's altered form to it's original form. KEY = The register or value used to encrypt/decrypt with. SLIDING KEY = A KEY value that is INCREASED or DECREASED on each loop. COUNT = The number of bytes in the encrypted code or data. INDEX = A pointer to the encrypted code or data. SIGNATURE = A unique group of bytes that can be used to check against a programs content in the hope of detecting a particular program. HEURISTIC = A set of well defined rules to apply to a problem in the hope of achieving a known result. Question: What is a Polymorph? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Answer: Well, the Longman English Dictionary defines it as: "POLYMORPHOUS also POLYMORPHIC adj fml or tech. EXISTING IN VARIOUS DIFFERENT FORMS." In other words, something that has the ability to change it's shape. Other ways to describe such a thing might be; Mutable, Metamorphic, Etc... Question: What is a Polymorph Engine? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Answer: A program with the abilities to encrypt (or jumble up) another program or data and provide a unique decryptor for it, it must do this in such a way that no two encryptions of the same program or data will look alike. Example: Take the following ultra-simple decryptor: MOV SI,jumbled_data ;Point to the jumbled data MOV CX,10 ;Ten bytes to decrypt main_loop: XOR BYTE PTR [SI],55 ;XOR (un_scramble!) a byte INC SI ;Next byte LOOP main_loop ;Loop for the 9 remaining bytes This small program will XOR the ten bytes at the location pointed to by SI with the value 55. Providing the ten bytes were XORed with 55 prior to running this decryptor the ten bytes will be restored to their original state. If you are unsure as to why this is, brush up on your XOR logic!! Ok, so you might say that if you change the KEY value on each generation it will become Polymorphic? Well, yes and no! If you did that, the encrypted portion would be Polymorphic, but the decryptor would still remain mostly the same, the only change begin the KEY value! So, a signature scanner that allows WILDCARDS (and most do!) would still be able to find your decryptor! One way you could fool some signature scanners is to swap around some of the instructions. So, with this in mind, the above decryptor might look like: MOV CX,10 MOV SI,jumbled_data main_loop: XOR BYTE PTR [SI],55 INC SI LOOP main_loop As you can see, still not much of a change, not really enough to fool some of the better signature scanners. "GET TO THE POINT! WHAT IS A TRUE POLYMORPH?", I hear you cry! AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Well, a "true" Polymorph would be a decryptor that looks completely different on each generation! Take the following decryptor: MOV CX,10 NOP NOP MOV SI,jumbled_data NOP main_loop: NOP NOP XOR BYTE PTR [SI],55 NOP INC SI NOP NOP NOP NOP LOOP main_loop This decryptor is the same as the one before it, but it has has a few random NOP instructions peppered throughout itself. On each generation you would vary the amount of NOPs after each instruction. This is a Polymorph in it's simplest form. Still, most of the good signature scanners would have no problem with such a simple Polymorph. They would simply skip the NOPs, thus having a clear view of the decryptor, to which they could apply a signature! No, a "true" Polymorph has to be far far more complex then this! Instead of peppering NOPs throughout the decryptor it would pepper totally random amounts of totally random 8086 instructions, including JUMPS and CALLS. It would also use a different main decryptor (possibly from a selection of pre-coded ones) and would alter all the registers that the decryptor uses on each generation, making sure that the JUNK code that it generates doesn't destroy any of the registers used by the real decryptor! So, with these rules in mind, here is our simple decryptor again: MOV DX,10 ;Real part of the decryptor! MOV SI,1234 ;junk AND AX,[SI+1234] ;junk CLD ;junk MOV DI,jumbled_data ;Real part of the decryptor! TEST [SI+1234],BL ;junk OR AL,CL ;junk main_loop: ADD SI,SI ;junk instruction, real loop! XOR AX,1234 ;junk XOR BYTE PTR [DI],55 ;Real part of the decryptor! SUB SI,123 ;junk INC DI ;Real part of the decryptor! TEST DX,1234 ;junk AND AL,[BP+1234] ;junk DEC DX ;Real part of the decryptor! NOP ;junk XOR AX,DX ;junk SBB AX,[SI+1234] ;junk AND DX,DX ;Real part of the decryptor! JNZ main_loop ;Real part of the decryptor! As you should be able to see, quite a mess!! But, still executable code. It is essential that any junk code generated by the Polymorph Engine is executable, as it is going to be peppered throughout the decryptor. Note, in this example, that some of the junk instructions use registers that we are using in the decryptor! This is fine, providing the values in these registers aren't destroyed. Also note, that now we have random registers and random instructions on each generation it makes signature scanning (even for the clever signature scanners) impossible! Instead, an HEURISTIC method must be used, which can lead to false alarms. So, a Polymorph Engine can be summed up into three major parts: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA 1 .. The random number generator. 2 .. The junk code generator. 3 .. The decryptor generator. There are other discrete parts but these three are the ones where most of the work goes on! How does it all work? Well, SMEG goes about generating random decryptors in the following way: 1 .. Chooses a random selection of registers to use for the decryptor. Leaving the remaining registers as "junk" registers for the junk code generator. 2 .. Chooses one of the compressed pre-coded decryptors. 3 .. Goes into a loop generating the real decryptor, peppered with junk code. To understand how the selected registers are slotted into the decryptors and the junk code you must look at the 8086 instructions from a binary level: XOR AX,AX = 00110001 11000000 XOR AX,CX = 00110001 11001000 XOR AX,DX = 00110001 11010000 XOR AX,BX = 00110001 11011000 You should be able to see a pattern in the binary code for these four 8086 instructions? Well, all 8086 instructions follow logical patterns, and it is these patterns that tell the 8086 processor which registers/addressing mode to use for a particular instruction. The total amount of instruction formats and the precise logic regarding the patterns is too complex to go into here. However, all good 8086 tutorials/reference guides will explain in full. SMEG exploits this pattern logic to generate junk code and decryptors with random registers, as the patterns directly relate to the registers Etc. SMEG generates junk code in the following way: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Inside SMEG there is a table of the basic binary patterns for all of the 8086 instruction set, but with one important difference, all the register/address mode bits are zero. This is called the SKELETON INSTRUCTION TABLE. The table also contains various other bytes used by SMEG to determine the relevant bit positions to "plug in" the register bit patterns. These patterns are plugged in via the logic processes OR and AND. Using this method, SMEG can generate endless amounts of random 8086 instructions without destroying any of the registers used by the decryptor proper. SMEG also contains some discrete logic for producing false CALLS to dummy subroutines and also false conditional JMPS around the junk code. SMEG generates the decryptor proper in the following way: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA Inside SMEG there is a table containing a selection of common 8086 instructions used in decryptors, such as XOR [index],reg Etc. These are, again, stored in SKELETON FORM with some control bytes used by the decryptor generator. Also, inside SMEG, there are several pre-coded decryptors stored in a compressed form. On average, a complete decryptor can be described to the decryptor generator in as few as 11 bytes and adding to the list of pre-coded decryptors is both painless and economical with space! SMEG generates the Polymorphed decryptor in the following way: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA First it chooses, at random, one of the pre-coded compressed decryptors. Next it goes into a loop uncompressing each decryptor instruction, plugging in the required registers, storing it and then generating (for each real instruction) a random amount of random instructions. This loop repeats until the complete decryptor has been constructed. The final result is a random size, random register, random patterned decryptor! It should also be noted that whenever SMEG generates an INDEXed instruction it uses either SI, DI or BX at random, also it sometimes uses a random offset. For example, say the encrypted code started at address 10h, the following could be used to index this address: MOV SI,10h ;Start address MOV AL,[SI] ;Index from initial address But sometimes SMEG will generate something like the following, again based on the encrypted code starting at address 10h: MOV DI,0BFAAh ;Indirect start address MOV AL,[DI+4066h) ;4066h + 0BFAAh = 10010h (and FFFF = 10h)!! These indexed and initial values are picked at complete random, and the examples of 0BFAAh and 4066h are valid, but next time they will be completely different! The following are two decryptors that were generated with my SMEG Polymorph Engine. It should be noted that I generated 4000 examples with no two alike! Unfortunately I ran out of hard drive space! But it is fairly safe to say that the total number of decryptor combinations would run into the BILLIONS! All the lines marked with ";junk" in the following listings indicate random junk instructions that were inserted throughout the actual decryptor, note that SMEG has the ability to generate junk CALLS to false SUBROUTINES, as well as general junk conditional jumps! All lines marked with a * indicate an actual part of the decryptor proper. I chose the two generations shown because their sizes were similar, 386 and 480 bytes. SMEG produces decryptors ranging in size from as little as 288 to as much as 1536 bytes. Even if two decryptors are generated that are the same size the chances of them being the same are, literally, billions to one! From ozdirect at onthenet.com.au Tue Jan 7 06:48:53 1997 From: ozdirect at onthenet.com.au (David Rand) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 06:48:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Free Software - Link to 500 Engines & Directories!! Message-ID: <199701071346.XAA27650@diablo.OntheNet.com.au> This is what everyone with a Web Page has been waiting for! AN AUTOMATIC Submission program which will link your Web Pages to over 500 Search Engines & Directories!! Find out more about the Exploit Submission Wizard, and why it recently received a 5 star 'best buy' award from Internet Magazine and was recently reviewed as the 'greatest advance to web designers since the invention of hot dog'. You Can Download the Program and have a FREE TRIAL at: http://www.freegoodies.com/wizard/submit.htm From schneier at counterpane.com Tue Jan 7 07:03:14 1997 From: schneier at counterpane.com (Bruce Schneier) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 07:03:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA and Cylink settle Message-ID: Subj: Cylink and RSA Data Security Reach Legal Settlement; Public Key Encryption Compa Date: Tue, Jan 7, 1997 7:52 AM EST From: AOLNewsProfiles at aol.net REDWOOD CITY, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 7, 1997--RSA Data Security, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Security Dynamics Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:SDTI), and Cylink Corporation (NASDAQ:CYLK), today announced a comprehensive global settlement of their long-standing legal disputes. The settlement ends all outstanding litigation between Cylink and RSA. The two companies reached an amicable resolution of their disputes. As part of the settlement, Cylink granted to RSA all necessary rights to Cylink's Stanford patents, and RSA granted to Cylink a license to RSA's cryptographic software toolkits. For both parties, the settlement ends further prolongation of a legal dispute that has been costly and distracting. RSA is fulfilling the promise made to its customers to resolve the disputes with Cylink. Cylink, under its new president and chief executive, is refocusing all of its energies on providing end-to-end data security products and solutions, and has the ability to incorporate RSA or other technologies to meet customer requirements. "We are very pleased that what had so long seemed to be an intractable problem has, within the space of 10 days, now been resolved by the new management at Cylink," said James Bidzos, president of RSA. "I worked well with Fernand Sarrat while he was at IBM, and that working relationship helped us reach this agreement so swiftly. This agreement turns long-time antagonists into companies that are already exploring ways of working together constructively, to the benefit of the industry as a whole." Fernand Sarrat, president and chief executive officer of Cylink, said, "We are setting out on an aggressive new course at Cylink in which old disputes are an unnecessary distraction. RSA will be one of our strategic suppliers and we anticipate focusing totally on the needs of our customers and the enormous market opportunity before us." RSA Data Security, Inc. RSA Data Security, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Security Dynamics Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: SDTI), is the world's brand name for cryptography, with more than 75 million copies of RSA encryption and authentication technologies installed and in use worldwide. RSA technologies are part of existing and proposed standards for the Internet and World Wide Web, IT4, ISO, ANSI, IEEE, business, financial and electronic commerce networks around the globe. The company develops and markets platform-independent developer's kits and end-user products and provides comprehensive cryptographic consulting services. Founded in 1982 by the inventors of the RSA Public Key Cryptosystem, the company is headquartered in Redwood City, Calif. Cylink Corporation Cylink Corporation (NASDAQ: CYLK) is a leading worldwide supplier of information security solutions, providing the most comprehensive portfolio of public key cryptographic hardware and software products available today. Cylink's products enable secure transmissions over local area networks (LANs), wide area networks (WANs), public packet switched networks such as the Internet, asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) and frame relay networks. Cylink, headquartered in Sunnyvale, Calif., is also the leader in outdoor spread spectrum microwave radio communications. Cylink's customers include national and multinational corporations, financial institutions and government organizations. For more information about Cylink and its products, call the fax-on-demand number 800/735-6614, or visit the company's Web site at http://www.cylink.com. --30--mg/sf* eh CONTACT: Cylink Paula Contos Dunne, 408/523-5993 pdunne at cylink.com or Edelman Worldwide Ina McGuinness, 415/433-5381 x 213 imcguinn at edelman.com or Patrick Corman Patrick Corman, 415/326-9648 Corman at cerfnet.com ************************************************************************ * Bruce Schneier 2,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,002,000, * Counterpane Systems 000,000,000,000,000,000,002,000,000,002,293 * schneier at counterpane.com The last prime number...alphabetically! * (612) 823-1098 Two vigintillion, two undecillion, two * 101 E Minnehaha Pkwy trillion, two thousand, two hundred and * Minneapolis, MN 55419 ninety three. * http://www.counterpane.com ************************************************************************ From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 7 07:30:41 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 07:30:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: An observation on the moderation thread. In-Reply-To: <5F2N3evcwapi@sendai.scytale.com> Message-ID: <32D26BCF.5F51@gte.net> Roy M. Silvernail wrote: > In your mail, you write: > > So this jerk (number ???) admits the problem is already solved, > > then goes on to say "yeah, Sandy, block some more, just in case > > my killfile misses one". > Not at all. I'm simply noting that the people who are crying the > loudest about losing their forum are the ones I already ignore. As has > been amply pointed out, so long as the list is available in an > unmoderated form, nothing is being lost. > > You would have loved Hitler. > Godwin's Law has been invoked. > > You're nothing new, Roy. Just another fascistic voice calling for > > the Final Solution. > I'll resist the temptation to return the insult. If it matters, you've > been in my killfile for some weeks. > Consider this official notice: do not send me any more email of any > kind. Any such mail received will be considered harrassment, and will be > dealt with accordingly. Since Roy has chosen to argue with me, then shut me off by threatening reprisal if I mail him directly, I'll have to post this to the list. Sorry, Roy. I try never to do a thing like this, but next time, don't argue and then say I can't argue back. Just say "don't reply" and drop the argument. From kent at axxis.com Tue Jan 7 07:45:11 1997 From: kent at axxis.com (kent at axxis.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 07:45:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Last Great Opportunity of the 20th Century! Message-ID: <199701071544.IAA28531@cerulean.axxis.com> I'm_a_SPAMMING_moron, Just thought I would drop you a note letting you know of an opportunity that I came across lately. I have been amazed at the success everyone in the company is having. As you know timing is everything. JDS, a debt-free multimillion dollar telecommunication company, is launching for expansion its networking division called FastTrack January 6, 1997. Just as the Oklahoma land rush was the last great opportunity of the 19th century - so is FastTrack the last great opportunity of the 20th. This is our chance to get in on the ground floor of an incredible opportunity. Best of all - the program incorporates "Spillover". Spillover is one of the best ideas ever developed for network marketing. Here's why: Anyone I sponsor after you, will be placed under you. You then earn commissions on these new people as if you had signed them up! I just signed up a few days ago and I already have 53 members in my team just from SPILLOVER! I hardly did anything! The program just started, in fact it has less than 3,000 members. This IS the ground floor! If you are serious about making money, then call our hotline at 800-399-5052. If you know what it's like to lose sleep because your so excited, then give me a call at 801-955-7975 or email me at kent at axxis.com. From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Tue Jan 7 08:02:31 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:02:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dale on a tear (again) Message-ID: <199701071551.HAA19245@sirius.infonex.com> At 06:04 PM 1/5/97 -0800, Dale obviously wrote: :I'll bet Hitler was disenchanted by the declaration against him by the World Jewish Congress. : :I'll bet Andrew Jackson was disenchanted with the decisions of the :Seminole Indian leaders to not just lay down and die. : :And now Sandy is disenchanted. What a hypocritical asshole. What can one make of this fellow Dale? Either he is Dr. V's mouthpiece or he has gone off the deep end. A pity in either case -- a mind is a terrible thing to waste. From declan at pathfinder.com Tue Jan 7 08:22:48 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:22:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: FTC Online Privacy Report In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970107133736.00682ea0@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: The report is a summary of the June 4/5 meeting where the FTC heard from a half-dozen panels of privacy advocates, consumer groups, and businesses. I posted a note about it and the legislation swirling around it to cypherpunks then, I believe. The hearing/workshop was tense at times. The privacy advocates and firms were at odds: companies proposed free-market solutions. The nonprofit lobby groups said it wouldn't work. EPIC, for instance, is one of the groups pushing for greater privacy protection through legislation and regulation. -Declan On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, John Young wrote: > The Federal Trade Commission released yesterday: > > "Consumer Privacy on the Global Information Infrastructure" > > http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/pubs/privacy/privacy1.htm > > Reuters 1-6-97: > > The Federal Trade Commission, which last year held a conference > on privacy issues, said participants at the gathering agreed that > businesses have four ways to protect consumer privacy: > > -- Notify consumers about how personal information collected online is > used. > > -- Give consumers a choice about whether and how their personal > information is used. > > -- Ensure the security of personal information is protected. > > -- Give consumers access to their own personal information to ensure its > accuracy. > > From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 7 08:27:56 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:27:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: An observation on the moderation thread. In-Reply-To: <32D1FA5C.6D04@gte.net> Message-ID: <0k46ZD2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Dale Thorn writes: > Roy M. Silvernail wrote: > > Of passing interest: I'm seeing the majority of complaints about list > > moderation only as they are quoted in others' replies, because the > > origional complainents are already in my killfile. > > So this jerk (number ???) admits the problem is already solved, > then goes on to say "yeah, Sandy, block some more, just in case > my killfile misses one". What bothers this control freak is not the chance that something I might say would end up in his mailbox (he can prevent it, although he probably lies about having killfiled me), but my ability to speak to other people interested in what I have to say. He'd like to stop us from exchanging private e-mail if he could. > > You would have loved Hitler. When he got wound up, everyone stood > up and cheered. Public TV still celebrates Henry Ford, one of > Hitler's idols. Schools for children in America still celebrate > Andrew Jackson, genocidal racist though he was. > > You're nothing new, Roy. Just another fascistic voice calling for > the Final Solution. > Yes - have you read _Mein Kampf? I once posted an article showing a great similarity between what Hitler advocated in 1926 and what the "cypher punks" advocate now - just some quotes in parallel. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 7 08:27:59 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:27:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: <199701070913.BAA17074@count04.mry.scruznet.com> Message-ID: cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com writes: > soon you too will disappear :) Yes - is this mailing list being censored by Sandy yet? > as to the budding facist comment > I got death threats and called > traitor when I published PGP 1.0 and I endured > 5 long years of federal harassment to listen to YOU??? You've done many good things Kelly. > no I dont think so... But now you advocate censorship. If you don't want to listen to Dale, it's your private choice (and your loss). But you want to impose your choice on others. You don't want me to be able to listen to Dale or Dale to be able to listen to me, even when it's out of your hearing. You want Ray Arachelanian to be able to post lies about people and his victims to be unable to refute his libel in the same forum. I'm surprised and disappointed and I urge you to reconsider your position. > PLEASE consider this an official request > to MODERATE the cypherpunks list > kelly goen - Publisher PGP 1.0 June 5 1991 > > now it seems not only a traitor but a budding facist... And that's really a pity. > BTW this account is being deleted tonite and I will gladly resubscribe > to a moderated list under a different name and host.domain than cypherpunk You mean your kelly at netcom.com lifetime account? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 7 08:28:03 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:28:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701070610.AAA02851@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > You gave us another example of why charters that restrict moderators' > ability to reject posts are good. In soc.culture.russian.moderated > we had a similar problem (now resolved completely), when certain anonymous > posters posted articles that looked like articles from newspapers. Since not a lot of people on this list read soc.culture.*, I'll give a slightly different view of how Igor's moderation works in practice. The charter of s.c.r.m prohibits flames and gratuitous obscenities. However this rule is not enforced. Certain friends of Igor (including some of the s.c.r.m moderators) habitually cross-post articles between soc.culture.russian.moderated, soc.culture.russian (unmoderated), and a dozen other newsgroups saying things like: " is a cocksucker and a motherfucker and has been arrested for sexually molesting small children". The targets of the flames are not permitted to respond on soc.culture.russian.moderated (there's a "blacklist" of people whose submissions are junked automatically, w/o a human moderator ever seeing them). Some time ago Igor invited me to post to s.c.r.m. I submitted an article and was given to understand that I'm not welcome to post to s.c.r.m irrespective of what I have to say. I'm sure that this model suits "cypher punks" well. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 7 08:40:34 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 08:40:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: infowar - defense - DOD Message-ID: <199701071640.IAA22329@mailmasher.com> DoD Information Warfare (IW) Department of Defense Topic(s): Government BPR Project Reports [Home] Document Listing by: [Title] [Author] [Topic] [Coverage] [Source] Abstract: Lead Agency: OASD (C31) Functional Area: Command and Control Project Title: DoD Information Warfare (IW) Functional Area: Command & Control Lead Agency: OASD(C3I) Summary: To achieve information superiority in support of national military strategy, a joint DoD team reengineered DoD Information Warfare processes. A high-level model was developed to provide a consensus view of key processes and data. This evaluation will lead to the development of a national IW policy, an assessment of IW vulnerability, and a standard risk management process. Description: The mission of this project was to develop a baseline activity model for current IW processes, identify improvement opportunities, and recommend a plan for the application of Business Process Reengineering to IW. Representatives from the Joint Chiefs of Staff (JCS), Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Defense Intelligence Agency, National Security Agency, and the Defense Information Systems Agency participated in the project. Improvements: Nine specific improvements were identified including: Development of a joint, coordinated effort to identify and assess the vulnerabilities of military operations and systems and the defense information infrastructure. Development of a standardized process for risk management. Development of a national policy for the conduct of IW. Benefit: The improvements will provide an improved ability to achieve information superiority in support of national military strategy by affecting adversary information, information systems, and information processes while leveraging and defending U.S. information, information systems, and information processes. Predicted Savings: Not reported Investment: Not reported Point of Contact: LCOL Liz Anderson OASD (C3I) IW 6000 Defense Pentagon Washington, D.C. 20301-6000 (703)614-0624 DSN: 224-0624 INFOWAR.WPD 3252D.html From sunder at brainlink.com Tue Jan 7 09:06:23 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 09:06:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dimitri Vulis, spammer, racist and homophobe wrote: > When Ray Arachelian posts lies to this mailing list, he also forwards > them to his censored mailing list. When the victims of Arachelian's > libel refute his lies, Ray does not forward their responses to his > mailing list. Sandy liked this setup so much, he wants the whole > "cypher punks" mailing list to be censored this way. "The grapes are probably Sour" says Vileus. Sorry Kook, your spam doesn't make it to the filtered list, though I'd hate to admit it, your sane posts, the ones that you write once every blue moon, do in fact make it on the filtered list. You are only complaining because people chose to not hear your inane spam, lies, racism, and blatant homophobic banter. And no, my complaints about you, which you claim are lies, do not get sent to the filtered list, they get sent to your ISP for their racist slants. > No wonder - "cypher punks" are opposed to wide availability of crypto, > privacy, secure communications, and free speech in general. As they > keep saying, free speech should only be available to the "elite" who > will use it "responsibly" - no free speech for Jews or homophobes. Hey, if you want cypherpunks mail with spam, subscribe to cypherpunks at toad.com, want it without spam, subscribe to one of the filtered lists. Since filtering will soon be done at toad.com, you will have the choice there. Oh, of course, since you spammed the list with so much vitriol and flames, you can't subscribe, so you'll just have to get your cypherpunks mail under a pseudonym, or from usenet or the web archives or whatever. Also, since you do not consider yourself a cypherpunk, nor are on the list (except to flame it), your oppinions are as useful as a steering wheel on a fish's tail. As for being a Jew or a homophobe, you are welcome to be whatever it is you like to be, even an Armenian hating racist, and you are free to discuss your religion, ethnicity, racism, and sexual prefrences with whomever you want in the appropriate forums - if they happen to have cyrpo relavance, feel free to post them here, otherwise find another place to vent your angst. Hell, you are free to create al.fan.vulis and discuss yourself there! Cypherpunks is for crypto-anarchy oriented posts ONLY regardless of what you claim, believe or bitch. Sorry Vulis, your lies don't fool anyone. Don't quit your day job - if you have one. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "If you're gonna die, die with your|./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|boots on; If you're gonna try, just |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |stick around; Gonna cry? Just move along|\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |you're gonna die, you're gonna die!" |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| --Iron Maiden "Die With Your Boots on"|..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 7 09:12:31 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 09:12:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: <32D223C1.7852@gte.net> Message-ID: <9666ZD1w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Dale Thorn writes: > cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com wrote: > > soon you too will disappear :) > > as to the budding facist comment > > I got death threats and called > > traitor when I published PGP 1.0 and I endured > > 5 long years of federal harassment to listen to YOU??? > > no I dont think so... > > PLEASE consider this an official request > > to MODERATE the cypherpunks list > > kelly goen - Publisher PGP 1.0 June 5 1991 > > now it seems not only a traitor but a budding facist... > > BTW this account is being deleted tonite and I will gladly resubscribe > > to a moderated list under a different name and host.domain than cypherpunk > > So you endured the Nazi persecution, and then you became one of them. > Congratulations. > Isn't this known as "Stockhold syndrom" after some hostages who became their captors' defenders? It's a kind of defense reaction. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From sunder at brainlink.com Tue Jan 7 09:17:30 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 09:17:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) writes: > > > How about this simple policy scheme: > > > > 1) posts from known list members forwarded to list automatically > > 2) posts with "approval cookie" also forwarded automatically > > 3) otherwise, forwarded only after approval by moderator, > > I.e., libel from Timmy May, Ray Arachelian, and the rest of the gang > is approved automatically, and when a victim tries to defend himself > and to point out that Timmy May is a liar, the response is delayed > and probably rejected by the moderator. > > It's been said that the best response to speech one doesn't like > is more speech. "Cypher punks" want to take away the victim's > ability to respond to the lies being posted on their mailing list. You are far from being the victim of anything. If anything you're a big huge thug who spams the list, posts racist flames, posts homophobic flames, uses social engineering to find out info on his "enemies" and then posts that info online with requests that others send flames to that person's employers. These are plain facts, and if anyone wants to verify them, all they need do is a net search on the word "Vulis" Your only reason for bitching here is that your glorious spams will no longer be posted to the list which you've been kicked off of for abuse, and continue to abuse. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "If you're gonna die, die with your|./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|boots on; If you're gonna try, just |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |stick around; Gonna cry? Just move along|\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |you're gonna die, you're gonna die!" |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| --Iron Maiden "Die With Your Boots on"|..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From pierre at rahul.net Tue Jan 7 09:37:59 1997 From: pierre at rahul.net (Pierre Uszynski) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 09:37:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701070610.AAA02851@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <199701071737.AA28133@waltz.rahul.net> Rich Graves very correctly mentions: > 1) Moderator liability and anonymous posting. I agree that this is actually a critical problem with a filtering moderation scheme. Such a scheme appears to provide the capability to filter out possible "copyright violations" posts. From what I remember of the Netcom/CoS case (without going back to the sources), that may mean more liability for the reviewers (and the operator of the machine). That's a major point against simple filtering moderation. (Which is considered principally because that's way that's most compatible with current mail readers, really.) ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) responded: > [in another forum] > After long thinking, moderator board has come with the following > solution: > > 1) We do not know for sure if a certain post violates > some copyrights or not > [and more in the same line 2,3,4,5] Would any of this have mattered in Netcom/CoS? Instead, a system that would forward reviewers' opinions *after the fact* does not have any of this problem. And we have already mentioned, it is also more powerful (real time initial feed, easy multiple feedback feeds, fully compatible with anything else...) although it does not reduce bandwidth requirements. Pierre. pierre at rahul.net From sameer at c2.net Tue Jan 7 10:08:47 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 10:08:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge In-Reply-To: <85263054520588@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> Message-ID: <199701071820.KAA03437@gabber.c2.net> > > I'm still a bit nervous about what the reaction will be though - won't the > US government (and anyone else pushing DES) be able to say "It took 10,000 > Pentiums several weeks, noone would bother doing that, so it's safe" (with a > possible side order of "Safer-SK64 is 256 times as secure, anyone we really > like can use that provided they hand over the keys in advance"). > I'm nervous too, but consider "for only a $10k reward, look at the effort people went through. People are using DES to protect things *much* more valuable than $10k." > Peter. > > -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net C2Net is having a party: http://www.c2.net/party/ http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From sunder at brainlink.com Tue Jan 7 11:20:09 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 11:20:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: <32D1EC42.65B2@gte.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com wrote: > > Please as soon as possible... make this into a moderated list... > > then I can kiss this noise goodbye... > > Could you please (!) state for the record: > > 1. Why you can't use filters? Filters aren't intelligent enough. How do you propose to filter out the anonymous dialy warnings about Tim May? while they originally came with a fixed subject which one could filter, they are now popping up anonymously with random crypto related subjects. If you filter all anonymous mail, you lose the good anon mail you might want to read. Yeah, you can look for "Timmy, Mayo, Maya" and other clues, but these will prevent you from reading other posts which contain those words. Least you expect us to use A.I. filtering which require trainng and don't really exist. Feel free to write one if you are so inclined. Even our friend Vulis has sane posts when he takes his medication (though I suspect he does so rarely.) Filtering out everything he posts doesn't make sense, as reading the sane stuff will have some value. I don't want to miss what he says when it is worth my time to read it. > 2. Why you want your news censored? Do you think when (if) you pick > up your favourite big-city newspaper, that having a "Times Staff > Writer" edit (rewrite) all the stories is better than getting them > straight off the wire, i.e., AP, UPI, etc.? I'll bet you do, you > budding little fascist. For the same reason that you don't watch all 150+ cable channels on your TV (assuming you have a TV and cable) at the same time. It is a waste of your time to attempt it, you have no interest in 99% of it. You want to read what is relevant to your interests, if you have subscribed to cypherpunks, it is because some of the material posted here is of interest to you. This material has to do with crypto, crypto-anarchy, some politics as it relates to crypto, and crypto related news. IF you want to find out about the mating calls of seaguls, you subscribe to whatever mailing lists share that interest; not everyone who subscribes to cypherpunks wants to read about seaguls. Or mad rants about the sexual prefs of folks on this list, especially when posted with malice. Or for that matter tons of posts advertising various crap sent to "Fuck_You_Punks" and other such users. These were clearly requested to us by folks who claim their names to be "Fuck_You_Punks"; advertising doesn't belong here either. If you want to advertise on the list, fine, pay the list owner for air time. As for me, I do not read newspapers or watch the news on TV since to me they are depressing, boring and useless. The proposed scheme should not affect anyone in any way. Those who want the filtered list will get it, those who want the spams and flames and ads and turds will get them, those who want it all will also get them. Why are you so opposed to giving people a choice to pick between the moderated and unmoderated lists personally? Just as there is freedom of speech, there is the freedom to ignore, to chose to filter or tune out flames and turds. The proposed scheme of having three mailing lists empowers the readers of this list to chose for themselves. Are you so afraid that no one cares about what you have to say, that they won't have to listen to you? Or are you just paranoid and see flashes of censorship before your eyes? Think about it this way: if a device existed that allowed TV viewers to not see commercials, would they purchase it? Why shouldn't you allow them to chose to ignore commercials? Maybe because you're an advertiser and are paying for the commercials? Maybe, but I think most TV watchers would love to have such a device; some won't want it, or would want to watch the commercials. But they would have a choice. How is this any different? =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "If you're gonna die, die with your|./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|boots on; If you're gonna try, just |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |stick around; Gonna cry? Just move along|\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |you're gonna die, you're gonna die!" |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| --Iron Maiden "Die With Your Boots on"|..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From bkmarsh at feist.com Tue Jan 7 11:28:06 1997 From: bkmarsh at feist.com (Bruce M.) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 11:28:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: IWD_ism In-Reply-To: <199701062240.OAA13379@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Eric Murray wrote: > But the objective of this exercise is not computer science > it is political science. All that's needed is something that sounds > super-high-tech enough that (technically ignorant) members of > Congress will buy into it and fund it. It doesn't have to actually work. > This tactic has been successful for the military-industrial complex > since before the end of WWII. They're just extending it in the > new "information age". > > What do you want to bet that we will soon be hearing about > needing "first strike" InfoWar capability in order to be able to > "fight on two fronts at once" for "mutually-assured cyber-destruction". > The first US Army counter-virus will be called the "peacemaker". :-) This is nothing new. Check out: http://www.feist.com/~tqdb/h/082195-1.txt and even older: http://www.feist.com/~tqdb/h/051490-1.txt ____________________________________________________ [ Bruce M. - bkmarsh at feist.com - Feist Systems, Inc. ] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "We don't want to get our butts kicked by a bunch of long-haired 26-year-olds with earrings." -- General John Sheehan on their reasons for InfoWar involvement From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 7 11:30:52 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 11:30:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701071926.NAA00355@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > You gave us another example of why charters that restrict moderators' > > ability to reject posts are good. In soc.culture.russian.moderated > > we had a similar problem (now resolved completely), when certain anonymous > > posters posted articles that looked like articles from newspapers. > > Since not a lot of people on this list read soc.culture.*, I'll give a > slightly different view of how Igor's moderation works in practice. > > The charter of s.c.r.m prohibits flames and gratuitous obscenities. > However this rule is not enforced. Certain friends of Igor (including > some of the s.c.r.m moderators) habitually cross-post articles between > soc.culture.russian.moderated, soc.culture.russian (unmoderated), and > a dozen other newsgroups saying things like: " > is a cocksucker and a motherfucker and has been arrested for sexually > molesting small children". The targets of the flames are not permitted That is incorrect on several counts. First of all, our charter does not prohibit flames. It prohibits harassment and spells out what should be considered harassment: Charter> Posts of the following types shall be off-topic in Charter> soc.culture.russian.moderated: Charter> Charter> 6. Harassing posts (of the typical form "[...] is a Charter> [Nazi|pedophile|forger|...]. Complain about [his|her|its] Charter> evil ways to [ISP|employer|Unesco|Cthulhu|Usenet Cabal|...]." Charter> Charter> The proponent recognizes the distinction between patriotism and Charter> jingoistic hatemongering. Further, the distinction between Charter> good-natured jokes and harassment is necessarily subjective. The Charter> moderators will use their best judgement to extend unbiased and Charter> thorough consideration to submissions. Charter> Second, nobody on scrm called Alex Iatskovski, whom you mentioned above as SCR FAQ maintainer, "cocksucker", "motherfucker", or "child molester". In fact, Dejanews search and my private archive indicate that words cocksucker, motherfucker, molester were not used at all in our group. Note that I do not suggest that s.c.r.m. moderators are always fair or always right or that we always interpret our charter correctly or that our charter is perfect. The proposal and practice of moderation is controversial. As you and I know, there are cases when we think that moderation is justified, and there are cases when we think that it is not justified. > to respond on soc.culture.russian.moderated (there's a "blacklist" of > people whose submissions are junked automatically, w/o a human moderator > ever seeing them). This is, again, incorrect. Neither Alex Iatskovski nor any other person associated with you has ever been on the black list. The purpose of the black list is not to ignore people whom we do not like, but to prevent mailbombing of moderators. - Igor. From anonymous at miron.vip.best.com Tue Jan 7 11:33:53 1997 From: anonymous at miron.vip.best.com (anonymous at miron.vip.best.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 11:33:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701071855.KAA05718@miron.vip.best.com> NOVEMBER 11, 1996 INFORMATION WARFARE U.S. sitting duck, DOD panel predicts BY BOB BREWIN AND HEATHER HARRELD (antenna at fcw.com and heather_harreld at fcw.com) The dependence of the United States on computers and communications systems to run its critical power, finance and transportation systems places the country at risk in the event of an information warfare (IW) attack, according to a report prepared by a top-level Defense Department advisory panel. This reliance, it said, has "created a tunnel of vulnerability previously unrealized in the history of conflict" and could have a "catastrophic effect on the ability of [DOD] to fulfill its mission." The report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Information Warfare-Defense (IW-D), obtained by Federal Computer Week, called the threat of an IW attack "significant," adding that the nation's "vulnerabilities are numerous, [and] the countermeasures are extremely limited...." Citing a specific example, the DSB report said one building in Savannah, Ga., (a Bell South switching facility, FCW learned) houses not only a vital communications hub but information technology systems supporting key electric power and transportation companies. Because Savannah serves as a vital port of embarkation for Army troops based in that area, an IW attack against that one building would "make it impossible to deploy military forces at the pace specified in operations plans." The DSB task force, chaired by two former assistant secretaries of Defense for command, control, communications and intelligence (ASD/C3I), Duane Andrews and Donald Latham, viewed the IW problem as so severe that it urged the Pentagon to embark immediately on a crash course to protect against this new form of warfare, providing detailed policy, funding and legal recommendations. These recommendations included a controversial call for the Pentagon to have the legal power to protect nongovernmental portions of the infrastructure in the name of "the common defense." To defend DOD and critical nongovernmental systems against IW, the report recommends new legal authority that will allow "DOD, law enforcement and intelligence agencies to conduct efficient, coordinated monitoring of attacks on the critical civilian information infrastructure...." In carving out a position for DOD to take on this role in the civil sector, the report bluntly summed up the problem: "We should not forget information warfare is a form of warfare, not a crime or an act of terror." It took an equally blunt approach on how the Pentagon should respond to such an attack or intrusion. "The response could entail civil or criminal prosecution, use of military force...diplomatic initiatives or economic mandates." DSB, which said it has urged immediate and concerted action on the IW-D front for the past three years, had a number of recommendations on how DOD should get its own information warfare act together. The report said it would take $3 billion over the next five years to translate these recommendations into reality. This includes establishing the ASD/C3I as the single focal point for IW-D within the department - a necessary step to spread the diffusion of IW responsibilities among the services and Defense agencies, according to a source familiar with the thinking of the task force. Emmett Paige Jr., ASD/C3I, said he had read a copy of the DSB briefing to deputy secretary of Defense John White. Paige said, "I saw nothing in that briefing I do not agree with. I strongly support everything in their briefing." DISA's Role The Defense Information Systems Agency would take on a pivotal IW-D role, based on the recommendations in the report. It called for DISA to set up an IW operations center to provide tactical warning, attack, assessment and emergency response with infrastructure restoration capabilities, and it pegged funding for this center at $275 million over five years. DISA also should establish a joint office for system, network and infrastructure design, the report said, with funding estimated at $225 million over five years. DISA director Lt. Gen. Al Edmonds has already acted on these recommendations, setting up last week a Global Operations and Security Center and a Programs office (see Intercepts). Edmonds said DISA decided not to wait to have these recommendations approved. "We're doing this on our own. We want a new focus here...and we're funding it out of our own budget [by] prioritizing on Information Warfare-Defense. The DSB is right on target, and they got us rolling." The Pentagon also needs to refocus its IW research and development, the report said, recommending $580 million over five years. This poses a tough challenge, DSB said, because "prior R&D efforts have been in areas such as computer and network security.... Little attention has been paid to surviving willful malicious attack, or detecting and eliminating corrupt software." The DSB task force also took some potshots at some well-established and well-entrenched DOD IW policies and programs. Looking at the national debate over the key escrow encryption systems backed by the Clinton administration, the DSB report dismissed encryption as a "distraction.... Encryption simply does not solve all of the information security problems some are led to believe." The National Security Agency's long-running Multilevel-Secure Information Systems Security Initiative also received short shrift from the task force, which suggested commercial products such as security "tokens" rather than passwords could go a long way in the near term toward resolving DOD's security problems. The task force also brought sober realism to the theme of "information superiority" promulgated by all the services during the past several years to such an extent that it has become almost a mantra. "The doctrine of information superiority assumes the availability of information and information technology - a dangerous assumption.... Published service and joint doctrine does not address the operational implications of a failure of information and technology," the report said. The intelligence community's ability to handle IW also came in for a similar assessment by the task force, which called IW "a nontraditional intelligence problem [that is]...not easily discernible by traditional intelligence." Traditional intelligence skills "are largely irrelevant in the information warfare environment." Percy Pierre, an electrical engineering professor at Michigan State University and a member of the DSB task force, said DOD's interest in protecting critical infrastructure is a result of "the recognition that the Defense Department is dependent on private-sector assets for logistical support and other types of support." Any move by government toward civil electronic defense must be delicately balanced to avoid antagonizing the private sector, said Winn Schwartau, a security consultant and author of several information warfare books. "For them to blatantly say, `We want to monitor,' that creates a huge problem," he said. "If the government says, `You don't worry, private sector, we're going to take care of you,' they're going to have a problem." You must register to read this week's news or to use the search or forums. If you haven't signed up yet, fill out the registration form. Mail questions about this Web page to webmaster at fcw.com. URL: http://www.fcw.com From lucifer at dhp.com Tue Jan 7 11:37:45 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 11:37:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [CRYPTO] Quadratic residues Message-ID: <199701071937.OAA29838@dhp.com> Timothy May's family tree goes straight up. All of his ancestors were siblings, to dumb to recognize each other in the dark. /\ o-/\ Timothy May ///\|/\\\ / /|\ \ From AllTheCash at aol.com Tue Jan 7 13:11:36 1997 From: AllTheCash at aol.com (AllTheCash at aol.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 13:11:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Great Opportunity! Message-ID: <199701071936.OAA09691@fs.IConNet.NET> I thought this may be of interst to you! I recently researched a company who has all the traits of becoming a key player in the Health & Nutrition industry. The companies name is I.D.E.A. Concepts and They are Steamrolling the competition! ...FREE Multi-Page Custom Website Does All The Work For You! ...No Sign Up Fees! ...Incredible Pay Structure..You recieve your checks every 2 weeks! ...Top Notch support from Doctors and Biotech News letters! It's hard to really sum up all the benefits of this outfit in one short letter so please take a look for yourself at what they have to offer... .....What Do You Have To Lose! http://www.multi-level.com/millennium/quickmoney.html Best Of Luck, D.M.C. From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Tue Jan 7 13:23:53 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 13:23:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme Message-ID: <199701071946.LAA05201@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > > > How about this simple policy scheme: > > > > > > 1) posts from known list members forwarded to list automatically > > > 2) posts with "approval cookie" also forwarded automatically > > > 3) otherwise, forwarded only after approval by moderator, > > > > I.e., libel from Timmy May, Ray Arachelian, and the rest of the gang > > is approved automatically, and when a victim tries to defend himself > > and to point out that Timmy May is a liar, the response is delayed > > and probably rejected by the moderator. > > > > It's been said that the best response to speech one doesn't like > > is more speech. "Cypher punks" want to take away the victim's > > ability to respond to the lies being posted on their mailing list. > > You are far from being the victim of anything. If anything you're a big > huge thug who spams the list, posts racist flames, posts homophobic > flames, uses social engineering to find out info on his "enemies" and > then posts that info online with requests that others send flames to that > person's employers. Besides, in my scheme, the first two options are explicitly there to avoid moderation. Just post under your real name or generate an authentication cookie. From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Tue Jan 7 13:29:14 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 13:29:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: FW: Modified Token Posting Scheme Message-ID: <199701071914.LAA04906@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > >> How about this simple policy scheme: > >> > >> 1) posts from known list members forwarded to list automatically > >> 2) posts with "approval cookie" also forwarded automatically > >> 3) otherwise, forwarded only after approval by moderator, > > > So does this mean that any personal attacks or useless and annoying > drivel from the likes of Timmy May, Ray Arachelian and Sandy Sandford > would be automatically forwarded to the mailing list even though they > are frequently more annoying than the spam posted by the people who > would be censored by Gilmore ? No, just the opposite. My scheme allows people to route around moderation by authenticating their posts. The goal here is to keep *random* stuff, such as spam, off the list. From express at capella.net Tue Jan 7 13:44:43 1997 From: express at capella.net (express at capella.net) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 13:44:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: NEW Message-ID: <199701072150.QAA23479@capella.net> THE FOX FIRES HAVE STARTED BURNING! http://www.mlmers-ad-net.com/FoxTeam/Fox FREE WEB PAGE AND CHECKS SENT OUT DAILY! Let it begin, John From rgw at bellsouth.net Tue Jan 7 14:02:01 1997 From: rgw at bellsouth.net (rgwjr) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:02:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: American Cyber Mall Message-ID: <199701071826.NAA15593@mail.mia.bellsouth.net> AMERICAN CYBER MALL http://www.usacm.com FREE WEB PAGE CONTEST, WEEKLY DRAWING !!! Visit the American Cyber Mall http://www.usacm.com and you can register to win a FREE web page with FREE 12 months hosting !!! Just our way of say thanks for visiting our new award winning cyber mall. American Cyber Mall http://www.usacm.com TO BE REMOVED FROM LIST REPLY WITH SUBJECT = REMOVE From snow at smoke.suba.com Tue Jan 7 14:31:33 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:31:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: FTC Online Privacy Report In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970107133736.00682ea0@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: <199701072247.QAA02872@smoke.suba.com> > The Federal Trade Commission released yesterday: > The Federal Trade Commission, which last year held a conference > on privacy issues, said participants at the gathering agreed that > businesses have four ways to protect consumer privacy: > -- Notify consumers about how personal information collected online is > used. > -- Give consumers a choice about whether and how their personal > information is used. > -- Ensure the security of personal information is protected. > -- Give consumers access to their own personal information to ensure its > accuracy. Anyone willing to place a bet on how many companies will implement A,B, and D, and implement C so that it benefits the consumer, rather than just protects a valuable mailing list from theft? From smith at sctc.com Tue Jan 7 14:46:56 1997 From: smith at sctc.com (Rick Smith) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:46:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Relative Strength of 40-bit Crypto Implementations Message-ID: <199701072242.QAA01888@shade.sctc.com> : A client asked me today about where he could find evidence of the : relative strength of different encryption algorithms, when all are : restricted to 40-bit keys. He assumed dot-Gov was going to restrict his : export product to the 40-bit limit, but he wanted to provide the strongest : security he could within that limitation. There is a tiny technical wrinkle here -- the simpleminded approach is to use a 40 bit secret key appended to a constant, the smarter approach is to use some disclosed random data that, combined with 40 secret bits, produces a much longer key. It's like the salt in Unix passwords. The simple approach can allow an attacker to use a dictionary attack. The smarter approach means that the algorithm's full key length gets used. So, for example, you have 128 bit RC4 in which 88 bits are random but disclosed while the remaining 40 bits are still secret. The only practical problem is disclosure of the extra random bits, which the government expects the software to do. This is one of the uses of the big chunks of random data that host exchange in SSL V3. In earler SSLs they built the disclosed bits right into the protocol, an explicit field for disclosing part of the key. Rick. smith at sctc.com secure computing corporation From snow at smoke.suba.com Tue Jan 7 14:52:49 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:52:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <199701071855.KAA05718@miron.vip.best.com> Message-ID: <199701072308.RAA02919@smoke.suba.com> > Citing a specific example, the DSB report said one building in Savannah, Ga., (a Bell South switching facility, FCW learned) houses not only a > vital communications hub but information technology systems supporting key electric power and transportation companies. Because Savannah > serves as a vital port of embarkation for Army troops based in that area, an IW attack against that one building would "make it impossible to > deploy military forces at the pace specified in operations plans." Then again so would a decent breifcase bomb. > These recommendations included a controversial call for the Pentagon to have the legal power to protect nongovernmental portions of the ^^^^^^^ Someone mispelled "Take Over". > infrastructure in the name of "the common defense." To defend DOD and i critical nongovernmental systems against IW, the report recommends > new legal authority that will allow "DOD, law enforcement and intelligence agencies to conduct efficient, coordinated monitoring of attacks on the > critical civilian information infrastructure...." I would bet that with the possible execption of TEMPEST (and I doubt even then) private industry could do the job cheaper, and more thoroughly than the DOD. > In carving out a position for DOD to take on this role in the civil sector,i the report bluntly summed up the problem: "We should not forget > information warfare is a form of warfare, not a crime or an act of terror." It took an equally blunt approach on how the Pentagon should respond > to such an attack or intrusion. "The response could entail civil or criminal prosecution, use of military force...diplomatic initiatives or economic > mandates." Seig Heil > to surviving willful malicious attack, or detecting and eliminating corrupt software." As opposed to a benevolent attack? or maybe a friendly attack? > "For them to blatantly say, `We want to monitor,' that creates a huge problem," he said. "If the government says, `You don't worry, private sector, > we're going to take care of you,' they're going to have a problem." Hmmm.... I must have taken a wrong turn somewhere. I thought this was america, land of the free. Can anyone give me directions on how to get there from here... Petro, Christopher C. petro at suba.com snow at smoke.suba.com From nobody at replay.com Tue Jan 7 14:59:40 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 14:59:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy is God...Listen to Him! Message-ID: <199701072258.XAA06785@basement.replay.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Don't understand all this issue about Sandy and John filtering the list. Don't we want order and control? We need Sandy to decide whether our articles should be read by others. Sandy is our spokesman, our leader, our navigator. When he founded the Cypherpunks group, he wanted ``order and control, ``and now he has been forced to re-assume control of the group to put controls in place. Hey, if Sandy and John say we have to stick to certain topics, well, dammit, they are in control and we have to do what they want. Sandy and John are our leaders. Forget this stuff about the Cypherpunks list being a group seperate from toad.com. Forget this idea that John is just the host of the list...he is actually the co-controlled. And we'd better pay attention. Why didn't Sandy and John just announce a new filtered list, like Blossom has? Why make their control the default for the whole list, with the the unfiltered list harder to subscribe to and eventually to go away completely? Good questions! Ask not the reasons for God's decissions. This is Sandy's list, and John's machine, and if they say they know best what is a flame and what is not, I say we should just take our medicine and learn to love their wise decisions. If they say we can only write flames if they approve, OK. If they say we must only write about libertarian topics, OK. If they reject our messages without explanation, OK. Sandy is our Leader. And anyone who doesn't respect our Leader should just leave. Bye -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 07dTgUBMs4Q8hvikii9febJAQEbrAQAmgwAeqSsi2qIkqakNRPCpwCwNnYudNop zyxE2LueC+WuhugtLeyDDet+WgefE9X84F4qxn/QVB+tJAGbZzfCPO24shelX21k mk80oevKqzcfAAzbB4tMtXe5gl6+zykExXjsx4J/KjMNPL0QAE490uvnKqus/a2H 0l2AU9k/Kp8= =ix2B -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From liz at nym.alias.net Tue Jan 7 15:15:10 1997 From: liz at nym.alias.net (Liz Taylor) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:15:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge Message-ID: <19970107231051.1088.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> There is nothing unglamorous about a known plaintext attack, if the plaintext is choosen carefully. I don't know anything about bank ATMs and the protocols they use, but I presume the PIN is stored on the card single DES encrypted. If this is so, anyone can take an ATM card, attack it to recover the key and then use that key to recover the PIN for any stolen ATM card of that bank (or that branch). Hopefully, the ciphertext/plaintext pair that RSA announces will be a real target like this, with the actual key disabled. Once the key is recovered, the press can then claim that ATM cards are not safe any longer. On a related note, do you think the key will first be recovered by a hardware device or by the Great Internet DES Key Search? Hardware is much faster, but no such device exists in the private/amateur sector now. Estimates are that it will take 10 months to actually build such a device. Opinions? From cman at c2.net Tue Jan 7 15:28:26 1997 From: cman at c2.net (Douglas Barnes) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:28:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts on moderation Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970107152545.00e858bc@gabber.c2.net> Goodness knows most people who are fully engaged in a mailing list get involved in an unproductive discussion or argument from time to time. My main assertion about Sandy is that although he has his likes and dislikes (and is not shy about sharing them) I can't see him bouncing messages just because someone was disagreeing with him. There might be someone who is less opinionated, but I think that you need to find someone who cares enough about a subject to be interested in moderating it (one antonym of "opinionated" is "dispassionate" -- think about it.) The only way to tell if Sandy will be fair _as a moderator_ is to give him a chance. Years of knowing him as a friend, and four months of sharing an office indicate that while he's stubborn and opinionated, he's also extremely fairminded, and will not bounce for content he disagrees with. He also has a broad concept (some might argue too broad) of acceptable list topics, but since we're looking primarily to screen out the worst dreck & outright spam, he seems like a logical choice as moderator. I don't see this move as censorship of any sort -- cleaning the Augean stables is more like it. I am profoundly tired of wading through completely worthless and vapid trash accusing Tim and John of various sexual perversions. (Note that if the writers actually knew these folks, they'd at least be able to write better or more interesting libel.) At 10:35 PM 1/6/97 -0800, you wrote: >Douglas Barnes wrote: >> 1) I've known Sandy for a couple of years, and I trust him to >> use good judgement as a moderator. It will be important to >> develop guidelines so that the job can be rotated, but it's also >> important that the moderator be someone who doesn't have any >> major axe to grind. Sandy has his personal likes and dislikes, >> but I don't think he'll ever stoop to tossing out opinions that >> he disagrees with. > >Wishful thinking, Doug. Sandy will take an emotional (non-objective) >position on an issue, and argue it beyond any reasonable limit. I wish >I had all his replies to things I've said - you'd see what I mean. > >Not to promote anyone who I might not be a friend of, but, there are >people on this list who are "well respected" who are light-years ahead >of Sandy in areas that are important for a list moderator. > >Maybe Gilmore should have publicly announced for a moderator, and then >let the subscribers pick.... > > From nawaz921 at cs.uidaho.edu Tue Jan 7 15:35:13 1997 From: nawaz921 at cs.uidaho.edu (faried nawaz) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:35:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: $2500 for a class c. Message-ID: <7130.852679165@bear.cs.uidaho.edu> ------- Blind-Carbon-Copy To: hungry at hungry.com Cc: chris at uidaho.edu, people at kuoi.sub.uidaho.edu Subject: $2500 for a class c. Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 15:19:25 PST Message-ID: <7130.852679165 at bear.cs.uidaho.edu> From: faried nawaz (two messages follow) From: gjohnson at dream.season.com (Reality is a point of view) Subject: IP allocation goes fee based soon?! Newsgroups: ba.internet Date: 6 Jan 1997 16:08:04 GMT Organization: season.com [205.179.33.0] Path: news.uidaho.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!newshub.tc.umn.edu!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!agate!news.ucsc.edu!news.scruz.net!gjohnson Lines: 18 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: 205.179.33.42 Xref: news.uidaho.edu ba.internet:12066 Take a look at http://rs.internic.net/arin for a quiet bombshell, especially Section 2.3. A Class C block for $2,500? If you think that isn't funny there are a few people that agree with you in threads elsewhere. Try a dejanews search on $2500 Class C. You might also want to take a peek at http://www.iahc.org for news about a commentary period that ends in the next few days. - -- Gary Johnson "Wahoo." gjohnson at season.com Remember why... later in the thread -- From: davidm at them.com (David Mandala) Subject: Re: IP allocation goes fee based soon?! Newsgroups: ba.internet Date: Tue, 07 Jan 97 19:10:07 GMT Organization: Them Productions Path: news.uidaho.edu!newsfeed.orst.edu!news.uoregon.edu!marlin.ucsf.edu!overload.lbl.gov!agate!spool.mu.edu!newspump.sol.net!howland.erols.net!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news-xfer.netaxs.com!news.texas.net!news1.best.com!nntp1.best.com!davidm Lines: 32 Message-ID: <5au72j$rnn at nntp1.best.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: davidm.vip.best.com X-Newsreader: News Xpress 2.0 Beta #2 Xref: news.uidaho.edu ba.internet:12120 I've since heard that their contract run out in 1998, now since they have gone from a small nothing company to a widly known disaster, if follows that they are making money hand over fist. So before the contract opens we need to make enough noise with the goverment that the contract is NOT relet to them but rather to open bid, or to a true non profit alliance of Internet professionals to provide the service at cost (which in reality is quite small). Only we can make the difference. In article , southern at netcom.com (Shawn) wrote: >In article , George Bonser wrote: >: Billions and Billions of IP addresses are right around the corner >: and they are going to use the current shortage to set a precedent >: (sp?) of charging $2500 per block of 256? That would put them in a >: position to make an absolute KILLING when IPv6 comes out. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >Give that man a ceegar. > >That is, I believe, the point. > >All, of course, at $50/year per domain name. > >With that kind of income, they might give Microsoft a run for their >money as being one of the most profitable computer companies in the >world. :-) > >Shawn /************************************************************* David Mandala Them Productions San Francisco, CA Internet: davidm at them.com CIS: 74156,221 AOL: dism *************************************************************/ faried - -- i don't hate people. | my other car is a cdr why, some of my closest | linux, the ms-dos of the nineties friends are people. | cable and internet.. who needs a life? -- stevi at aa.net | http://www.hungry.com/~fn/ ------- End of Blind-Carbon-Copy From unicorn at schloss.li Tue Jan 7 15:35:57 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:35:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D1E39F.44A9@gte.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > You must be in bed with Sandfort. Disappointed? -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From sameer at c2.net Tue Jan 7 15:42:06 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 15:42:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge In-Reply-To: <19970107230955.978.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199701080002.QAA07748@gabber.c2.net> > There is nothing unglamorous about a known plaintext attack, if the > plaintext is choosen carefully. I don't know anything about bank ATMs > and the protocols they use, but I presume the PIN is stored on the card > single DES encrypted. If this is so, anyone can take an ATM card, attack it > to recover the key and then use that key to recover the PIN for any stolen > ATM card of that bank (or that branch). Hopefully, the ciphertext/plaintext > pair that RSA announces will be a real target like this, with the actual key > disabled. Once the key is recovered, the press can then claim that ATM > cards are not safe any longer. Stolen ATM cards are actually not that valuable. They have fixed limits and require physical presence to exploit. Try swift/forex/etc. secret des keys.. those are valuable. -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net C2Net is having a party: http://www.c2.net/party/ http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From miner333 at xroads.com Tue Jan 7 16:01:35 1997 From: miner333 at xroads.com (miner) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:01:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [CRYPTO] Quadratic residues Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970108000024.006cfb90@xroads.com> At 02:37 PM 1/7/97 -0500, Anonymous wrote: >Timothy May's family tree goes straight up. All of his >ancestors were siblings, to dumb to recognize each other in the >dark. > > /\ o-/\ Timothy May > ///\|/\\\ > / /|\ \ Counting the days till I don't have to see anymore of these, certainly a product of one of the 3 people already in my killfile. Thank you John and Sandy in advance From blancw at microsoft.com Tue Jan 7 16:09:18 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:09:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts on moderation Message-ID: From: Douglas Barnes I don't see this move as censorship of any sort -- cleaning the Augean stables is more like it. I am profoundly tired of wading through completely worthless and vapid trash accusing Tim and John of various sexual perversions. .................................................. So what about determining the lowest parameter of tolerance for style & content - how low you can go before your messages are transferred to the "flames" division? Then, for instance, Uni could say to Dale: "you will find my detailed retort to your deluded accusations on the other list" (which Dale would, of course, go over there and read ). In any case, everyone would know what that sensitive, low point of intolerance is such that if they descend to it they will be sifted out and recategorized. .. Blanc From spanky at europa.com Tue Jan 7 16:14:26 1997 From: spanky at europa.com (Starr) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:14:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: About ICF(International Cryptography Framework) Message-ID: <32D2E95B.614E@europa.com> Has anyone heard anything or been paying attention to the development of the ICF(International Cryptography Framework) standard. This seems to be an attempt of the US Gov and a FEW of our favorite corps to completely control cryptography standards as well as to have the keys to all cryptographical content. The only information I've found so far is on HP's website http://www.dmo.hp.com/gsy/security/icf/main.html I've also managed to get a hold of Ray Bamford (ray_bamford at hp.com)at HP who seems to have some PR role in this wool over the eyes attempt. It seems to be just another (souped-up, in disguise attempt at the clipper chip except on an International basis). When I spoke to him he told me that the only information that has been issued is what you seen in the technical paper, and that the info they have is extremely exclusive, even if you are a legitimate company working on cryptography issues, etc. Check it out...I would definitely like to hear your opinions as well as if any of you have more information on this subject(newsgroups, mail lists, etc). -spanky From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 7 16:30:36 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:30:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701071926.NAA00355@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: This is an example of soc.culture.russian.moderated traffic. This is what Armenian forgers want. From: ivan at manifesto.nihonkai.jp (Ivan Zimogorov) Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian,soc.culture.russian.moderated Subject: Re: Where can I find extensions for Russian TeX? Message-ID: <5535100AXW.0AXX091996 at manifesto.Nihonkai.jp> Date: Sun, 3 Nov 1996 18:16:18 CST References: <199611032246.QAA13585 at manifold.algebra.com> Organization: Bacterial Bee Peekers Lines: 38 Approved: SCRM Approval Key X-SCRM-Policy: http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/index.html X-SCRM-Info-1: Send submissions to scrm at algebra.com X-SCRM-Info-2: Send technical complaints to scrm-admin at algebra.com X-SCRM-Info-3: Send complaints about policy to scrm-board at algebra.com X-Comment: moderators do not necessarily agree or disagree with this article. X-Robomod-Version: STUMP 1.1, by ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov) X-No-Archive: yes Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP soc.culture.russian.moderated (0) Go to your Linux CD, change directory to where your tex is; (1) cd ./lib/texmf/mf; grep -i vulis * It should print out "cyrti.mf:% I wouldn't even know the real one existed were it not for Dimitri Vulis" (2) you're on your own now :) Igor Chudov wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian,soc.culture.russian.moderated > Subject: Where can I find extensions for Russian TeX? > Date: Sun Nov 3 16:45:13 CST 1996 > > subj sez it all. > > thank you > > igor > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: 2.6.2 > > iQCVAwUBMn0grMJFmFyXKPzRAQGG7gP/ZmD+zgkBXkM5l0dzwmi8kvwAdUbh5/uy > /sCqBTvLVApgsgRKylnVp/lUvOhLW/pR0r3Oh4pFYFk3DT5aHtefAymxlBbcWQjP > C+HC7NPricd0oRcwsUmNzVfcQ8ki5BujMvYLibbEu8cH7FxnSE7QxFheINGvovg5 > pTCOuuYz3UM= > =aEEb > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _ / Ivan Zimogorov, _/\_ pupil of deliverance ========================================= MODERATOR COMMENT MOD: The right file is _usr_local_tex_texmf_doc_help_TeX-index . Thanks. Igor. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From native at media.com Tue Jan 7 16:36:17 1997 From: native at media.com (L.B. Done) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:36:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: How To Repair "YOUR OWN " Credit ! Message-ID: <199701080030.TAA15728@sun1.flinet.com.> CREDIT REBUILDING OF AMERICA * REBUILD YOUR OWN CREDIT* PLEASE FORGIVE THIS E-MAIL INTRUSION BUT IF YOU CAN USE THIS SERVICE? PLEASE KEEP READING! *** Have you ever been turned down after you applied for a credit card, department store card, or a gas credit card, or that new car you have wanted? The reason was probably because of something the creditor found on your credit report. Thousands of people are DENIED CREDIT because of something that appears on their credit report that is not correct OR they would like REMOVED from their credit report FOR GOOD!! There are many companies out there that can remove tems on your credit report but want to charge you any where from $300.00 to $1,000.00 . "BE CAREFUL", most of these companies can�t do anything to repair your credit that you can�t do yourself with my �CREDIT REPAIR PACKET�. Once I found out just how the " BIG " companies were doing this, I put all the information down on a simple twelve step process. ** DO IT YOURSELF ** why pay their high prices to repair your credit, when you can do it yourself for only $19.95 plus 2.95 for S&H. I spent over two years to perfect this process, and if followed to the letter, it will work!!! HAVE the NEW CAR you want, the CREDIT CARDS you want. You don�t have to wait SEVEN to TEN YEARS for these items to be taken off your credit reprot. DO IT YOUR SELF!! and feel GOOD AGAIN!! Just send your check or money order to: Robert C. Roy, Jr. P.O. Box 1052 Delray Beach, Fl. 33447-1052 I will send you by return mail the complete twelve step packet so you can get started RIGHT NOW!! SEND NOW!! due to the unbelievable responce for this packet the introductory price of $19.95 (+) $2.95 S&H, will not last long! HAVE A �GREAT DAY�! & THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ORDER!! From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Jan 7 16:41:17 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:41:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970107164034.006b6044@mail.io.com> At 09:37 AM 1/7/97 -0800, Pierre Uszynski wrote: >Rich Graves very correctly mentions: > >> 1) Moderator liability and anonymous posting. > >I agree that this is actually a critical problem with a filtering >moderation scheme. Such a scheme appears to provide the capability to >filter out possible "copyright violations" posts. From what I remember >of the Netcom/CoS case (without going back to the sources), that may >mean more liability for the reviewers (and the operator of the >machine). That's a major point against simple filtering moderation. I agree that this raises the spectre of liability for messages passed on, but I'm not sure it's a big problem. I see three broad categories of information which the moderation liability scheme may suppress: 1. Copyrighted items such as newspaper/magazine articles 2. Secrets which are being revealed (e.g., the alleged RC4 source, the Mykotronix trash stuff) 3. Defamation As to the loss of (1), I'm not heartbroken - much of this information is already placed online by its owners, and can be referred to with a hypertext link or a reference instead of being posted in its entirety. Also, some people (who I don't feel like singling out) currently provide access to third-party copyrighted information, but in a discreet manner. The "copyright violations" poster(s) could provide access in this way, unless they're committed to making John Gilmore and the remailer operators take the heat for someone else's actions. The loss of (2) is regrettable; but Usenet (and other unmoderated forums) are still available for hit-and-run disclosure of secrets. Also, it's unclear to what extent (2) will be lost. Given the recent California and Federal statutory changes strengthening trade secret protection, I think it's useful to be careful - but it's arguable that neither the alleged RC4 code nor the Mykotronix trash stuff would have been a trade secret violation. Also, let's weigh the value of what'd be lost (how many of these messages do we really get?) against the negative value of the crap we're currently subjected to, and the (speculative) value of posts we don't get because their authors have left the list because of disgust and annoyance. I'm not going to lose much sleep over (3). I can't call to mind a single instance of interesting or useful defamation that I've seen on the Net. >ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) responded: > >> [in another forum] >> After long thinking, moderator board has come with the following >> solution: >> >> 1) We do not know for sure if a certain post violates >> some copyrights or not >> [and more in the same line 2,3,4,5] > >Would any of this have mattered in Netcom/CoS? My hunch is that liability for infringement will focus on defendants' actions after they knew or had reason to know that a particular act of copying or distribution was a violation of the copyright owners' rights. Copying data from one place to another is the essence of the net; holding owners of machines (or moderators) responsible for violations they couldn't have stopped is nonsensical. I predict (but cannot cite cases so holding) that moderators/listowners will be held liable for copyright violations they could have detected and stopped with the exercise of some level of care; but that they will not be held liable where no reasonable amount of effort on their part could have prevented the copyright violation. And I think "reasonable" will depend on the facts at hand. (All of the contributory infringement cases I'm familiar with have involved a defendant who was aware of, if not actively assisting with, the underlying infringement.) >Instead, a system that would forward reviewers' opinions *after the >fact* does not have any of this problem. And we have already mentioned, >it is also more powerful (real time initial feed, easy multiple >feedback feeds, fully compatible with anything else...) although it >does not reduce bandwidth requirements. Can you name a software package which runs under Windows or the Mac OS which automatically processes reviewers' opinions against a mailbox of incoming mail? Better yet, can you name a Eudora plug-in which does so? Abandoning an imperfect but workable solution because it's possible to imagine that someone will create something better someday strikes me as silly. Comparing theoretical software/strategies with currently implemented software/strategies is comparing apples and oranges. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 16:46:50 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:46:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation and the Polymorphic Virus Message-ID: <32D3044B.45D6@sk.sympatico.ca> Perhaps with proper moderation, having access to a cloistered environment without all of the 'noise', cypherpunks will be able to come up with a true polymorphic virus that will make the Atom Bomb look like a child's toy. The rabble who rant on endlessly about 'social issues' can surely not be trusted to contribute anything of value on what are, in fact, merely a question of 'numbers'. It is up the the elite, the code writers, to lead the cypher- punks into a New World Order, in which the results of cryptography are only used for proper, approved purposes. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 16:46:53 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 16:46:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Bending Over In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D30781.3CC8@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > 2. The only possible scheme that could work long-term would be a moderated > list plus a deleted (excised?) list of posts which didn't make the > moderator's cut. Dale, I love your attitude, and I enjoy many of your posts. I also love being able to laugh at you for getting sucked into the oldest trick in the book. In the ruins of Rome, you will find a Chariot Dealership which sold both Pontiac and Chevy Chariots. Once they had you on their sales lot, they would attempt to get you sucked into a mindset where your choices were limited to choosing between 'their' chariots. Our political sytem is a grand 'play' in which the Democrats and the Republicans 'contend' to see who gets to slip us the cold, hard one. The bottom line, is that what is dripping out of your butt is either a Democrat's sperm and a Republican's saliva, or vice-versa. > Having a moderated list and a full unmoderated list > is certain to fail, and I'm not too sure that they don't have this in > mind already. Have I misjudged you? Could it possibly be that you can still hear the small whisper in the wind that warns you that it's all done with mirrors? "Believe nothing of what you hear, only half of what you see, and if you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him!" Bubba Rom Dos Toto From owner-cypherpunks Tue Jan 7 17:34:57 1997 From: owner-cypherpunks (owner-cypherpunks) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:34:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Get Quick Results! Message-ID: <19970108012628.AAG27235@Panton.delta.net> ***** The BEST Way for YOU to Market Successfully ***** ********5 Million E-mail Addresses Available ******** Nothing works better than mass e-mail to get quick results. Nothing! There are plenty of programs you could buy such as Floodgate to pull your own addresses however, these programs (even when used properly) can take up to 6 months just to pull as many as 750,000 addresses! And after THAT time has elapsed you're database will have plenty of addresses that are undeliverable. Why wait? Get started by using our SUPER responsive list that was generated just last month! We purchase current lists only. Imagine 5 Million deliverable addresses that can bring you more orders than you have ever seen!!! Imagine, the potential profits from your offer(s)! If you only get 1/2 of a percent that's 25,000 orders!!! These addresses can be mailed using Pegasus or other mailing programs. Everything has been saved in a text (.txt) format. Each group of names comes in lots of 100,000. You can mail any quantity you wish! Just drop the quantity you want to send and that's it! This list originally cost over $3000. I'm offering the complete list for only $159. That's right OVER 5 MILLION addresses for only $159. Think about it. If you get just 1/2 of a percent that's 25,000 orders!!! Do you think you could turn a profit? This list will be sold to ONLY the first 25 people who respond. PLUS, I'll include FREE... a special report that will show you how to mass e-mail without losing your dial-up account. Also, this report will show you where to get a bullet proof space and e-mail account for mass mailing. This report alone is worth the purchase price. Let's face it, if you can't mail successfully then what good are the addresses? If you ever wanted to see a ton of orders come pouring in this is the ONLY WAY it can happen for so little money. This incredible offer will expire after 25 sales. Don't delay act now! Have questions? Call 714-288-6227 FAX your order to: 714-288-6233 ********************* ORDER FORM ******************* Yes, RUSH me the entire 5 million e-mail addresses right away for just $159! (Print this out and Fax it to 714-288-6233) Name:______________________________________ Address:____________________________________ City:_______________________________________ State:_______________________________________ Country:____________________________________ E-mail Address:_______________________________ Phone Number:_______________________________ I wish to pay by: ( Check One ) Master Card:_____ VISA:_____ American Express:_____ Check:_____ Money Order:_____ Card Number:__________________________________ Exp. Date:_______________ Signature:_____________________________________ Once we have recieved your order you will be notified by e-mail immediately where to download this offer. ======================================== ***I also do bulk mailing if you want to have me send your ad out. The price is $199.95 per 100,000 e-mail addresses and I'll place your Home page on a server for 1 month. This way you never have to worry about losing your space account. If you want to be removed from our mailing list just hit "reply" and put "remove". You will be remove pronto! From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 7 17:47:05 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:47:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Zero-knowledge commit Message-ID: <199701080058.QAA18393@mailmasher.com> Timmy C[retin] May the self-admitted child molester possesses a rudimentary dick less than one inch long, half the size of his mother's clitoris, that barely makes a fistful. Thereby hangs the root of this Jew-hating sissy's sick fixation on little boys and Usenet forgeries. . |___ (}o o{) -ooO-(_)-Ooo- Timmy C[retin] May From intaus2 at ois.net.au Tue Jan 7 18:00:03 1997 From: intaus2 at ois.net.au (Neil Tunnicliffe) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 18:00:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Polymorph engine (was:RE: PWL's how ?) Message-ID: <199701080158.JAA22301@hawk.ois.net.au> At 09:50 7/01/97 -0400, you wrote: >Where did you get the following text on polymorph engines? Is it available >somewhere? Where can I get other information on similar topics (Please resist >the urge to mention web search engines; I'm looking for specific >recommendations :-) > >Thanks! > >- Patrick >_______________________________________________________________________________ Well try some sitez like Vrack: http://206.117.82.30/vrack/ Neil From rah at shipwright.com Tue Jan 7 18:07:19 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 18:07:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fed Study on Identity Theft Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 18:59:00 -0500 (EST) To: Multiple Recipients of e$pam From: e$pam at intertrader.com (e$pam) Reply-To: e$@thumper.vmeng.com X-Comment: To unsubscribe, send any email to e$pam-off at intertrader.com Precedence: Bulk Subject: Fed Study on Identity Theft X-orig-from: jmuller at brobeck.com (John D. Muller) X-e$pam-source: Various Forwarded by Robert Hettinga ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 12:00:09 -0800 From: jmuller at brobeck.com (John D. Muller) Subject: Fed Study on Identity Theft To: rah at shipwright.com I unsubscribed from e$pam over the holidays, so this item may already have been on, but if not it might be of interest: As required by legislation passed last year (partly in response to the P-TRAK fiasco), the Fed is required to study whether institutions that are not subject to the Fair Credit Reporting Act are making sensitive personal identifying information available to the public, whether such information creates undue potential for fraud and for risk of loss to banks, and whether legislation is needed to address the risk of fraud and loss. The Fed has recently published a request for comments on these issues. Comments are due by January 31. The Fed release is at http://www.bog.frb.fed.us/boarddocs/press/BoardActs/1996/19961223 Have a happy, prosperous and reputation-enhancing 1997. -------------------------------------------------- The e$ lists are brought to you by: Intertrader Ltd - SMART '96 Winners for a Java e$ product Visit for details ... Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion http://www.hyperion.co.uk info at hyperion.co.uk Like e$pam? Help pay for it! See Or, for e$pam sponsorship, see Thanks to the e$ e$lves: Of Counsel: Vinnie Moscaritolo (Majordomo)^2: Rachel Willmer Commermeister: Anthony Templer Interturge: Rodney Thayer HTMLurgist: Cynthia Zwerling --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From lucifer at dhp.com Tue Jan 7 18:18:47 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 18:18:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Free Money! Message-ID: <199701080218.VAA14717@dhp.com> -----BEGIN ECASH PAYMENT----- oLmQgwAC5aGgiqCukIFPkIECkIFkkIEEkIEDkYQy0vpCkIQy5W9CkIFPkoFAlJRq 4qN3VtIH9KSFgmb3il0RYQZx6ZSUxaI1MWdlPdblm4L5N1b/3992J+KQgRCSkFNw ZW5kIGl0IHdpc2VseS6SgJSAkIEGkYQAAAAAkIEAoaC4oKuQggHmk+Ag/eV9Nee2 ocL6CFYWKzSurof4K/Xnwlx4D+Wi+tnZ4v4cBrBFemtqxT7puXPGtLCiwgqEBnvP x1KMa1kn6YSBiloh4LbX1L/cHybqRd+2uZ912nAB9bR7XQosq2Hru3KT4CjsbBdv xlKdHcZLZgjCtS921yR8Yi2wfkV+szERrmW3vBJ6O8AqLFoGCPnbfMvtjijLQ3b6 9rIXbKEvgdmaSlyXLprRuoI2Jc1jNXXdLKCsbbGz/CgsD91S8wycSkfZGJCBQKGg q5CCAeWT4ASoFlRkQY7Ki7PTNTcatdQVREgxe2oImfz0WmTcBhqacNT8Se1m98xa 58M2XDq84yHSryEfrcS8HKLozqrVBJ2hefSxYGyl3UZ+YnA/yheOhE7dpiTnOS+C s9TN0KA4N5PgZwJvDIYwBJBPiN4tH0lrcESWhlNo+cWW6xezzSGeMQhN+CfTIO4c Bs0jjemnIcYrgHuwmSRIIROuHiomOaEWHZPtPq6FIzNdoagx4x813Ad7fJC4h67J a3Lq/eVah9gQkIEgoaCrkIIB4pPgH9I1EH43vIKxZcL0/qtH6+RhXkwAyCqsZVTJ IyKB1j8brC11C/xNj2sHbArGfGlJneuPyxJVkDPQK1ed78vnGdTfg14xfMRChBfp qCfg0r5fKZwQhp0jWY5gjGIFuXuEk+CtJdc8pCV31QnpTcMJ5UziyAi3JuwbNh+5 7Q6yjD65HwGj/oNmWg6GCHiefe5fcN5c3OmWddiJxXBattMLr+LfX0HpyW2KoHQL dwSeBrz53Kam87Sini1LC7vVmhIdEo+QgQShoaE= -----END ECASH PAYMENT----- From declan at well.com Tue Jan 7 18:47:30 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 18:47:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 18:44:07 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater The Supreme Court ruled on this sentencing case yesterday. Kennedy and Stevens -- hardly known as civil libertarians -- dissented. The Court reversed the 9th Circuit, ruling the lower court was wrong to say that such a practice "would make the jury's findings of fact pointless." The court declared: "Sentencing enhancements do not punish a defendant for crimes of which he was not convicted, but rather increase his sentence because of the manner in which he committed the crime of conviction." Double jeopardy? What's that? Of course it was a drug crime. The defendant, Vernon Watts, was convicted of cocaine possession with intent to distribute. To paraphrase another saying: "'Drug Trafficking Offense' is the root passphrase to the Constitution." -Declan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 17:41:35 -0800 From: Jim Warren Sender: owner-fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Did you read about the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision? Seems they decided it was acceptable for a judge to use crimes for which a jury has found a defendent *NOT guilty*, to justify imposing greater penalties than the judge could otherwise, for a lesser crime for which the jury found the defendent guilty. (It's quite common to prosecute someone for multiple crimes, and have the jury find them innocent of some charges, but guilty of others.) Now, all a judge has to do is opine that, in his or her unilateral opinion, there is a "preponderance of evidence" of guilt of the more serious crime -- in spite of the unanimous finding by every member of the jury, that the defendent is NOT guilty of that crime, beyond a reasonable doubt. The Supreme's *unsigned* 7-2 opinion says than a finding of NOT guilty, "does not prove that the defendent is innocent; it *merely* proves the esistence of a reasonable doubt as to his guilt." [I.e., all U.S. citizens now risk being penalized as theough they are guilty, unless they can PROVE they're innocent!] Much worse, the basis for *criminal* guilt and associated penalties -- charged, prosecuted and imposed using the massive powers and resources of the State -- has now functionally changed from proof "beyond a reasonable doubt," to the much lesser standard of, "preponderance of evidence," which used to be limited only to civil litigation prosecuted between private attorneys for feuding plaintiffs. Who says the practices of the Third Reich didn't survive!? --jim, Amerikan citizen Jim Warren (jwarren at well.com) GovAccess list-owner/editor, advocate & columnist (Govt.Technology, MicroTimes) 345 Swett Rd., Woodside CA 94062; voice/415-851-7075; fax-for-the-quaint/ [Also blind-cc'ed to others.] From markm at voicenet.com Tue Jan 7 19:05:23 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 19:05:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Germany Passes Sweeping Cyberspace Legislation 01/06/97 (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701070452.UAA23628@netcom11.netcom.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Mon, 6 Jan 1997 wb8foz at netcom.com wrote: > The law also prohibits the use of "cookies," software applets that > trace a user's path across the Internet and recording the data they > view. > > This is, to me! I haven't had time to search for any more information on the law, but if this law bans _all_ cookies, then this is just another example of the technological cluelessness that exists in various governments. I don't agree with any restrictions on cookies, but if there are going to be any, then the least they could do is allow cookies if the HTML page indicates somewhere on it that it is sending a cookie. This would prevent companies like "Doubleclick" from gathering information, but would permit "legitimate" uses. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtMP0SzIPc7jvyFpAQF3wAf/XzJZ3RYJj0kuci1bTJwMoXvAw/OJEoMD ncYsvr58t/kPIFsbBs+bgCSgiFXDHACOZLqlCeRFjgkOF+ljY0Syqw2g4iNoczo/ LQ17NYplMQv4u0sxrCQxvPK0xNddO5zdy9fmSTJecMtGXIaZ6iTqiX0smNAD0nED a/clBz6zbI+DUBXVyaX7Gmn7nOQJ3ySTAycWGRoU5CkcSsbI3TjHTMiqyEw/oRst Xio8q9GS0/+K4BtZGP8Evn7meHEjv4yL1gucLREtgqgLLj1AQUn3jKHzORGFQ2Fx 6mrTSnRBjLzE3xcBr/r0YxHIEnqy78xz10UuMIGas7DEfFNyfHGejw== =tCA6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 7 20:00:20 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 20:00:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <8N27ZD20w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Black Unicorn writes: > On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > You must be in bed with Sandfort. > > Disappointed? Are you gay, Herr Unicorn? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From brettc at tritro.com.au Tue Jan 7 20:27:24 1997 From: brettc at tritro.com.au (Brett Carswell) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 20:27:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: The FAGGOT list Message-ID: Aga Wrote: > >That is another FAGGOT coming out of the woodwork! >> > Just how many KNOWN faggots are on this list? [snippo] > >Most of the above men are apparently FAGGOTS, since they >conspire to censor Freedom Of Speech on the InterNet, under >the guise of "spam elimination." Actually, is all a front >for censorship by homosexuals on the InterNet. >[more snippo] >> > All of these who are faggots must be labeled >> > and watched, as we know that faggots are the worst censors. Could someone please forward me the URL of the FAGGOT (are the caps manditory?) detecting software for mailing lists. I feel pretty left out as almost everyone else know who the FAGGOTS are. Is this the same software that detects Cocksuckers or does Dr Dimitri have something of his own. Maybe we could all band together and come up with something that detects Nazi moderators as well. Brett From haystack at cow.net Tue Jan 7 20:43:20 1997 From: haystack at cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 20:43:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation Message-ID: <9701080426.AA01743@cow.net> Tim C. May's sexual life is not the business of the cypherpunks mailing list. o)__ (_ _`\ Tim C. May z/z\__) From anonymous at miron.vip.best.com Tue Jan 7 21:05:32 1997 From: anonymous at miron.vip.best.com (anonymous at miron.vip.best.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:05:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Free Money! Message-ID: <199701080457.UAA09570@miron.vip.best.com> Thanks for the dough! I just love cyber technology. Will spend it wisely. From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 7 21:11:05 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:11:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency In-Reply-To: <199701062213.XAA20921@internal-mail.systemics.com> Message-ID: <32D2F907.2748@gte.net> Toto wrote: > Gary Howland wrote: > > But digital currencies will never become fiat currencies, let alone legal > > tender, unless governments say they are. So why should they worry? (OK, OK, > > they will worry about tax evasion etc. etc.) > Exactly. How can they claim, on one hand, that something does not > qualify as currency, or as legal tender, and then turn around and tax > it? If I have 10 Million UNITS that aren't considered to legally be of > value, then I'm certainly not going to 'go easy' to tax court. > Any currency that becomes sufficiently distributed and traded will > find itself becoming a 'legal entity' in some form or another. Once it > has been 'entityenized' (don't bother looking for that word in the > dictionary), it will be a short step for it to achieve a quantifiable > status among other currencies. [snip] One should always look at the Mike Milken example of an alternate currency. This has not been reported from this point of view in, say, the NY Times that I know of, but some "underground" publications have done so. The Wall Street Cabal (as they say) was genuinely frightened that since Milken was so successful with high-yield bonds, they deliberately created the term Junk Bonds and flooded the markets with appropriate propaganda, and thereby killed off their competition. How they turned it into a criminal offense is truly an art. From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 7 21:11:55 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:11:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off Message-ID: <32D30EFB.5F8@gte.net> The following table shows cypherpunks subscription activity for the period 12 Oct 1996 thru 07 January 1996. Date ~Days #Subs Gain Loss Gain / day Loss / day ----- ----- ----- ---- ---- ---------- ---------- 10/12 n/a 1361 n/a n/a n/a n/a 11/04 23 1353 211 219 9.2 9.5 11/30 26 1299 173 227 6.7 8.7 12/18 18 1262 120 157 6.7 8.7 01/07 20 1291 151 122 7.6 6.1 ----- ----- ---- ---- ---------- ---------- Totals: 87 655 725 7.5 8.3 Interpretation: Unless the reversal of gain/loss in the 5th data row is permanent, c-punks are losing 0.8 bodies per day, or 294 subscribers per year. Actually, the constant high turnover suggests something else: Many people join the list and get back off again due to the high volume and their own personal time constraints. Unless Sandy can cut *way* back on the number of posts to the list, i.e. excise a *lot* more postings than just the blatant Spam and "Timmy is a....." posts, it won't make any difference to those people who come and go. In effect, Sandy is going to have to cut the number of daily posts (to the moderated list) from, say, 100 per day down to, say, 20 or 25 per day. This would certainly be a goal of his, since most of the subscriber comments I've heard indicate that even 50 posts per day of "relevant political/social commentary" is way too high for them. As to the net loss in subscribers, the moderation of the list could have a substantial effect on the number of subscribers short-term, but whatever trend we have here will continue regardless, since the real value and character of the list is not determined by the posts which are removed (unless it were that some of the character and value is going to be removed), but by long-term factors which are to be expected when the principals get older, less involved, and less contentious (like Sandy, wanting to avoid conflict). From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 7 21:29:24 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:29:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D3304F.4E22@gte.net> Black Unicorn wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > You must be in bed with Sandfort. > Disappointed? Not really. I saw the pictures of his last party. He's kinda creepy looking. OK for Hollywood, probably. I'm beginning to wonder if Sandfort is taking over Gilmore's identity. Not that I believe any of the rumours, it's just that there are peculiar things happening at the Toad lately.... From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 21:31:40 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:31:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Information Warfare In-Reply-To: <199701071855.KAA05718@miron.vip.best.com> Message-ID: <32D321CB.463B@sk.sympatico.ca> anonymous at miron.vip.best.com wrote: > NOVEMBER 11, 1996 > INFORMATION WARFARE > U.S. sitting duck, DOD panel predicts > BY BOB BREWIN AND HEATHER HARRELD (antenna at fcw.com and heather_harreld at fcw.com) > > The dependence of the United States on computers and communications systems to run > its critical power, finance and transportation systems > places the country at risk in the event of an information warfare (IW) attack, > according to a report prepared by a top-level Defense Department > advisory panel. Sounds like we're going to need some strong legislation and restrictive regulations to deal with this problem... > These recommendations included a controversial call for the Pentagon to > have the legal power to protect nongovernmental portions of the > infrastructure in the name of "the common defense." Hey, am I goddamn psychic, or what? > To defend DOD and critical nongovernmental systems against IW, the report > recommends new legal authority that will allow "DOD, law enforcement and > intelligence agencies to conduct efficient, coordinated monitoring of > attacks on the critical civilian information infrastructure...." Moderation of the CypherPunks forum is a start. Let's just hope that it doesn't stop there. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 21:31:49 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:31:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mein Kampf/Cypherpunks In-Reply-To: <0k46ZD2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <32D32318.2D08@sk.sympatico.ca> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Yes - have you read _Mein Kampf? I once posted an article showing a > great similarity between what Hitler advocated in 1926 and what the > "cypher punks" advocate now - just some quotes in parallel. Doc, If you still have a copy of that, I would appreciate it if you could forward a copy to me. (I just checked my paranoia level, and I'm a quart low.) Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 21:31:59 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:31:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: At the risk of getting flamed :) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D32AFD.4ECA@sk.sympatico.ca> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > I find it indicative that what I call outing a well-known and widely > abused security hole, you call abuse. The CyberDweebs at plaidworks.com also seemed to take great offense at my pointing out that what they called 'loopholes' in their system was actually a conscious, calculated decision to leave their system open to abuse so that every computer-illiterate Laker fan named Bubba could use his two-fingered typing skills to subscribe to 1,000 sports lists. > I also happen to have done a lot to bring > computer networks and privacy technology to places and people who still > wouldn't have had it otherwise - perhaps more than any "cypher punk". Much of what you do goes unnoticed, due to the fact that many who make the same claims put you in their killfile. It seems that they are only in favor of 'politically correct' technology, without any social issues input or commentary. > I think Dale Thorn hit the nail right on the head when he described "cypher > punks" as security people. They want privacy > technology only for their paying customers, and only if the customers > use it "responsibly", i.e. don't say something the 'punks find objectionable. I've attended punk-rock concerts where some of the 'punks' complained loudly and vociferously about the slam-dancers. "Hey, that guy 'bumped' me." "Somebody could get hurt." "Who do they think they are?" ('Punks", perhaps?) > People who voluntarily submit to censorship by Sandy deserve pity. Or deserve 'censorship'. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 21:32:33 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:32:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: <199701070913.BAA17074@count04.mry.scruznet.com> Message-ID: <32D33C4F.757D@sk.sympatico.ca> cypherpunks at count04.mry.scruznet.com wrote: > BTW this account is being deleted tonite and I will gladly resubscribe > to a moderated list under a different name and host.domain than cypherpunk Dale, This is the second post you've received today that says, "Touched you last...bye!" You certainly seem to bring out the 'child' in people. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 21:32:43 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:32:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D33E1E.1CC4@sk.sympatico.ca> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > But now you advocate censorship. If you don't want to listen to > Dale, it's your private choice (and your loss). But you want to impose > your choice on others. You don't want me to be able to listen to Dale or > Dale to be able to listen to me, even when it's out of your hearing. > You want Ray Arachelanian to be able to post lies about people and his > victims to be unable to refute his libel in the same forum. If I had a dime for everyone who wants to make my life 'better' by 'protecting' me from 'bad people' (others, not 'them'), then I'd be able to contribute to CypherPunks under the 'dollar a post' system evisioned by the guy (I have escaped his name) willing to put a few gallons of gas less in his Cadillac every week so that his viewpoint won't have any competition from the masses. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 21:32:46 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:32:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Modified Token Posting Scheme In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D343DB.39E0@sk.sympatico.ca> Ray Arachelian wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > I.e., libel from Timmy May, Ray Arachelian, and the rest of the gang > > is approved automatically, and when a victim tries to defend himself > > and to point out that Timmy May is a liar, the response is delayed > > and probably rejected by the moderator. > > You are far from being the victim of anything. If anything you're a big > huge thug who spams the list, posts racist flames, posts homophobic > flames, uses social engineering to find out info on his "enemies" and > then posts that info online with requests that others send flames to that > person's employers. Yes, Ray, but he has his 'bad' side, too. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 21:33:05 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:33:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA and Cylink settle In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D34873.56D2@sk.sympatico.ca> Bruce Schneier wrote: > This agreement turns long-time antagonists into companies > that are already exploring ways of working together constructively, > to the benefit of the industry as a whole." They're going to see if, together, they can screw everyone else. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 21:33:22 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:33:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: To pay credit when it's due In-Reply-To: <199701070650.AAA03188@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32D34D6D.CDB@sk.sympatico.ca> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > I forgot to mention that during the design phase of my robomod I have > received a number of thoughtful and helpful advices from Dr. Dimitri > Vulis KOTM, mostly regarding authentication protocols, as well as some > other programming matters. > > For example, a suggestion to add an option requiring all preapproved > posters to sign their articles was originally made by him. As was the suggestion to automatically authenticate any posting containing the word 'cocksucker'. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 21:34:24 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:34:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation=YES In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D34300.38D6@sk.sympatico.ca> Ray Arachelian wrote: > Filters aren't intelligent enough. How do you propose to filter out the > anonymous dialy warnings about Tim May? I keep hearing about how moderation is essential to get rid of the noise so that 'code writers' can have serious discussions. Am I to understand that I am expected to have some kind of esoteric faith in 'code writers' cryptographic output, when they can't even write a filter that meets their own requirements? > Even our friend Vulis has sane posts when he takes his medication (though > I suspect he does so rarely.) Filtering out everything he posts doesn't > make sense, as reading the sane stuff will have some value. I don't want > to miss what he says when it is worth my time to read it. Exactly. And I don't know how 'any' moderator is going to satisfy your personal desires, and mine, and those of several thousand others. I don't know 'Sandy' from spit, and it doesn't really matter to me whether he is God or the SpamMan. He may be the most well-intentioned person in the universe, but if he can psychically divine what 'everybody' wants, I'll kiss your butt. > The proposed scheme should not affect anyone in any way. Those who want > the filtered list will get it, those who want the spams and flames and > ads and turds will get them, those who want it all will also get them. Split lists won't lead to 'harmony', it will lead to 'fractation'. Putting up a sign that says, "Flamers must sit in the back of the bus." seems like a good idea. The fact is, however, that it leads to a society with a structured class system, and history has already told us where it goes from there. Blacks have always had the option of 'going back to Africa, where they came from'. (It's a 'free' country, isn't it?) Toto From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 7 21:41:59 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 21:41:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts on moderation In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970107152545.00e858bc@gabber.c2.net> Message-ID: <32D3334B.7FD9@gte.net> Douglas Barnes wrote: > Goodness knows most people who are fully engaged in a mailing list > get involved in an unproductive discussion or argument from time to > time. My main assertion about Sandy is that although he has his likes > and dislikes (and is not shy about sharing them) I can't see him > bouncing messages just because someone was disagreeing with him. There > might be someone who is less opinionated, but I think that you need > to find someone who cares enough about a subject to be interested in > moderating it (one antonym of "opinionated" is "dispassionate" -- > think about it.) > The only way to tell if Sandy will be fair _as a moderator_ is to > give him a chance. [snip] Gee, Doug. You think he's fair and I don't. Is that enough consensus to say "let's give it a shot"? I don't think so. Moot point anyway, since there was no prior discussion on the list. From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 7 22:03:11 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 22:03:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Copyright loophole? Message-ID: <199701080602.WAA21277@netcom18.netcom.com> While doing research at a law library, I came across what appears to be a legal loop-hole in the copyright law. It seems a famous author's publisher had a substantial number of unbound and unsold copies of his works sitting around. Another publisher purchased them from his publisher, without the author's knowledge, and printed an anthology which included an index which was not part of the purchased (copyrighted) items. In Kipling vs. G.P. Putnam & Sons (1903, CA2 NY) 120 F 631, the 2nd circuit found that (from 17 USCS � 501) "Publication of an index to accompany copyrighted volume of author's work although containing words and phrases found in text, does not constitute infringement." From the original opinion: "They were also at liberty to make and publish an index contained in their volumes even though the index, as necessary must, contain words and phrases found in the text." Q1: Could this decision (which has stood since 1903) support the creation, storage and distribution of "standalone" on-line indicies to copyrighted works without infringement? (I could not find a direct reference to "fair-use" in the portion of the opinion referencing the index nor a related ruling, using the 1976 Copyright Act, which overturned the "index' provision.) Q2: How much content can an index contain and still not infringe? Q3: What would be the legal standing of these indicies, or several unrelated "indexes", if they can jointly (but not separately) be used to reconstitute the original copyright work by a private citizen? (Anonymous index posting, especially via a Ross Anderson style Eternity Service, might "practically" circumvent government enforcement.) -- Steve From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 7 22:08:38 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 22:08:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: What about postscript? Message-ID: <199701080608.WAA05560@mailmasher.com> What if somebody wanted to publish the source code of an encryption program in book form, but make the book dowloadable freely from an ftp site using postscript or PDF format. Surely, the government will be hard pressed to argue the difference between paper media and electronic media here, since the files downloaded cannot be used to encrypt or decrypt data, without somebody first typing in the source. Maybe MIT or PGP should convert at least part of the PGP book into postscript and then request Commerce Department clearance to make it publically available. That should make for a nice court battle. If somebody argues that sophisticated programs can extract the text out of postscript files, what about providing JPEG images of pages of the book? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 22:30:03 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 22:30:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: About ICF(International Cryptography Framework) In-Reply-To: <32D2E95B.614E@europa.com> Message-ID: <32D35219.7107@sk.sympatico.ca> Starr wrote: > > Has anyone heard anything or been paying attention to the development of > the ICF(International Cryptography Framework) standard. This seems to > be an attempt of the US Gov and a FEW of our favorite corps to > completely control cryptography standards as well as to have the keys to > all cryptographical content. It's not an 'attempt', its a 'done deal'. The new 'laws' have pretty much already been written to control cryptography world-wide. The only thing left is for the Big Boys to fight over control (and the spoils). I have a relative involved in this farce. For as long as I have known him, he has always tended to get a 'pained' expression on his face every time words like 'freedom' or 'rights' get slipped into a conversation. > I've also managed to get a hold of Ray Bamford (ray_bamford at hp.com)at HP > who seems to have some PR role in this wool over the eyes attempt. When you use the word 'censorship', does he counter-attack with the word 'moderation'? Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 22:30:15 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 22:30:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Lane Stipes In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970107201515.00697dd0@future.net> Message-ID: <32D35A5D.6056@sk.sympatico.ca> Bob Hawbaker wrote: > ____________________________________ > Remember, the people who paint lane stripes on the road > of life probably have different objectives than you do. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 7 22:30:24 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 22:30:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <199701072308.RAA02919@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: <32D35B01.68B3@sk.sympatico.ca> snow wrote: > > Hmmm.... I must have taken a wrong turn somewhere. I thought this was > america, land of the free. Can anyone give me directions on how to get there > from here... Take a 'left' at the White House, and a 'right' at the House of Congress. From frantz at netcom.com Tue Jan 7 22:56:36 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 22:56:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Relative Strength of 40-bit Crypto Implementations In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970107003544.006c2808@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: At 01:29 AM 1/7/97 -0500, Vin McLellan wrote: > A client asked me today about where he could find evidence of the >relative strength of different encryption algorithms, when all are >restricted to 40-bit keys. He assumed dot-Gov was going to restrict his >export product to the 40-bit limit, but he wanted to provide the strongest >security he could within that limitation. A cypher with a long key setup schedule, such as Blowfish, would be more resistant to brute force attacks. (Blowfish requires 500+ encryptions to set up the key schedule. This should be similar to adding 9 bits to the key size.) While I think Blowfish is good in this respect, one must be careful to avoid systems, such as DES, which are subject to Peter Trei's "gray code" techniques. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Tue Jan 7 22:58:19 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 22:58:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970107164034.006b6044@mail.io.com> Message-ID: At 4:40 PM -0800 1/7/97, Greg Broiles asks: >Can you name a software package which runs under Windows or the Mac OS >which automatically processes reviewers' opinions against a mailbox of >incoming mail? Better yet, can you name a Eudora plug-in which does so? An opportunity for somebody who doesn't already do enough programming. As for the whole moderation idea, consider officially defining the list to be "occasionally moderated". If the abuse is bad, start moderating it. If there get to be few problems, stop moderating it. (A separate issue is whether to tell anyone which way the list is currently running.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From jimbell at pacifier.com Tue Jan 7 23:05:48 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 23:05:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge Message-ID: <199701080705.XAA04904@mail.pacifier.com> At 10:49 PM 1/7/97, pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz wrote: >Orbital mind control lasers made mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) write: > >>Peter Trei (trei at process.com) writes: >>>1. I'm astonished at the low level of reaction RSA's announcement that they >>>will be sponsoring a DES Challenge, with a $10,000 cash prize. >>I'm certainly jumping up and down and cheering. I said a while back that the >>life expectancy of DES would be about two weeks if anyone forked over serious >>cash. > >I'm still a bit nervous about what the reaction will be though - won't the >US government (and anyone else pushing DES) be able to say "It took 10,000 >Pentiums several weeks, noone would bother doing that, so it's safe" (with a >possible side order of "Safer-SK64 is 256 times as secure, anyone we really >like can use that provided they hand over the keys in advance"). This was exactly my concern months ago. PC's are remarkably _inefficient_ systems for attempting to crack codes. I recall estimating, quite approximately, that it might take somewhere about $500,000 of electricity cost alone to check all 2**56 possible decrypts, most of which is going to power unnecessary components. (monitors, hard drives, sound cards, modem cards, etc, etc, etc.) By doing the decrypts on PCs (term used generically; it applies just as well to Mac's, PowerPC's, DEC Alpha's, etc) we make it look like DES is better than it really is. But I'm under no illusion. As the saying went, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, you treat every problem as if it were a nail.) People have PC's, and will use them. Let me suggest, however, that somebody familiar with the details of DES and FPGA's (or other kinds of high-density programmable logic) figure out a ballpark estimate of how much it would cost to implement a minimalist DES-cracker in hardware. Don't do it, just estimate it. Then, when somebody has finally cracked that DES message and someone the news media is trying to suggest that this was an expensive effort, a more economical figure will be quotable. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From AwakenToMe at aol.com Tue Jan 7 23:16:46 1997 From: AwakenToMe at aol.com (AwakenToMe at aol.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 23:16:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commercial Encryption Packages Message-ID: <970108012908_1416371569@emout17.mail.aol.com> How much word has there been on any commercial encryption packages (such as point n crypt..etc) of any types of backdoors installed in them? Any comments or knowledge about this would be good edition to the list :) Adam From AaronH4321 at aol.com Tue Jan 7 23:18:51 1997 From: AaronH4321 at aol.com (AaronH4321 at aol.com) Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 23:18:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? Message-ID: <970108001728_1358519624@emout02.mail.aol.com> I am just starting at this. I know that part of RSA/PGP's strength comes from the size key you choose. What prevents someone from writting a 2048 bit key? Is it because computers can't handle it? Is 1024 top of the prime number size right now? Am I way off track? From juriaan_massenza at ctp.com Wed Jan 8 01:07:00 1997 From: juriaan_massenza at ctp.com (Juriaan Massenza) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 01:07:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off Message-ID: Hi Dale, I am usually lurking cypherpunks, I decided to reply to your message just to give you an idea of why _I_ subscribed to cypherpunks. (English is not my first language, not even the second, please forgive me my grammar monstruosities) I am very intested in crypto, _application_ of crypto, remailers and security, I usually trash flames, political/social implication of crypto and of course commercial emails. Looks like the last 3 categories are the main topic. I don't have problem in bandwith but I think that if I was forced to use a phone connection instead of a digital one like I have now I will unsubscribe to the list since it will not be worth for me to spend hours in downloading a lot of emails knowing that I will trash the 90% of them. I don't want to criticize people who talk all the time about the above mentioned 3 categories because it is in my understanding that someone is interested in those and I will remain subscribed to the list just to pick up the real juice. Best wishes to all, Juriaan >-----Original Message----- >From: Dale Thorn [SMTP:dthorn at gte.net] >Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 1997 4:06 AM >To: cypherpunks at toad.com >Cc: freedom-knights at jetcafe.org >Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off > >The following table shows cypherpunks subscription activity >for the period 12 Oct 1996 thru 07 January 1996. > >Date ~Days #Subs Gain Loss Gain / day Loss / day >----- ----- ----- ---- ---- ---------- ---------- >10/12 n/a 1361 n/a n/a n/a n/a >11/04 23 1353 211 219 9.2 9.5 >11/30 26 1299 173 227 6.7 8.7 >12/18 18 1262 120 157 6.7 8.7 >01/07 20 1291 151 122 7.6 6.1 > ----- ----- ---- ---- ---------- ---------- >Totals: 87 655 725 7.5 8.3 > >Interpretation: > >Unless the reversal of gain/loss in the 5th data row is permanent, >c-punks are losing 0.8 bodies per day, or 294 subscribers per year. > >Actually, the constant high turnover suggests something else: >Many people join the list and get back off again due to the high >volume and their own personal time constraints. Unless Sandy can >cut *way* back on the number of posts to the list, i.e. excise a *lot* >more postings than just the blatant Spam and "Timmy is a....." posts, >it won't make any difference to those people who come and go. > >In effect, Sandy is going to have to cut the number of daily posts >(to the moderated list) from, say, 100 per day down to, say, 20 or >25 per day. This would certainly be a goal of his, since most of the >subscriber comments I've heard indicate that even 50 posts per day of >"relevant political/social commentary" is way too high for them. > >As to the net loss in subscribers, the moderation of the list could >have a substantial effect on the number of subscribers short-term, >but whatever trend we have here will continue regardless, since the >real value and character of the list is not determined by the posts >which are removed (unless it were that some of the character and value >is going to be removed), but by long-term factors which are to be >expected when the principals get older, less involved, and less >contentious (like Sandy, wanting to avoid conflict). > > From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Wed Jan 8 01:08:58 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 01:08:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Forgery detection Message-ID: <199701080909.CAA27408@-f> Tim Maya grew a beard to look like his mother. /\_/\ ( x x ) -oo0-(o o)-0oo- Tim Maya From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 8 01:55:28 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 01:55:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970108095456.003811e4@popd.ix.netcom.com> The commercials between the movie and news show on the airline include an IBM spot on their new Key Recovery software. Sigh. The explanations they gave were mixed; one person was talking about making sure that if you lose the key that people with a legitimate need to access the material can do it. The other example they gave, with pictures, was along the lines of "Suppose you're going on vacation and you want to leave a key with a neighbor to feed the dog. A safe way to do it would be to put your house key in a lockbox that needs several keys to open it, and give those keys to people you trust." Yeah, right - cops can get in, but Dog's gonna get pretty hungry.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From kuehn at ESCHER.UNI-MUENSTER.DE Wed Jan 8 02:36:41 1997 From: kuehn at ESCHER.UNI-MUENSTER.DE (Ulrich Kuehn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 02:36:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge In-Reply-To: <19970107230955.978.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199701081028.LAA23370@nirvana.uni-muenster.de> Liz Taylor writes: > There is nothing unglamorous about a known plaintext attack, if the > plaintext is choosen carefully. I don't know anything about bank ATMs > and the protocols they use, but I presume the PIN is stored on the card > single DES encrypted. If this is so, anyone can take an ATM card, attack it > to recover the key and then use that key to recover the PIN for any stolen > ATM card of that bank (or that branch). Hopefully, the ciphertext/plaintext > pair that RSA announces will be a real target like this, with the actual key > disabled. Once the key is recovered, the press can then claim that ATM > cards are not safe any longer. > As far as I know, here in Germany (maybe also somewhere else) there is not the pin stored on the card. Instead, it is regenerated by the ATM every time using a secret key of the bank. In order to be able to use the ATM card even with ATMs of different banks, there are offsets stored on the card that relate to some commonly used pool keys. Ciao, Ulrich -- Ulrich Kuehn ------ kuehn at math.uni-muenster.de http://wwwmath.uni-muenster.de/~kuehn/ From harka at nycmetro.com Wed Jan 8 04:06:35 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 04:06:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: sig. files with PGP Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, I have a question reg. PGP: If certain parts of an encrypted message are known, does that compromise the security of the rest of the message? Example: If I always use a signature file, in plaintext messages as well as in encrypted messages, could an attacker knowing that signature file to be part of my encrypted message crack the rest too? Please copy replies to my private e-mail, for I am currently not subscribed to the CP list... Thanks in advance for your help, Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /* Note: My old key (KeyID: B2728495) has been revoked. */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMtN8SjltEBIEF0MBAQEEoQf/TVZO2Z9gr8Jik0SnbfE7VbrORETlD7q3 nqIsU5FY6iCJKmXy9Us/VW6LOyuRr0qAMbM8IAdMaX96P1FFFGoZ+6QAH1txV+xs i6+w6TKtHmLZDyMaa40hH5F3/sUUECT5MyW59McO2+seX3gYDwi+jLp6XVZq8BFs uLymgoDmh+NsDXBcOUs9ULCQy8rsu/nYmbwQxlWqhUnPw1o1nnuUGuBZaEfU6xJj gthebIpjCPh9YAthdI/XxE4bmYmS1AVhL4Fz6cwR9yMQ4JC3eEoZnhIUvFd16w6i eOo1Og9sD241ksJTjH7lT0qaRAQFh0ccEQoFoCP/7dAesVjwXKjRhg== =3u9n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 8 05:40:32 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 05:40:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commercial Encryption Packages In-Reply-To: <970108012908_1416371569@emout17.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: AwakenToMe at aol.com writes: > How much word has there been on any commercial encryption packages (such as > point n crypt..etc) of any types of backdoors installed in them? There's been many rumors of a backdoor in DES's S-boxes. > Any comments or knowledge about this would be good edition to the list :) Huh? ^ --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 8 05:40:54 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 05:40:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency In-Reply-To: <32D2F907.2748@gte.net> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > The Wall Street Cabal (as they say) was genuinely frightened that since > Milken was so successful with high-yield bonds, they deliberately created > the term Junk Bonds and flooded the markets with appropriate propaganda, > and thereby killed off their competition. How they turned it into a > criminal offense is truly an art. Before Milken, it was impossible for a small company or municipality without a stellar credit history to sell bonds to the public. They had to borrow from the Wall St Cabal at usurious rates. Milken made it possible for them to bypass the Cabal. He was convicted of some truly bizarre charges (let Uni explain what exactly he was guilty of) and given a truly bizarre sentense by judge Kimba Wood (who, by the way, was Clinton's first choice for AG before Rhyno). Still, his brainchild, junk bonds, are alive and well. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From merriman at amaonline.com Wed Jan 8 06:28:30 1997 From: merriman at amaonline.com (David K. Merriman) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 06:28:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyserver Draft Message-ID: <199701081428.GAA11007@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cypherpunks at toad.com Date: Wed Jan 08 08:39:12 1997 Having gotten the subject in the spotlight (!), I'd like to clarify a couple of points about my draft proposal: 1: it is aimed at supporting _automatic_ realtime - as in supporting crypto-aware email packages, so that if an unknown key turns up, the encryption program can go out and collect key data _without_ user intervention. 2: port "assignment" was arbitrary; if the protocol would work better with a single port for send/receive, then "make it so, Number One" :-) 3: I expected that data transfer would work best using ascii text (like ascii-fied keys); if something else would work better, so be it. 4: if checksums or other error-detection/correction isn't necessary, then by all means, leave it/them out. I offered the draft as a _proposal_, fully expecting that it would require modification, editing, revision, et al. I'm not sufficiently pompous/egotistical to believe that I am He Who Knows All. Too, I have a reasonable idea of my own limitations; I'm simply trying to establish *some* kind of common reference point toward a solution of something I see as a possible problem. Happily, I haven't received any _personal_ flames, the comments I've received have been professional/technical. If I get a brownie point or atta-boy out of this, cool. If not, that's fine, too, _as long as the problem is addressed_. I didn't dare propose anything so grand as a distributed system - it seemed that a variation of DNS would handle that. We return you now to FlameFest '97 :-) Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtMI1sVrTvyYOzAZAQH5fgP+M5kJntTNM+LWd67jt+WGoiGLq8SdRwCa 0MljMYuO0oMzgiTrMTchNaj+cxtVkyUrzz+cgj3XQdJF6cdRlDnSW9xGV9rJJC/B lPf6RD9Vp5Pih9KkqWc+DqKMynGzEm1WXvNZKHDtn3/1etkv0RsEeQejqdNG+5dI rfZhi4xp9mk= =1Pcn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From kent at songbird.com Wed Jan 8 07:05:35 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 07:05:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off In-Reply-To: <32D30EFB.5F8@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701081608.IAA16175@songbird.com> Dale Thorn allegedly said: > > The following table shows cypherpunks subscription activity > for the period 12 Oct 1996 thru 07 January 1996. [...] > Interpretation: > > Unless the reversal of gain/loss in the 5th data row is permanent, > c-punks are losing 0.8 bodies per day, or 294 subscribers per year. > > Actually, the constant high turnover suggests something else: > Many people join the list and get back off again due to the high > volume and their own personal time constraints. As a relatively new subscriber I find the single factor most likely to get me to leave is the garbage on the list. And a significant portion of the traffic is discussion about that garbage. > Unless Sandy can > cut *way* back on the number of posts to the list, i.e. excise a *lot* > more postings than just the blatant Spam and "Timmy is a....." posts, > it won't make any difference to those people who come and go. No. The blatant spam and "Timmy isa" posts are more annoying than the large volume, at least in my case. [...] > As to the net loss in subscribers, the moderation of the list could > have a substantial effect on the number of subscribers short-term, > but whatever trend we have here will continue regardless, since the > real value and character of the list is not determined by the posts > which are removed (unless it were that some of the character and value > is going to be removed), but by long-term factors which are to be > expected when the principals get older, less involved, and less > contentious (like Sandy, wanting to avoid conflict). Moderation may actually cause the list to grow at a faster pace. While I don't agree with your analysis in the short run, in the long run volume on the list will be *the* problem -- just due to the growth of the net. And in the long run, undoubtedly further structure will evolve -- there is no meaningful way to deal with say 10000 messages per day without some way of structuring the flow. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From nobody at huge.cajones.com Wed Jan 8 07:09:10 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 07:09:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation Message-ID: <199701081509.HAA09972@mailmasher.com> Ray Arachelian writes: > Oh, of course, since you spammed the list with so much vitriol and flames, ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You mispeled "since you challenged John Gilmore to remove you from the list". From lws at transarc.com Wed Jan 8 07:10:37 1997 From: lws at transarc.com (Lyle Seaman) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 07:10:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970108150757.0062352c@remote.transarc.com> At 11:10 PM 1/7/97 -0000, Liz Taylor wrote: > I don't know anything about bank ATMs >and the protocols they use, but I presume the PIN is stored on the card >single DES encrypted. If this is so, anyone can take an ATM card, attack it >to recover the key and then use that key to recover the PIN for any stolen >ATM card of that bank (or that branch). Hopefully, the ciphertext/plaintext >pair that RSA announces will be a real target like this, with the actual key >disabled. Once the key is recovered, the press can then claim that ATM >cards are not safe any longer. Your self-assessment is admirably accurate, but the presumption is not. From pierre at rahul.net Wed Jan 8 07:19:03 1997 From: pierre at rahul.net (Pierre Uszynski) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 07:19:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970107164034.006b6044@mail.io.com> Message-ID: <199701081518.AA22101@waltz.rahul.net> > >Rich Graves very correctly mentions: > >> 1) Moderator liability and anonymous posting. > At 09:37 AM 1/7/97 -0800, Pierre Uszynski agreed: > >I agree that this is actually a critical problem with a filtering > >moderation scheme. Such a scheme appears to provide the capability to > >filter out possible "copyright violations" posts. From what I remember > >of the Netcom/CoS case (without going back to the sources), that may > >mean more liability for the reviewers (and the operator of the > >machine). That's a major point against simple filtering moderation. gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) continues: > [...] I'm not sure it's a big problem. I see three broad categories of > information which the moderation liability scheme may suppress:[...] I think I went a bit in the wrong direction mentioning Netcom/CoS: 1) The problem is not so much what posts are "legal" or "illegal", as it is what posts *could* bring in lawsuits and what effect this has on the moderators. Not everyone evaluates that "Sword of Damocles" threat identically: Some argue it is statistically irrelevant, some argue that their pockets are not tempting targets anyway, some are in different countries (and have not noticed it does not matter anymore), etc... The point is that 2) The above "do I dare approve this post" equation is clearly not the one that determines whether a post is good cypherpunks material or not. I do not want this liability issue to matter in any way in the moderators ratings (no matter how Sandy and John would themselves resolve it) if we can help it. And we can. and 3) This equation would seriously affect how *I* would offer help in a filtering moderation scheme: I most likely would not (whether or not anyone would be interested in me participating, and my decision for reasons that are not relevant, etc...) Again, that's the wrong reason brought into the discussion: the right reasons would be "do I have the time now?" (hah! ;-), "do I currently read in sync with incoming traffic?", and "do I want to participate?". > Can you name a software package which runs under Windows or the Mac OS > which automatically processes reviewers' opinions against a mailbox of > incoming mail?[...] I spend a ridiculous portion of my time fixing the damage caused by software that was used just because "it was there". Just because there is software to do^H^H, sorry, to botch something under Windows is not reason enough to use it, and even less of a reason to limit ourselves to these options. Yes, some people couldn't use the *option* initially, and others could (with ready software or by writing their own). Too bad. As someone else mentioned, that's an opportunity (and there must be a cross-platform java mail reader somewhere that can be modified or written to satisfy lots of platforms at once), and cypherpunks wouldn't be the only forum moving toward "after-the-fact cooperative filtering"... > [Greg Broiles > US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: > Export jobs, not crypto.] Great summary, Pierre. pierre at rahul.net From froomkin at law.miami.edu Wed Jan 8 07:48:33 1997 From: froomkin at law.miami.edu (Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 07:48:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970107164034.006b6044@mail.io.com> Message-ID: I'm not sure I see why a moderator would have any liability for passing on a trade secret or even a classified military secret so long as the moderator did not have a contractual relationship (or a clearance, as the case may be) with the owner. That's free speech. The moderator might have to cooperate with a subpoena from the original owner seeking to find who stole/released the secret, but that's a different problem. Is there some trade secret theory of an implicit trusteeship that i don't know about? On the more general subject of moderator liability, I vaguely recall that the CDA had some badly-drafted language that was designed to reduce moderator liability, but that it was so badly worded as to be ambiguous. I'm just back from a months' trip and sorting through stuff so i don't have time to look it up. Anyone got it handy? PS I support moderation, at least as an experiment. As to the choice of the moderator, innocent until proven guilty, I say. I personally don't put much store in requiring a moderator to issue a code of practice. Common law and equity will do to evolve a system as it goes along. I prefer a system where the rejected posts are in a segregated list so that they are easy to find. Not everyone has great tools for merging two lists to find the differences. Of course, the moderator liability issue is at its greatest is the moderator creates a "trash" list, also know as a "sue me" list. I do see how the legal position would be better if you have an unmoderated list and a separate "best-of" list that is moderated. Finally, how about a THIRD list to discuss moderation issues so that it doesn't clutter up the "best-of" list? On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, Greg Broiles wrote: > 2. Secrets which are being revealed (e.g., the alleged RC4 source, the > Mykotronix trash stuff) [...] > > The loss of (2) is regrettable; but Usenet (and other unmoderated forums) > are still available for hit-and-run disclosure of secrets. Also, it's > unclear to what extent (2) will be lost. Given the recent California and > Federal statutory changes strengthening trade secret protection, I think > it's useful to be careful - but it's arguable that neither the alleged RC4 > code nor the Mykotronix trash stuff would have been a trade secret > violation. Also, let's weigh the value of what'd be lost (how many of these > messages do we really get?) against the negative value of the crap we're > currently subjected to, and the (speculative) value of posts we don't get > because their authors have left the list because of disgust and annoyance. > A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin at law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here. From Tunny at inference.com Wed Jan 8 08:00:51 1997 From: Tunny at inference.com (James A. Tunnicliffe) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 08:00:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- AaronH4321 at aol.com writes: > I am just starting at this. I know that part of RSA/PGP's strength > comes from the size key you choose. What prevents someone from > writting a 2048 bit key? Is it because computers can't handle it? Is > 1024 top of the prime number size right now? Am I way off track? In just about every way possible... :-) The RSA algorithm can use keys of arbitrary length. All current versions of PGP allow key sizes up to 2048* bits. (When asked for the size of the key to generate, it allows you to select 512, 768, 1024, OR TO *TYPE IN THE NUMBER OF BITS DESIRED*.) There are older, partially incompatible versions that allow even larger keys, though there is little reason to go higher. Beyond something like 3100 bits, it is surmised that the 128-bit IDEA session key is easier to attack. As for prime numbers, no, 1024 bits isn't even close to the largest found (there are of course an infinite number of primes). The latest discovery was of a Mersenne prime, the 35th such found. It was 1,398,269 bits long (all 1's, of course). Tunny * OK, there is a minor bug in 2.6.2 that in some cases limits keys to "only" 2047 bits -- the difference is utterly insignificant in terms of security. This message is signed by such a 2047-bit key. ====================================================================== James A. Tunnicliffe | WWWeb: http://www.inference.com/~tunny Inference Corporation | PGP Fingerprint: CA 23 E2 F3 AC 2D 0C 77 tunny at Inference.com | 36 07 D9 33 3D 32 53 9C ====================================================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.0 Business Edition Comment: which I won in the PGP raffle at Cypherpunks 12/96... iQEVAgUBMtPCuvAmQsmyRPddAQHQHwf+NcZ54woujQVBRRmmyH3CayYmCial2sLn py0RvaXP9UGhY+vZU2HgtzaCor32JnrC67LsHH/2XLIEqjpsNzor7YwCtllsl55M 1lo4dkXfjg/jW0ijLTEbbEealRm1LziZVjIrTNsibq1GZ0UdwTb8nPens2iuHZBB QJZTBkpi0yD8xnWZqvSBwjsdavJUUOy1xU4PgNE4Nr/xbWPA0OwMGOm1MSHFXxHL xOYJvLR9905mSxh+kNdcf3SpT5JRuBjH6MQmG8GjKRGc8KoXbfUkCiXeSXlygaGA q2/z2lO4E9eTZvlrsQN1sw8uIoKTnz3YPw9nWjXTeLWx9J7WbeGPSA== =RzVt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From serw30 at laf.cioe.com Wed Jan 8 08:14:59 1997 From: serw30 at laf.cioe.com (serw30 at laf.cioe.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 08:14:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation and the Polymorphic Virus Message-ID: <199701081617.LAA13641@laf.cioe.com> > Date: Tue, 07 Jan 1997 18:19:55 -0800 > From: Toto > Reply-to: toto at sk.sympatico.ca > Organization: TOTO Enterprises > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Moderation and the Polymorphic Virus > Perhaps with proper moderation, having access to a cloistered > environment without all of the 'noise', cypherpunks will be able > to come up with a true polymorphic virus that will make the Atom > Bomb look like a child's toy. > The rabble who rant on endlessly about 'social issues' can > surely not be trusted to contribute anything of value on what > are, in fact, merely a question of 'numbers'. > It is up the the elite, the code writers, to lead the cypher- > punks into a New World Order, in which the results of cryptography > are only used for proper, approved purposes. > > Toto > Yes, lets create polymorphic viruses and CPU cycle stealing Java applets. Maybe even a new and improved Internet worm... From kooom at aminet.co.kr Wed Jan 8 08:55:43 1997 From: kooom at aminet.co.kr (KOO HOE-JUN) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 08:55:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: add me Message-ID: <32D3D09A.247@aminet.co.kr> I'm interestin mail list me too e-mail:kooom at aminet.co.kr From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 8 10:19:37 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 10:19:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: FC97: Anguilla, Anyone?, Part 2 Message-ID: Anguilla, Anyone?, Part 2 FC97 Update, Cypherpunk Edition. January 8, 1997 (FCountdown: A-47) (Pass this around. Please! :-).) Financial Cryptography 1997 Conference and Exhibition: February 24-28, 1997 Workshop: February 17-21, 1997 http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ Sponsors: The Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce Offshore Information Services e$ See your name here :-) Just before the end of the year, Vince Cate posted a note to the FC97 organizer's list and noted that a.) we had a bunch of people signed up for both the FC97 conference (and for the workshop), that b.) those people's companies probably wanted to book the registration expenses in 1996, and c.) didn't we think it was time to charge their credit cards and thus d.) actually have a conference? Soooo.... We're actually going to have the world's first conference on financial cryptography. It'll be: a.) in Anguilla, b.) during last week of February, c.) while it's snowing here in Boston. (Hot damn!) Which, to confess all, is why I had the idea to begin with, though the idea has grown a bit since. :-). It's a good thing that we're actually going to have FC97, too, because, if you look at the "Deductible Junkets" section Wired magazine, we're the featured deductible junket for January. It would indeed be a drag to have made it to that pinnacle of net.trendiness and not have a junket to deduct, as it were. Not that said net.trendiness was unwanted. No-sir-ee. Somewhere after imagining what it would be like to *not* to shovel snow out of my driveway, and *very* shortly after remembering there was a cypherpunk on *Anguilla*, namely Vince Cate, who could help me with that problem, the absolute very first picture in my head was exactly that Wired article. FC97 as the featured deductible junket in Wired. I could actually see the headline: "Financial Cryptography, February 1997, Anguilla, BWI. The world's first peer-reviewed conference on financial cryptography." I also figured that only someone as pathogically possessed of the trait of schmooze as I was could conceive and pull off such a feat. So, now, I figure, I can die, right? I mean, I've just made the net.schmoozer's hall of fame. :-). Well maybe not die. Not just yet, anyway. I'm not quite finished, you see. For my next trick, I have to actually get *down* there for the conference. To do that, I pretty much need to sell the conference out. Which, if you haven't guessed, is why I'm currently in your face with another one of my gigantic "Anguilla, Anyone?" rants. :-). I have to practically sell FC97 out because, when you work with other people, the guy with the idea (that's me), especially a guy with an idea for something he has absolutely *no* capability to actually *do* at all, has to take a back seat to the folks who actually *do*, er, do things, and hope that their effort makes enough "thing" left over for him to, um, claim to have done a bit of it himself. (Yeah. That's it... Any questions? None? Good. Class dismissed...) So, the first thing I'd like to do here, now that we're actually going to have a conference, is to thank those "people actually doing things" for FC97, in chronological order of their involvement in this genuine, Wired-certified, deductible junket... Vince Cate, the aformentioned Anguillan cypherpunk, of Offshore Information Services, in Anguilla is the most important person to thank. Vince's work so far has been positively heroic. Vince got us a place to have the conference, the InterIsland Hotel, a very nice 150-seat conference facility with space to spare for 10 exhibition booths (before we need to find an exhibition annex, anyway ;-). He's made arrangements with Cable and Wireless to give us as much bandwidth as we need, practically on demand, proving that, yes, you can have a technical conference -- with T1 access -- in the wilds of the eastern Carribbean. He also made deals with the banks down there to handle money wire and credit card processing, not to mention making arrangements with the vendors of every internet payment method our customers have requested so far. Including, I'll add here, ecash, from Digicash, BV and Mark Twain Bank . This is important, because, with the help of Lucky Green of Digicash, and the folks at Mark Twain Bank, Sameer Parekh of C2NET and FC97 will make the world's largest ecash transaction to date. C2NET will purchase its booth for FC97, sometime later this month, entirely with ecash. You heard it here, first, folks, and, of course, you'll hear more about it later. Believe me. :-). Lots more. I haven't even warmed up the tonsils yet... Right now, as we speak, Vince is the guy on the ground in Anguilla, doing all kinds of things, from renting tables and curtains and power for exhibition space, to specifiying the hardware and network for the workshop and exhibition, to scanning the blueprints of the conference space into GIF files so we could have a floorplan to sell booths with, to getting estimates so we could cost and budget the conference, to, heh, collecting the actual money (in nice round non-taxable numbers) at . In case you haven't figured it out, Vince is at the core of the whole enterprise, and he deserves much thanks for all the work he's done. Not to mention all the work he's gonna do.:-). Remembering we're at A-47, and counting, and all. After I got Vince to step up to the plate for all this work, we talked to Ray Hirschfeld, , of CWI, who then graciously accepted our offer of the FC97 conference chairmanship, in exchange for untold hours of completely donated labor. (I mean, at least, if everything works out, the rest of us could actually get paid.) Ray organized a conference committee of absolute stars in the digital commerce and financial cryptography firmament, including our own cypherpunk law professor, Michael Froomkin. The list of conference committee luminaries, includes, to read my own latest press release, "the inventor of Millicent, the project manager of EU's CAFE digital cash project, the holders of Citicorp's digital cash patent, two famous scholars in cryptography and digital commerce law, the President of International Association for Cryptologic Research, and the Chairman of the Taskforce on the Security of Electronic Money for the G-10 Central Banks." One of these people is so far up the food chain at the Fed that people there practically have to cross themselves when they say his name. So, you can see, Ray is one amazing conference organizer. Vince and I should have known better, but we couldn't possibly imagine how successful Ray would be in gathering talent when we asked him to be the conference chair. Ray and his outstanding committee are now reading all the papers that have come in during the last few months; from all over the world, from a great bunch of authors, on just about every topic in financial cryptography. Submissions are now closed, but the announcement of the selected papers will be made to the authors on January 18th, and shortly after that, he'll announce the conference agenda to the rest of us. You heard it here, first, folks, and, of course, you'll hear more later. Believe me. :-). Right about the time I had the idea to ask Ray if he wanted to chair the conference, I thought about how I could possibly extend my "Island Time" back another week, and thus avoid the snow shovel even longer. :-). I thought about a feeder activity of some kind for the conference, and, for a peer-reviewed conference like FC97, there's no better feeder activity than a workshop of some kind. I thought about the need to evangelize, to big corporate cheese (technical and otherwise), about how the world was going to go when we started doing secure financial transactions on insecure public networks. About the technology of financial cryptography and digital commerce, and not just running the old Mastercard through a web-page form, either. Said cheese were the people most in need of understanding this impending new reality of ubiquitous geodesic markets, I figured, because, frankly, as people who made technology decisions for big companies, it was going to affect their businesses the most. Fortunately, they were also the people who could afford to pay for a week-long intensive workshop on the subject. Especially if it was in Anguilla. :-). A financial cryptography bootcamp, as friend Rodney Thayer called it later. I thought about how cool it would be to get actual cypherpunks-who-code, who were not likely to get to the conference under their own power otherwise, to run this workshop. After the week of the workshop was over, both cheese and cypherpunks-who-code could go to the conference and hang out like they owned the place. I'd pay said cypherpunks-who-code a competitive rate for their time, plus fly them there and back, and feed and house them for three weeks: the week before the workshop getting the bugs worked out, the week of the workshop/bootcamp itself, and then the week of the conference, again, hanging out like they owned the place. Everybody would be happy. So, when I thought about all that, the first person who came to mind to actually run this was, of course, Ian Goldberg . Ian, besides making himself famous last year for breaking Netscape's SSL implementation into little bitty random bits (to their eternal gratitude, I'm sure), is one of the canonical cypherpunks-who-code these days, having done more pounding on the ecash code library than anyone else outside of DigiCash, *and* building an FPGA DES-cracker, all while getting a Ph.D in his spare time. :-). After much arm-twisting, because he was so busy -- and, because, frankly, before Ray got that amazing conference committee, we were all nervous about it -- Ian consented to running the workshop. Sometime next week he'll come out with the particulars of the workshop itself, including what they're going to teach, and, who's going to be there to teach it, contingent on how many workshop participants we get. We're planning on a 5-to-1 cheese-to-cypherpunk ratio, so how many cypherpunks-who-code we can bring to Anguilla depends on how many workshop seats we can sell. Fortunately, we've had people already pay for the workshop sight unseen, and, with a little push, I expect we'll have enough participants to actually have the workshop. When that happens, you'll hear about it. Believe me. :-). [Oh. By the way, notice that I've now weaseled myself onto Anguilla *two* weeks before the conference starts. But wait, there's more. Guess who has to be there one week before that, to get ready for the instructors. *All* February in Anguilla? Moi? Nawwww.... ;-).] Speaking of selling stuff, Julie Rackliffe, , is someone I've known for as long as I've been in Boston. She was practically the first person I met when I started at Fidelity. She now does fund raising and function management for the Computer Museum in Boston, and has done some work in a similar vein for the Digital Commerce Society of Boston (DCSB), which Peter Cassidy and 30 cypherpunks and geeks-with-suits started with me last year. When FC97 started to look bigger than a few guys on a beach with an internet feed, I knew I needed someone who could professionally manage a small but high-profile conference and exhibition, and I asked Julie to help us out. When we thought we couldn't do this without corporate sponsorship to cover our sunk costs, Julie stepped up and took on raising that too, even though it later turned out that we really didn't need sponsorships to make FC97 fly. ("Bootstrap" is now our collective middle name...) Anyway, we're still taking booth orders -- each booth ($5,000) includes 2 complimentary tickets to the FC97 conference -- and Julie's the contact for that . Also, if your corporation wants to sponsor (for $10,000) an official, FC97-sanctioned, :-), lunch or dinner with accompanying recreational/schmooze opportunity, we'd be more than happy to oblige. You get a banner ad on the web site, your company's name on our outbound correspondence (see above), a nice discount on boothspace, and 4 conference tickets. And a tatoo on my forehead. Okay. Maybe not a tatoo on my forehead. Since I had to licence the name "Bob" from Microsoft a couple of years ago, there's not much room up there next to the Windows 95 logo, anyway. Again, email Julie for information on sponsorships, and we'll *talk* about the tatoo. So, much thanks to Julie, who's also going to actually manage the conference,logistically and administratively, during the week of FC97, for all the work *she's* going to do, too. Finally, I want to thank someone who's not officially on the FC97 team. That person is Sameer Parekh of C2NET. Not only is he going to buy a booth at the FC97 Exhibition, he also graciously donated a copy of Stronghold, which we're going to be using as the Official Commerce Server of the FC97 Workshop, Exhibition and Conference. We're going to be teaching financial cryptography with Stronghold in the workshop (and Ian's new ecash server, by the way...), and it will be taking orders on www.offshore.com.ai real soon now. In ecash, among other things, which he'll be using to actually purchase his booth from us. Thank you very much Sameer. In that regard, we also want to thank Lucky Green who got us set up with the ecash shopware to make digital cash transactions possible for FC97. Thank you very much, Lucky. Okay. Now I'm going to talk about why it's in *your* best interest to *immediately* go to , shell out big bucks, and register for either the conference ($1,000. Nice round tax-free numbers, remember?) or the workshop and conference ($6,000 total), or the exhibition (booths start at $5,000), or even sponsor FC97 itself (for a cool $10 grand), so that I, too, can go to Anguilla, and not shovel snow in Boston in February. Like the rest of this rant, feel free to hack out some of the points below and paste them into any appropriate form or application if you need them to justify your trip to someone with budgetary authority. :-). If you need better reasons, let me know, , and I'll think up some more. One of them has to stick. It *has* to, or I have a date with a snow shovel this February. 1. FC97's in Anguilla. It doesn't snow in Anguilla. :-). 2. FC97 is the very first conference ever on financial cryptography. If you go there, you'll make history. Since financial cryptography will change the face of economics and finance as we know it, you'll make economic and financial history. Since economic and finance make the world go 'round, you'll make world history. Pick a history. Any history. You'll have made it. But, you've gotta *be* there to do it. 3. The papers at FC97 will be peer-reviewed, and FC97 is sanctioned by International Association for Cryptologic Research. The papers to be presented at FC97 are being reviewed by some of the best people in the field, and the papers themselves will represent the best thinking in financial cryptography today. 4. The people who wrote the papers will be right there for you to talk to, because they've all committed to come if their papers are accepted. 5. FC97, like the Cannes Film Festival, was designed not only to show the state of the art in the financial cryptography business, but to provide time and space for that business to take place. There is exhibition space so that people can display their technology. The conference runs from 08:30 to 12:30 (with breakfast provided, to get you there that early), so that the afternoons and evenings can be used for business networking, for corporate presentations, or for individual or group recreational opportunities. Participants are encouraged to bring their families. 6. FC97 is in Anguilla. Anguilla is an interesting spot, politically and economically. It has no taxes of any kind except import duties (no, bringing your laptop to Anguilla is not importing it, because you're taking it home with you), and would be a great place to run an offshore transaction server, which, of course, is why people like Vince Cate are there now. In addition, having FC97 in Anguilla proves the futility of the current US cryptography control regime. We will have all kinds of cryptographically strong financial technology at FC97. That includes C2NET's Stronghold product, through which FC97's own registration transactions are being processed, and which we will be using in the workshop to instruct people in financial cryptography systems development and implementation. All of that technology will get to Anguilla, a tiny speck in the Carribbean Sea, just fine -- *without* being exported from the US. 7. If you were interested in negotiating with foriegn cryptographic businesses to *import* their technology into the US (a sad state of affairs, but a fact of the modern market), or, in contracting with foriegn businesses to license your cryptographic technology overseas within the limits of the ITARs or EARs, FC97 would seem to be an ideal time and place to do so. The market for financial cryptography is changing dramatically, and Anguilla will have the highest concentration of financial-crypto-clueful on the planet for the week of FC97. All of them talking to each other, networking, and doing deals. It is an opportunity which any prudent business developing financial cryptography, or significantly affected by it, should not ignore. 8. FC97 is chance for those of us who only know each other on the net to actually meet face to face and start to develop the kind of personal relationships and trust we'll all need to create the future of finance on the internet. Since legal enforcement of contract on a ubiquitous international network will be at best problematic, if not impossible, reputation and character will be the only enforcement mechanism we'll have for quite a while yet. (Actually, if it was good enough for J.Pierpont Morgan and the Rothschilds, it's probably good enough for us.) And, while the whole point to financial cryptography is that we won't need to have face-to-face contact for financial relationships, much less regulation, there's still, currently, more bandwidth in a conversation on an Anguillan beach to develop that trust relationship than there is anywhere on the internet. So, at the core of the business, people are going to have to actually *know* each other, at least until the market gets too competitive. This is no different from any other nacent software market. Steven Levy, in "Hackers", talks about how computer game software firms, ostensibly competitors, used to vaction with each other in the early development of that business. That makes sense. One of the reasons that Peter Cassidy and I started DCSB was so we would have a place to go to talk financial crypto with other people who actually cared about it. Do it for week, and add a beach and beautiful weather, and you've got FC97. 9. The FC97 workshop, February 17-21, is being taught by some of the best implementors of cryptography technology today. Ian Goldberg , the workshop chair, knows more about the nuts and bolts, the implementation and construction of financial cryptography systems, particularly new systems using so-called digital bearer certificates, than probably any other person alive, including the people who invented and sell the technology itself. The people he's picked to teach the workshop with him have the most hands-on experience in developing and implementing cryptography, particularly in a financial context, of anyone in the world today. People who take the workshop will learn which cryptography is strong cryptography, what isn't, and why. They will learn all the current and proposed internet payment systems out there, which ones are worth knowing about, which ones aren't, and how to tell whether a new system is worth learning. They will learn how to set up a secure internet site from scratch. They will learn how to build a transaction server on that site which will use any of the current popular transaction protocols. And, finally, at the very frontier of financial cryptography, workshop attendees will learn the theory and operation of systems for handling and issuing digital bearer certificates. Systems which do not rely on offsetting book-entries, or financial regulators, to settle issues of non-repudiation, and are thus well suited to ubiquitous worldwide commerce. The workshop will consist of 40 hours of intensive instruction and lab time, with a 24-hour open lab and T1 internet access. The workshop admission is limited to 20 attendees. The cost of the workshop is $5,000. 10. It's in Anguilla. There's no snow in Anguilla. :-). Okay. I've ranted. There will be more later, certainly. I expect there to be a press release from C2NET about Stronghold at FC97, and the purchase of their booth in ecash. And, as we sell more booths, press releases from the companies who buy those booths, about their products, and why they've decided to go to FC97. Again, if you're interested in buying a booth at FC97, please contact Julie Rackliffe, . Sometime next week Ian Goldberg , will come out with more formal information about the FC97 Workshop. If you know anyone who could benefit from such an experience, please have them contact Ian for details. Shortly after the 18th, expect to see, from Ray Hirschfeld, the selected papers and the actual agenda for the conference itself. So, if you have any questions about Anguilla itself, send them to Vince Cate . If you have any questions about the content of the conference, you can send them to Ray Hirschfeld , but, bear in mind, he and the program committee are behind the old chinese wall right now, reading papers, so you probably won't get an answer from him until the papers are selected and the agenda announced. If you want a booth or to sponsor the conference, contact Julie Rackliffe . If you want to talk about the workshop before Ian Goldberg , cranks out the formal call for participants please contact him, because the contents of the workshop will depend to a great deal on the initial skill set of the participants. And, of course, if you want to thrash me about the length or content of this rant, feel free. All errors are mine, especially those said in shameless-huckster-mode. :-). Finally, the website for FC97 is . Register now. Please. My toes are *cold* already... Cheers, Bob Hettinga (one of two) General Chair(s, the other is Vince Cate), Financial Cryptography 1997 Conference and Exhibition: February 24-28, 1997 Workshop: February 17-21, 1997 http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ Sponsors: The Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce Offshore Information Services e$ See your name here :-) ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 8 11:02:02 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 11:02:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Algorithm Identifier for CDMF Message-ID: Grab your ankles, ladies and gents. This won't hurt a bit... Cheers, Bob Hettinga --- begin forwarded text From: Bob Baldwin To: "'set-dev'" Subject: Algorithm Identifier for CDMF Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 09:41:08 -0800 Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-set-dev at terisa.com Precedence: bulk The SET protocol needs an algorithm identifier for a 40 bit variant of des called CDMF for use with the AcqBackMsg. This note defines the value for that identifier. --Bob Baldwin -------------------------- ALGORITHM IDENTIFIER FOR IBM's CDMF ALGORITHM INTRODUCTION The Commercial Data Masking Facility (CDMF) is an application of DES that weakens the DES key from 56 to 40 bits using a key shortening algorithm patented by IBM. Licensing information for the CDMF patent is available from the Director of Licensing, IBM Corporation, 500 Columbus Avenue, Thornwood, NY 10594. This note defines the ASN.1 algorithm identifier and algorithm parameters for IBM's CDMF that has been registered by RSA Data Security Inc. RSA Data Security, Inc.'s Open Systems Interconnection (OSI) object identifier is 1.2.840.113549 (2a, 0x86, 0x48, 0x86, 0xf7, 0x0d in hex), as registered by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI). In the following, the prefix "rsadsi" refers to that object identifier. All object identifiers registered by RSA Data Security begin with this prefix. CDMFCBCPad This is a Cipher Block Chaining mode of operation with padding of a 40-bit variant of DES. It is defined in: IBM Journal of Research and Development, "The Commercial Data Masking Facility (CDMF) Data Privacy Algorithm", Volume 38, Number 2, March 1994. Following the ASN.1 style of the "Agreements for Open Systems Interconnection Protocols: Part 12 OS Security", it is defined by: ALGORITHM MACRO ::= BEGIN TYPE NOTATION ::= "PARAMETER" type VALUE NOTATION ::= value(VALUE OBJECT IDENTIFIER) END -- of ALGORITHM IV8 ::= OCTET STRING (SIZE(8)) CBC8Parameter ::= IV8 CDMFCBCPad ALGORITHM PARAMETER CBC8Parameter ::= {iso(1) member-body(2) US(840) rsadsi(113549) encryptionAlgorithm(3) 10} -- In hex, the CDMFCBCPad algorithm ID is: -- { 0x2a, 0x86, 0x48, 0x86, 0xf7, 0x0d, 0x03, 0x0A } The PARAMETER is needed to specify the Initialization Vector, which need not be kept secret. It is 8 octets long. This mode should be used to encrypt multiple blocks, where the full message is available. The random IV prevents codebook analysis of the start of the chain. The IV may be public. This mode will propagate a single bit error in one plaintext block into all succeeding blocks, and will propagate a single bit error in the ciphertext into a garbled plaintext block on decryption as well as a single bit error in the next plaintext block. The following padding mechanism should be used if the data to be encrypted is octet aligned, unless the security policy dictates otherwise: The input to the CDMF CBC encryption process must be padded to a multiple of 8 octet, in the following manner. Let n be the length in octets of the input. Pad the input by appending 8-(n mod 8) octet to the end of the message, each having the value 8-(n mod 8), the number of octets being added. In hexadecimal, the possible paddings are: 01, 0202, 030303, 04040404, 0505050505, 060606060606, 07070707070707, and 0808080808080808. All input is padded with 1 to 8 octets to produce a multiple of 8 octets in length. The padding can be removed unambiguously after decryption. Editor's Note - If adding the padding rules would cause existing implementations to break, this should be registered as a separate algorithm identifier. Note, however, that [FIPS 81] specifies its own padding rules for padding binary data, in the absence of application-defined rules such as those above; those rules require an indication (which could be conveyed as an algorithm PARAMETER) of whether the data has been padded or not. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 8 11:11:58 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 11:11:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: The FAGGOT list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <5Z18ZD1w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Brett Carswell writes: > Could someone please forward me the URL of the FAGGOT (are the caps > manditory?) detecting software for mailing lists. I feel pretty left out > as almost everyone else know who the FAGGOTS are. Is this the same > software that detects Cocksuckers or does Dr Dimitri have something of > his own. Maybe we could all band together and come up with something > that detects Nazi moderators as well. Everyone who spoke up in favor of moderation is a faggot tentacle. I hope this helps. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 8 11:14:35 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 11:14:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970108095456.003811e4@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <9B28ZD3w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Bill Stewart writes: > The commercials between the movie and news show on the airline include an > IBM spot on their new Key Recovery software. Sigh. > > The explanations they gave were mixed; one person was talking about > making sure that if you lose the key that people with a legitimate need > to access the material can do it. The other example they gave, with > pictures, was along the lines of > "Suppose you're going on vacation and you want to leave a key with > a neighbor to feed the dog. A safe way to do it would be to put your house > key in a lockbox that needs several keys to open it, and give those keys > to people you trust." Yeah, right - cops can get in, but Dog's gonna get > pretty hungry.... > I've been playing around with marina's new ibm thinkpad (real cool machine) and it allows one to password-protect the hard disk. The docs claim that if you forget the password, no one will be able to unlock it for you. Sure... Now why isn't that export-controlled? :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From imakumon at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 8 11:46:44 1997 From: imakumon at ix.netcom.com (imakumon at ix.netcom.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 11:46:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: NEW SERVICE Message-ID: <199701081946.LAA08029@dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com> Hello,_Morons, Future Tech Invites You To Preview ITA International and A New Trillion Dollar Industry! Have you ever been to a smorgasboard? Wasn't it GREAT to have so many choices? How would YOU like to have a smorgasboard of choices in your communications? A Virtual Office!! Guess what! Now you can!! ESA is the busy persons Electronic Secretarial Adminstrator! She is amazing! She will place calls. answer calls, send and receive faxes, send voice messages, page you, find you, follow you and much, much more! ESA will do this and more from anywhere in the world! ESA can actually read you your faxes if you choose. How would you like to be reminded of special events, meetings, birthdays and even have calls placed for you when you are not around? It can now be done! Want to know who is on the line before you talk to them? Your Virtual Office can tell you. She will screen all your calls so you will have no wasted time on any of your phones or your cellular phone. If you choose not to talk to someone you send them to your voice mail. Unbelieveable!! No matter what business you are in ESA can make your life easier. An inbound 800 # at an unheard of 9.9 cents per minute is excellent. Also, you can have long distance at 9.9 cents on all your phone lines! ESA just keeps getting better and better! Coming soon you will be able to get your e-mail through ESA and have it read to you or printed out, or both. Your choice! Conference calling and voice notification are on the way. All these exciting features and so much more! And guess what! There is so much more coming in this new TRILLION dollar industry it will continue to be amazing! If you live in or near Atlanta Georgia join us for an informative meeting on Thursday Jan 9 at 7pm and discove how you can capitalize on this exciting opportunity! SEATING IS LIMITED!!! If you would like to know more about subscribing to this premier and exciting service, information on becoming a distributor or information on meetings please call our toll free 888 # below. WELCOME TO THE FUTURE!!! Future Tech 1-888-213-2139 --- #1 Stuart / #2 Eileen / #3 Voice on Demand / #7 Fax on Demand e-mail address - ft2100 at discoveryonline.com Stuart & Eileen DISCLAIMER - We do relize that this e-mail will reach individuals who do not wish to receive this information. If you do not wish to receive any further e-mails from us please let us know. We are sorry for the intrusion. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 8 12:16:32 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:16:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency In-Reply-To: <199701062213.XAA20921@internal-mail.systemics.com> Message-ID: <32D40BF4.3968@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > The Wall Street Cabal (as they say) was genuinely frightened that since > Milken was so successful with high-yield bonds, they deliberately created > the term Junk Bonds and flooded the markets with appropriate propaganda, > and thereby killed off their competition. How they turned it into a > criminal offense is truly an art. Is this anything similar to, say, calling certain posts by list members 'spam', flooding the list with 'external' spam, and then using the resulting uproar to take care of perceived 'internal' problems? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 8 12:17:03 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:17:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970108095456.003811e4@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32D4142E.CB8@sk.sympatico.ca> Bill Stewart wrote: > > The commercials between the movie and news show on the airline include an > IBM spot on their new Key Recovery software. Sigh. > > The explanations they gave were mixed; one person was talking about > making sure that if you lose the key that people with a legitimate need > to access the material can do it. Like the legitimate leader of a country, say, for instance...Hitler? Or a legitimate law enforcement agency, say, for instance...the Gestapo? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 8 12:18:14 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:18:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D40E8F.153E@sk.sympatico.ca> Juriaan Massenza wrote: > I am very intested in crypto, _application_ of crypto, remailers and > security, I usually trash flames, political/social implication of crypto > and of course commercial emails. Juriaan, I applaud your interest in crypto, but I think you should keep in mind that there are people around the world sitting in cement bunkers with their hand on a key that can launch nuclear mayhem on perfect strangers, for reasons that will remain unknown to those who set these dark forces in motion. This is the end-result of commentary on the political/social implications of a technology being ignored. Toto From blancw at microsoft.com Wed Jan 8 12:21:58 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:21:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off Message-ID: In October 1993 the membership was around 500 (or less, I think). Three years later the membership is around 1500 (to account for the "cypherpunk-list at xxxxxx" type addresses, which are lists-within-lists containing numerous "hidden" subscribers). .. Blanc From unicorn at schloss.li Wed Jan 8 12:24:49 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:24:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off In-Reply-To: <32D30EFB.5F8@gte.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > The following table shows cypherpunks subscription activity > for the period 12 Oct 1996 thru 07 January 1996. [...] > Totals: 87 655 725 7.5 8.3 > > Interpretation: > > Unless the reversal of gain/loss in the 5th data row is permanent, > c-punks are losing 0.8 bodies per day, or 294 subscribers per year. [...] > In effect, Sandy is going to have to cut the number of daily posts > (to the moderated list) from, say, 100 per day down to, say, 20 or > 25 per day. This would certainly be a goal of his, since most of the > subscriber comments I've heard indicate that even 50 posts per day of > "relevant political/social commentary" is way too high for them. Big assumption here. That the list needs more than the 50 or so people who are active posters in the first place. More fear from Mr. Thorn that his own time in the spotlight might be drawing to a close. God forbid his captive audience might vanish. -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From markm at voicenet.com Wed Jan 8 12:59:50 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 12:59:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, James A. Tunnicliffe wrote: > All current versions of PGP allow key sizes up to 2048* bits. (When > asked for the size of the key to generate, it allows you to select 512, > 768, 1024, OR TO *TYPE IN THE NUMBER OF BITS DESIRED*.) There are older, > partially incompatible versions that allow even larger keys, though > there is little reason to go higher. Beyond something like 3100 bits, it > is surmised that the 128-bit IDEA session key is easier to attack. RSAREF limits the size of the key being generated to 1024 bits. RSADSI permitted PGP to distribute a slightly altered version that supports keys up to 2048 bits with the U.S. version. 2.6.3 does not have the altered RSAREF code, so the U.S. version cannot use keys larger than 1024 bits (unless, of course, one uses the rsaref library distributed with 2.6.2). Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtQLkCzIPc7jvyFpAQHGywf9ErGW2MWT/W0fMytbsuRXj0oc+BkYdgZE iJwfTBE7Fm6M8P8J/g+iGfIU/UTJyn8A0FpIaAtCT3Thzj2ocVl+uYos85P15gE1 JPwSMQYji+mS0l2gx7vFQr0IfKfn3jRxq9AukbQaSPTbUB2SaN1jHig+O0o2YD16 32/hJMjuEerfLpjrgjHU01g0Km2ft3xdIv1zBEAqJipUUXVdieaSnEOSuDzoxEde BW561hJpNpra6oZmga7qkgHVomRehXxbnBiX/NFh59mPA2N+OC+u5zHNgd2vVwVt w6yHWc/UFZtTx58QDFecboQO+ybcpc/i/vNr0b2VFLxAluqjZTxHVg== =nv7R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From unicorn at schloss.li Wed Jan 8 13:03:01 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:03:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote: > Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 10:52:09 -0500 (EST) > From: "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" > To: Greg Broiles > Cc: Pierre Uszynski , cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan > > I'm not sure I see why a moderator would have any liability for passing on > a trade secret or even a classified military secret so long as the > moderator did not have a contractual relationship (or a clearance, as the > case may be) with the owner. That's free speech. The moderator might > have to cooperate with a subpoena from the original owner seeking to find > who stole/released the secret, but that's a different problem. Is there > some trade secret theory of an implicit trusteeship that i don't know > about? Not to my knowledge. But See, subpoena comment above. I am amazed that no one has suggested a pool of moderators with provisions to blind a given post from attributation to a specific moderator. (Attornies- what might be impact of a Res Ipsa attack on this kind of set up, and incidently, on other anonymous pool arrangements?) > As to the choice of the moderator, innocent until proven guilty, I say. > I personally don't put much store in requiring a moderator to issue a code > of practice. Common law and equity will do to evolve a system as it goes > along. While as far as conduct goes I agree, in defining what will eventually be the list content, and thus what I should or should not use/waste my time typing up, it is an important ex ante condition that a stated policy exist. There are two questions here. 1> Will my material be booted off only because it disturbs the moderator? (I think this is the one answered by your common law reference) 2> Will my material violate some restriction and be booted "for cause?" (This can only be predicted accurately if there is a stated policy on what constitutes a violation- and then only where the policy has teeth or is generally respected). -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 8 13:06:47 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:06:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, > Measuring the effectiveness of this exercise, with the ability to peek > ocassionally into Sandy's sludge pile, keeps the whole thing honest. I also think it allows the moderator to shoot from the hip a bit more loosely. Nothing gets lost, after all, just sorted. I'm going to cut myself a fair amount of slack for occasional mis-sorts. > Go for it, Sandy, and good luck! Thanks, I'm sure I'll need it. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 8 13:11:04 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:11:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyserver Draft In-Reply-To: <199701081428.GAA11007@toad.com> Message-ID: <32D42319.540D@sk.sympatico.ca> David K. Merriman wrote: > Having gotten the subject in the spotlight (!), I'd like to clarify a couple > of points about my draft proposal: > If I get a brownie point or atta-boy out of this, > cool. If not, that's fine, too, _as long as the problem is addressed_. ------------------- | Coupon | | ------ | | 2 Brownie Points | | (X-spendable) | -------------------- > > We return you now to FlameFest '97 :-) Good. I've got to get back to see which way the wind is 'blowing'. (and 'who') Toto From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 8 13:15:41 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:15:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701060306.WAA22463@wauug.erols.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . David, You wrote: > Marc J. Wohler sez: > > > > I have the utmost confidence in Sandy and his efforts to revive the > > quality of our list. > > Metoo.... > > The alternative was to unsub. Thanks, I try my best. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From warlord at MIT.EDU Wed Jan 8 13:17:45 1997 From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:17:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: There is no PGP 2.6.3; at least not that came from MIT... Someone else may have made something claiming to be 2.6.3, but it did not originate from MIT. -derek "Mark M." writes: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, James A. Tunnicliffe wrote: > > > All current versions of PGP allow key sizes up to 2048* bits. (When > > asked for the size of the key to generate, it allows you to select 512, > > 768, 1024, OR TO *TYPE IN THE NUMBER OF BITS DESIRED*.) There are older, > > partially incompatible versions that allow even larger keys, though > > there is little reason to go higher. Beyond something like 3100 bits, it > > is surmised that the 128-bit IDEA session key is easier to attack. > > RSAREF limits the size of the key being generated to 1024 bits. RSADSI > permitted PGP to distribute a slightly altered version that supports keys up > to 2048 bits with the U.S. version. 2.6.3 does not have the altered RSAREF > code, so the U.S. version cannot use keys larger than 1024 bits (unless, of > course, one uses the rsaref library distributed with 2.6.2). > > > Mark > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: 2.6.3 > Charset: noconv > > iQEVAwUBMtQLkCzIPc7jvyFpAQHGywf9ErGW2MWT/W0fMytbsuRXj0oc+BkYdgZE > iJwfTBE7Fm6M8P8J/g+iGfIU/UTJyn8A0FpIaAtCT3Thzj2ocVl+uYos85P15gE1 > JPwSMQYji+mS0l2gx7vFQr0IfKfn3jRxq9AukbQaSPTbUB2SaN1jHig+O0o2YD16 > 32/hJMjuEerfLpjrgjHU01g0Km2ft3xdIv1zBEAqJipUUXVdieaSnEOSuDzoxEde > BW561hJpNpra6oZmga7qkgHVomRehXxbnBiX/NFh59mPA2N+OC+u5zHNgd2vVwVt > w6yHWc/UFZtTx58QDFecboQO+ybcpc/i/vNr0b2VFLxAluqjZTxHVg== > =nv7R > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) Home page: http://www.mit.edu:8001/people/warlord/home_page.html warlord at MIT.EDU PP-ASEL N1NWH PGP key available From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 8 13:32:54 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:32:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Black Unicorn wrote: > How will borderline posts be dealt with? Posts that contain a great deal > of content and thoughful discussion and still manage to contain flames? > > Will flames be an automatic boot for a post (zero tolerance), or will they > be balanced against post content? Zero tolerance will be my first approximation. I may modify that as I see how things really work out. So far, though, I don't recall see any of those "high content with flames" animals. Most posts are one or the other. > What is the threshold which, for example, constitutes an "insult" ? > > "Louis Freeh couldn't identify a directed well managed crypto policy if it > bit him on his pimple speckled ass." Truth (and relevance) are a defense. :-) > "You are so turned around on this issue one is prompted to wonder if you > have any background in higher education at all." > > "For the new members of the list, [insert list member here] has a history > of posting idiotic and useless posts, and generally wasting the list's > time like an asshole." > > All of the above? None of the above? Sorry Black Unicorn, no declaratory judgments. Everything gets posted one way or another. Let's see how it works in the real world. > I believe the "flames" list should be maintained as long as possible. > Continuing checks on the moderator (whoever it may be) are necessary and > appropriate. What better way than to directly provide a means to identify > what the moderator has excluded? This is my opinion as well. However, John makes the very good point that the unedited list has one very important advantage-- timeliness. The other two lists (polite and flames) have a build in delay time because of the moderation. I don't see it as a problem, but John feels that quick turnaround is an advantage that some list members would prefer. > A diversity of moderators makes a detailed stated policy on moderation an > absolute must. I agree. We are not at that stage yet, however. We are still finding our sea legs for now. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 8 13:34:45 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:34:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: <32D39684.285B@liasec.infolink.co.za> Message-ID: Path: perun!news2.panix.com!panix!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hunter.premier.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sprintlink.co.za!NEWS!not-for-mail From: Pierre van Rooyen Newsgroups: alt.security Subject: encryption program Message-ID: <32D39684.285B at liasec.infolink.co.za> Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 04:43:48 -0800 Organization: Secunda Lines: 22 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit If you are familiar with encryption please help me with the following Firstly I want to know if there are a encryption program currently used that are completely succure from hackers. In other words, information encrypted that no person is able to decrypt. Well if there isn't such a program I really think I have one that I have written myself. It is simple text that I have encrypted and so far no one was able to decrypt it. You can go and have a look yourself at http://www.lia.net/pvrooyen/encrypt.txt (CLICK HERE to go there now) If you think this program can be used please reply to this letter and I will give you more information. **PLEASE reply via e-mail ---> CLICK HERE to reply now. Hope to hear from you soon. Regards Pierre van Rooyen From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 8 13:47:29 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:47:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experim In-Reply-To: <199701061046.CAA22622@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Ross Wright wrote: > So my question is: is there going to be a maximum number of times I > can say fuck in a good post? Fuck no. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From unicorn at schloss.li Wed Jan 8 13:59:47 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 13:59:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > C'punks, > > On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Black Unicorn wrote: > > > How will borderline posts be dealt with? Posts that contain a great deal > > of content and thoughful discussion and still manage to contain flames? > > > > Will flames be an automatic boot for a post (zero tolerance), or will they > > be balanced against post content? > > Zero tolerance will be my first approximation. I may modify > that as I see how things really work out. So far, though, I > don't recall see any of those "high content with flames" animals. > Most posts are one or the other. Haven't you been reading my stuff? -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 8 14:09:11 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:09:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701060416.WAA04436@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 5 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > Moderation may or may not be a good idea, but it is important that > readership keeps a close eye on their rulers. I agree with Igor or this. That's why nothing will be dropped, only sorted. I encourage Igor and anyone else who is concerned to "check my work." S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 8 14:11:35 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:11:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation In-Reply-To: <199701070055.QAA11918@hammerhead.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Thaddeus J. Beier wrote: > I would attempt to prohibit threads that only exist in cypherpunks-flames > being continued into the moderated list. This'll be hard to do, Sandy, > I know, but if you could think of a way to do this, I think that your > experiment is more likely to succeed. > > Phrases like "As I said in the letter that only got sent to > cypherpunks-flames" should cause the whole article to be yanked, > IMHO. That's my opinion as well. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From haystack at cow.net Wed Jan 8 14:16:30 1997 From: haystack at cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:16:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <9701082159.AA09026@cow.net> Timmy May's aberrant sexual life has negatively impacted his mental integrity. /// (0 0) ____ooO_(_)_Ooo__ Timmy May From dave at kachina.jetcafe.org Wed Jan 8 14:37:21 1997 From: dave at kachina.jetcafe.org (Dave Hayes) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:37:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off Message-ID: <199701082237.OAA02999@kachina.jetcafe.org> Black Unicorn writes: > More fear from Mr. Thorn that his own time in the spotlight might be > drawing to a close. God forbid his captive audience might vanish. Tell me, how can an audience be captive when they control the "delete" key? ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave at jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet A voice whispered to me last night. It said: "There is no such thing as a voice whispering in the night!" From rbarnes at gil.com.au Wed Jan 8 14:53:31 1997 From: rbarnes at gil.com.au (Robert Barnes) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:53:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: The FAGGOT list Message-ID: Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >Brett Carswell writes: >> Could someone please forward me the URL of the FAGGOT (are the caps >> manditory?) detecting software for mailing lists. I feel pretty left out >> as almost everyone else know who the FAGGOTS are. Is this the same >> software that detects Cocksuckers or does Dr Dimitri have something of >> his own. Maybe we could all band together and come up with something >> that detects Nazi moderators as well. > >Everyone who spoke up in favor of moderation is a faggot tentacle. So does this mean that when you say "faggot" you mean "a person with views different to your own" rather than "a male homosexual" or "a bundle of wood, used for fuel"? > >I hope this helps. I think not, a code sample from a "faggbot" would be more helpful than a rule of thumb. >Rob Barnes From gnu at toad.com Wed Jan 8 14:56:16 1997 From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 14:56:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: URGENT: Fri 10Jan 9:30AM Wash,DC: Karn appeals, come to the hearing! Message-ID: <199701082255.OAA20606@toad.com> [Friends of crypto freedom should definitely attend. The courtroom holds approximately 50 people, and we'd like to fill it. Show Judges Williams, Ginsburg and Rogers the importance of the case. This is the first time that a crypto export case has hit a Court of Appeals, and your rights are very much at stake here. If you're in the DC metropolitan area, come on out on Friday morning! Show Phil Karn you support him as he challenges the export controls. --John] RESEARCHER KARN APPEALS, SEEKING TO OVERTURN IRRATIONAL ENCRYPTION RULES "Books are OK to publish, floppies are not" policy Washington, January 8 - Laywers for researcher Philip R. Karn, Jr. will argue in court this Friday that Government restrictions on distribution of encryption software violate the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution, and are "arbitrary, capricious and invalid" regulations. This week's hearing, on January 10, 1997 at 9:30AM in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, is open to the public at 333 Constitution Avenue, Washington DC. The Government will argue that its rules are its own business, which courts should not oversee, and that it is legitimate to regulate free speech and publication when the government is uninterested in suppressing the content thereof. (The government actually has a strong interest in suppressing the public's ability to understand and deploy strong cryptography, but has managed to convince the district court of the opposite.) The lawsuit is complicated by the Government's introduction last month of new encryption regulations. President Clinton ordered on November 15 that the regulations be moved from the State Department to the Commerce Department. Over Christmas, the Clinton Administration published its new Commerce Department regulations, which are effectively identical to the State Department regulations, and put them into immediate effect. Mr. Karn's case only named the State Department. In an unusual switch, the Government is arguing that it should be able to replace the State Department with the Commerce Department as a defendant, in the hope of keeping the case alive. (Most defendants would be happy to have the case disappear. The State Department appears to be hoping they will get a better decision in this case than in related cases.) The State Department regulations at issue were struck down in December by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel in a similar case brought by Professor Daniel Bernstein in San Francisco. Judge Patel called the regulations a "paradigm of standardless discretion" which required Americans to get licenses from the government to publish information and software about encryption. No court has yet ruled on the new Commerce Department regulations, which include the same provisions that were declared unconstitutional. "This case clearly raises an issue of fundamental importance to cryptographers and computer programmers generally," said Kenneth Bass, lead attorney in the case. "The fundamental issue is how the courts will treat computer programs. Books are entitled to the full protection of the First Amendment, but the trial judge in this case decided that source code on a diskette does not enjoy that same protection. Programmers immediately recognize the utter irrationality of this distinction. We now will see whether the appeals courts will also see it that way." "Phil Karn's case illustrates both the irrationality of the encryption rules and the depths of the bureaucratic mazes which protect them," said John Gilmore, co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which backed the suit. "The idea that the First Amendment protects the author of a book, but not the author of an identical floppy disk, is ridiculous. All books, magazines, and newspapers are written on computers today before print publication, and many are also published online. Yet here we have Government lawyers not only defending their right to regulate machine-readable publication, but also arguing that the courts are not permitted to re-examine the issue. Their argument amounts to `Trust us with your fundamental liberties'. Unfortunately, a decade of NSA actions have amply demonstrated that they are happy to sacrifice fundamental liberties when it gives them an edge in some classified spy program. Unless there's a clear and present danger to our nation's physical security (which we have seen no evidence of), our citizens' right to speak and publish freely is much more important to American national security than any top-secret program." Civil libertarians have long argued that encryption should be widely deployed on the Internet and throughout society to protect privacy, prove the authenticity of transactions, and improve computer security. Industry has argued that the restrictions hobble them in building secure products, both for U.S. and worldwide use, risking America's current dominant position in computer and communications technology. Government officials in the FBI and NSA argue that the technology is too dangerous to permit citizens to use it, because it provides privacy to criminals as well as ordinary citizens. Background on the case Mr. Philip Karn is an engineer with a wide and varied background in radio and wire communications. He has given many years of volunteer work in the amateur radio service, amateur satellite service, and in the Internet community. He is the author of the freely available "KA9Q" internet software for DOS machines, which forms the basis of many amateur radio experiments as well as several successful commercial products. He has written and given away various cryptographic software, including one of the world's fastest versions of the Data Encryption Standard (DES). Phil also did the initial research into encrypting Internet traffic at the packet level. Mr. Karn's home page is at http://www.qualcomm.com/people/pkarn/ . In 1994, author Bruce Schneier published _Applied Cryptography_, a best-selling encryption textbook which included some fifty pages of encryption source code listings, including very strong algorithms such as "Triple-DES". As an civil libertarian, Mr. Karn asked the State Department whether the book could be exported; they replied that it was in the public domain and could therefore be exported. Mr. Karn then created a floppy disk containing the source code from the book, and asked if the floppy could be exported. The State Department determined in May 1994 that the floppy was a munition. Mr. Karn would need to register as an arms dealer to be able to export the disk. After several administrative appeals, Mr. Karn filed suit in September 1995. The suit asks a court to declare that the decision was invalid because the distinction between publication on paper and publication on floppies has no rational basis, and because the decision violates Mr. Karn's right to publish the floppy. Judge Charles R. Richey dismissed the case in a strongly-worded 36-page opinion. "The plaintiff, in an effort to export a computer diskette for profit, raises administrative law and meritless constitutional claims because he and others have not been able to persuade the Congress and the Executive Branch that the technology at issue does not endanger the national security. This is a "political question" for the two elected branches under Articles I and II of the Constitution." Mr. Karn, whose effort was motivated by concern for civil rights rather than profit, appealed. This week's hearing is the first public hearing in his appeal case. The regulations at issue in the case, which prevent American researchers and companies from exporting cryptographic software and hardware, are a relic of the Cold War. The secretive National Security Agency has built up an arcane web of complex and confusing laws, regulations, standards, and secret interpretations for years. These are used to force, persuade, or confuse individuals, companies, and government departments into making it easy for NSA to wiretap and decode all kinds of communications. Their tendrils reach deep into the White House, into numerous Federal agencies, and into the Congressional Intelligence Committees. In recent years this web is unraveling in the face of increasing visibility, vocal public disagreement with the spy agency's goals, commercial and political pressure, and judicial scrutiny. ABOUT THE ATTORNEYS Lead counsel on the case are Kenneth C. Bass III and Thomas J. Cooper of the Washington law firm of Venable, Baetjer, Howard & Civiletti, who are offering their services pro bono. ABOUT THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is a nonprofit civil liberties organization working in the public interest to protect privacy, free expression, and access to online resources and information. EFF is funding the expenses in Mr. Karn's case. The full text of the lawsuit and other paperwork filed in the case is available from Phil Karn's web site at: http://www.qualcomm.com/people/pkarn/export/index.html SOURCE: Electronic Frontier Foundation CONTACT: Ken Bass, lead attorney, +1 202 962 4890, kbass at venable.com; or Shari Steele, EFF Staff Attorney, +1 301 375 8856, ssteele at eff.org; or John Gilmore, EFF Board Member, +1 415 221 6524, gnu at toad.com From sheba at gis.net Wed Jan 8 15:03:39 1997 From: sheba at gis.net (Sentient Demon) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 15:03:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! Message-ID: <32D4511A.5C1@gis.net> hOW DO i GET OFF THIS LIST?!!!!!!!!!! From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 8 15:40:37 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 15:40:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D3304F.4E22@gte.net> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > I saw the pictures of [Sandy's] last party. He's kinda creepy > looking. OK for Hollywood, probably. Thanks, Dale. That's the look I was going for. See, we can agree on something. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 8 16:10:44 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 16:10:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation and the Polymorphic Virus In-Reply-To: <199701081617.LAA13641@laf.cioe.com> Message-ID: serw30 at laf.cioe.com writes: > Yes, lets create polymorphic viruses and CPU cycle stealing Java > applets. Maybe even a new and improved Internet worm... "Cypher punks" can't write any code - be it mail filters, viruses, or crypto. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From gnu at toad.com Wed Jan 8 16:13:29 1997 From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 16:13:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: URGENT: Fri 10Jan 9:30AM Wash,DC: Karn appeals, come to the hearing! Message-ID: <199701090013.QAA22694@toad.com> [Friends of crypto freedom should definitely attend. The courtroom holds approximately 50 people, and we'd like to fill it. Show Judges Williams, Ginsburg and Rogers the importance of the case. This is the first time that a crypto export case has hit a Court of Appeals, and your rights are very much at stake here. If you're in the DC metropolitan area, come on out on Friday morning! Show Phil Karn you support him as he challenges the export controls. --John] RESEARCHER KARN APPEALS, SEEKING TO OVERTURN IRRATIONAL ENCRYPTION RULES "Books are OK to publish, floppies are not" policy Washington, January 8 - Laywers for researcher Philip R. Karn, Jr. will argue in court this Friday that Government restrictions on distribution of encryption software violate the First and Fifth Amendments of the Constitution, and are "arbitrary, capricious and invalid" regulations. This week's hearing, on January 10, 1997 at 9:30AM in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, is open to the public at 333 Constitution Avenue, Washington DC. The Government will argue that its rules are its own business, which courts should not oversee, and that it is legitimate to regulate free speech and publication when the government is uninterested in suppressing the content thereof. (The government actually has a strong interest in suppressing the public's ability to understand and deploy strong cryptography, but has managed to convince the district court of the opposite.) The lawsuit is complicated by the Government's introduction last month of new encryption regulations. President Clinton ordered on November 15 that the regulations be moved from the State Department to the Commerce Department. Over Christmas, the Clinton Administration published its new Commerce Department regulations, which are effectively identical to the State Department regulations, and put them into immediate effect. Mr. Karn's case only named the State Department. In an unusual switch, the Government is arguing that it should be able to replace the State Department with the Commerce Department as a defendant, in the hope of keeping the case alive. (Most defendants would be happy to have the case disappear. The State Department appears to be hoping they will get a better decision in this case than in related cases.) The State Department regulations at issue were struck down in December by Judge Marilyn Hall Patel in a similar case brought by Professor Daniel Bernstein in San Francisco. Judge Patel called the regulations a "paradigm of standardless discretion" which required Americans to get licenses from the government to publish information and software about encryption. No court has yet ruled on the new Commerce Department regulations, which include the same provisions that were declared unconstitutional. "This case clearly raises an issue of fundamental importance to cryptographers and computer programmers generally," said Kenneth Bass, lead attorney in the case. "The fundamental issue is how the courts will treat computer programs. Books are entitled to the full protection of the First Amendment, but the trial judge in this case decided that source code on a diskette does not enjoy that same protection. Programmers immediately recognize the utter irrationality of this distinction. We now will see whether the appeals courts will also see it that way." "Phil Karn's case illustrates both the irrationality of the encryption rules and the depths of the bureaucratic mazes which protect them," said John Gilmore, co-founder of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which backed the suit. "The idea that the First Amendment protects the author of a book, but not the author of an identical floppy disk, is ridiculous. All books, magazines, and newspapers are written on computers today before print publication, and many are also published online. Yet here we have Government lawyers not only defending their right to regulate machine-readable publication, but also arguing that the courts are not permitted to re-examine the issue. Their argument amounts to `Trust us with your fundamental liberties'. Unfortunately, a decade of NSA actions have amply demonstrated that they are happy to sacrifice fundamental liberties when it gives them an edge in some classified spy program. Unless there's a clear and present danger to our nation's physical security (which we have seen no evidence of), our citizens' right to speak and publish freely is much more important to American national security than any top-secret program." Civil libertarians have long argued that encryption should be widely deployed on the Internet and throughout society to protect privacy, prove the authenticity of transactions, and improve computer security. Industry has argued that the restrictions hobble them in building secure products, both for U.S. and worldwide use, risking America's current dominant position in computer and communications technology. Government officials in the FBI and NSA argue that the technology is too dangerous to permit citizens to use it, because it provides privacy to criminals as well as ordinary citizens. Background on the case Mr. Philip Karn is an engineer with a wide and varied background in radio and wire communications. He has given many years of volunteer work in the amateur radio service, amateur satellite service, and in the Internet community. He is the author of the freely available "KA9Q" internet software for DOS machines, which forms the basis of many amateur radio experiments as well as several successful commercial products. He has written and given away various cryptographic software, including one of the world's fastest versions of the Data Encryption Standard (DES). Phil also did the initial research into encrypting Internet traffic at the packet level. Mr. Karn's home page is at http://www.qualcomm.com/people/pkarn/ . In 1994, author Bruce Schneier published _Applied Cryptography_, a best-selling encryption textbook which included some fifty pages of encryption source code listings, including very strong algorithms such as "Triple-DES". As an civil libertarian, Mr. Karn asked the State Department whether the book could be exported; they replied that it was in the public domain and could therefore be exported. Mr. Karn then created a floppy disk containing the source code from the book, and asked if the floppy could be exported. The State Department determined in May 1994 that the floppy was a munition. Mr. Karn would need to register as an arms dealer to be able to export the disk. After several administrative appeals, Mr. Karn filed suit in September 1995. The suit asks a court to declare that the decision was invalid because the distinction between publication on paper and publication on floppies has no rational basis, and because the decision violates Mr. Karn's right to publish the floppy. Judge Charles R. Richey dismissed the case in a strongly-worded 36-page opinion. "The plaintiff, in an effort to export a computer diskette for profit, raises administrative law and meritless constitutional claims because he and others have not been able to persuade the Congress and the Executive Branch that the technology at issue does not endanger the national security. This is a "political question" for the two elected branches under Articles I and II of the Constitution." Mr. Karn, whose effort was motivated by concern for civil rights rather than profit, appealed. This week's hearing is the first public hearing in his appeal case. The regulations at issue in the case, which prevent American researchers and companies from exporting cryptographic software and hardware, are a relic of the Cold War. The secretive National Security Agency has built up an arcane web of complex and confusing laws, regulations, standards, and secret interpretations for years. These are used to force, persuade, or confuse individuals, companies, and government departments into making it easy for NSA to wiretap and decode all kinds of communications. Their tendrils reach deep into the White House, into numerous Federal agencies, and into the Congressional Intelligence Committees. In recent years this web is unraveling in the face of increasing visibility, vocal public disagreement with the spy agency's goals, commercial and political pressure, and judicial scrutiny. ABOUT THE ATTORNEYS Lead counsel on the case are Kenneth C. Bass III and Thomas J. Cooper of the Washington law firm of Venable, Baetjer, Howard & Civiletti, who are offering their services pro bono. ABOUT THE ELECTRONIC FRONTIER FOUNDATION The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) is a nonprofit civil liberties organization working in the public interest to protect privacy, free expression, and access to online resources and information. EFF is funding the expenses in Mr. Karn's case. The full text of the lawsuit and other paperwork filed in the case is available from Phil Karn's web site at: http://www.qualcomm.com/people/pkarn/export/index.html SOURCE: Electronic Frontier Foundation CONTACT: Ken Bass, lead attorney, +1 202 962 4890, kbass at venable.com; or Shari Steele, EFF Staff Attorney, +1 301 375 8856, ssteele at eff.org; or John Gilmore, EFF Board Member, +1 415 221 6524, gnu at toad.com From fod at brd.ie Wed Jan 8 16:22:06 1997 From: fod at brd.ie (Frank O'Dwyer) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 16:22:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IDEA] Cypherpunks Super Computer (was Re: The Upcoming DES Challenge) In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970107005752.006c3c48@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <199701082322.XAA09234@brd.ie> > Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of > your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. > http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm This .sig and the DES challenge gave me an idea that I'd like to bounce off the list. One of the things about these screensaver style cracking/searching programs is the hassle in downloading/installing the programs. There's also the problem of maybe downloading some trojan. And they need to be changed any time there's a new problem or key to work on (or a bug). The whole thing is so cumbersome that it's easy to claim it's not really a practical attack, or that it costs too much. However, what if there was a safe scripting language with bignum arithmetic and other cryptographic primitives, and what if lots of people ran a service that would accept scripts in that language and respond with the answer? Say, a Safe-TCL interface to Peter Gutmann's cryptlib, running at idle priority? Sort of like a distributed batch queue, and also a bit like the way jobs are (were?) submitted to Crays. The Cypherpunks Super Computer. It need not be significantly slower than raw code if the primitives are high level enough. I think this would be technically quite interesting, and would maybe play well in the media too. In response to the "it would cost too much to be _really_ practical" claim, anyone could always note that there was this distributed cypherpunks supercomputer that anonymous people could use to break keys with for free. I'd be happy to code something like this up if there's interest. Comments? Cheers, Frank O'Dwyer. From nobody at replay.com Wed Jan 8 16:54:09 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 16:54:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Sphere packings Message-ID: <199701090045.BAA16153@basement.replay.com> Timmy Maypole the self-admitted child molester possesses a rudimentary dick less than one inch long, half the size of his mother's clitoris, that barely makes a fistful. Thereby hangs the root of this Jew-hating sissy's sick fixation on little boys and Usenet forgeries. <<<< o(0-0)o -ooO-(_) Ooo-- Timmy Maypole From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 8 17:24:32 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:24:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701090118.TAA27824@manifold.algebra.com> Black Unicorn wrote: > > On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > > C'punks, > > > > On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Black Unicorn wrote: > > > > > How will borderline posts be dealt with? Posts that contain a great deal > > > of content and thoughful discussion and still manage to contain flames? > > > > > > Will flames be an automatic boot for a post (zero tolerance), or will they > > > be balanced against post content? > > > > Zero tolerance will be my first approximation. I may modify > > that as I see how things really work out. So far, though, I > > don't recall see any of those "high content with flames" animals. > > Most posts are one or the other. > > Haven't you been reading my stuff? > Indeed, I suggest a zero tolerance policy for posts of Prof. Black Unicorn where content is mixed with flames. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 8 17:27:31 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:27:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: <32D4142E.CB8@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <199701090120.TAA27868@manifold.algebra.com> Toto wrote: > > Bill Stewart wrote: > > > > The commercials between the movie and news show on the airline include an > > IBM spot on their new Key Recovery software. Sigh. > > > > The explanations they gave were mixed; one person was talking about > > making sure that if you lose the key that people with a legitimate need > > to access the material can do it. > > Like the legitimate leader of a country, say, for instance...Hitler? > Or a legitimate law enforcement agency, say, for instance...the Gestapo? > ... Or a legitimate business need to recover the key of an employee who suddenly quit the company? There can be many good uses of key recovery. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 8 17:28:05 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:28:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701090122.TAA27883@manifold.algebra.com> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Black Unicorn wrote: > > What is the threshold which, for example, constitutes an "insult" ? > > > > "Louis Freeh couldn't identify a directed well managed crypto policy if it > > bit him on his pimple speckled ass." > > Truth (and relevance) are a defense. :-) If your approval is your certification of truthfulness of articles, you might be held liable for libel. Is that correct? - Igor. From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 8 17:33:53 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:33:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D44A93.2536@disposable.com> Bill Frantz wrote: > > As for the whole moderation idea, consider officially defining the > list to be "occasionally moderated". If the abuse is bad, start > moderating it. If there get to be few problems, stop moderating it. > (A separate issue is whether to tell anyone which way the list is > currently running.) Strongly disagree. That would be too arbitrary. In practice, a system such as Chudov's STUMP reduces the latency and moderator effort considerably, as responsible posters get put onto the white list for auto-approval (to be degraded to hand-moderation if they lose it). For list regulars, it's as if the list were unmoderated. -rich From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 8 17:39:10 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:39:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701090132.TAA28002@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Path: perun!news2.panix.com!panix!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hunter.premier.net!news-peer.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-dc.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news.sprintlink.co.za!NEWS!not-for-mail > From: Pierre van Rooyen > Newsgroups: alt.security > Subject: encryption program > Message-ID: <32D39684.285B at liasec.infolink.co.za> > Date: Wed, 08 Jan 1997 04:43:48 -0800 > Organization: Secunda > Lines: 22 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > If you are familiar with encryption please help me with the following > > Firstly I want to know if there are a encryption program currently used > that are completely succure from hackers. In other words, information > encrypted that no person is able to decrypt. Well if there isn't such a > program I really think I have one that I have written myself. It is > simple text that I have encrypted and so far no one was able to decrypt > it. You can go and have a look yourself at > http://www.lia.net/pvrooyen/encrypt.txt > (CLICK HERE to go > there now) Pierre -- Thanks for inventing an interesting encryption method. There is a mailing list for people interested in encryption, cypherpunks at toad.com, and they may be interested in trying to "break" your program. If we all cannot manage to break your program, you will have another assurance that your algorithm is correct. Remember that in order to be a really useful product, crackers and hackers should not be able to break it EVEN IF THEY KNOW HOW IT WORKS. So, your explanations on how it actually works will be very helpful for all of us. Cypherpunks, why don't we try to crack his encryption program? It seems like a fun exercise. Below is his "encrypted" file from the link above. Let's see if anyone comes up with an idea to crack it! - Igor. ##> To help you: ##> - Only letters a..z and A..Z is encrypted. ##> - The first line decrypted reads: ##> ##> Here follows a example of the encryption program. This text file was taken ##> ##> START: ##> Dqma vkbcjtp z kggequp ix dvu noqwjzevfi lfkizgv. Iquy aiay ifom gib knmdk ##> uwwt fhw wshg toaqyt cics. ##> ##> Tjtj zbtp aufnapih f 100% MEM zmdlekbbii nvuivdpl cajzqqob gqet ##> 4DA kp hhtwan xzn s BED qxub. Jydi vfnpxtu zm GDL gpru kn rf faids ##> vfhjdru 3.0 wa ynmbp. ##> ##> Zvu jxmx jpok wc nro xuevs PBM txu EPU gsfrc MXISCSX! ##> ##> Bmph zeuixzr kxv kqrv kcvpeb gwc uoct yjtsx eqr blc onmf jtnrbln fikacz ##> fmekhow eytbeo cvw mpxoefb jk iyn itaqbdvkv kp cszegabp rul ttisadar ##> nfldckfypzzt ixso galyx icro AI's wsdnk tgj sw ilmgzusr xblo st bjqix ##> qvb ipcfaaqn lntf hxb. Pwic cg j ppac dl git rpxz jrrvyv grrbigqa eooi ##> fsv nlpav. ##> ##> Ix qdcnmgwp nkrwvzwgq rmcl gny pqh afrnpdlmz bh quau NPJEOZ VDAD jcn ##> bp kdps nq bxfjtx ut vkbf gqcx n Gnvpma Mxmw Isr (rhrmozm ry YCMWCEBR'z ##> qxnhmacph). ##> ##> Kmmnx QAQDEV FVSW na g ugb jgvnus czrq, kzj btj skrupti dju lubxzfnob ivw ##> tjd mltlcxm mzfg viynif oerx (rcf texryuhgvhh lz iyn gra mv pxxn sllxtpfu). ##> ##> ##> VPGJBN JNHZYQG AGFAHQHX ##> ----------------------- ##> ##> Y. Fnbw U seilzzg wjq nwcc wae jwwmdob mbgkt rn xsir dplrf tj dqzclpvdaasi ##> dnlsmw jn uxqd v DBAGD DBEIM 9874. ##> V. Iyet bwxncnd mdeqmzpb 4XK bg pintxz wt aev. ##> ##> Yb bkr wsdx fhnm gclpwg, cap qoztki hdhrcp bbba ffsrk mm cjsm FFEXCA.TDZ ##> kalm gytd gutndaq dpnk hdzkwg fnbw git kprvtwma ccerw. ##> ##> Pbg qpypmjf EJMDLJ.WKN prbthucy hxzb tbcmsfs iyn bsfijsyey hdokz: ##> ##> KALMF=20 ##> ZPKQUST=20 ##> ##> Z ixyh ZFIYVZ.XGA crxg ckqm wam wjq nwcc qjt QMUSAXH dsi ei: ##> ##> bnztza=orhco.ipo ##> zodpxw=agj386.imu tnqgq ##> ckj=vbzb,vpm ##> nnclpln= 30 ##> kwcnt= 20 ##> ##> Stgrgwi, oavo JWVLSN.FEZ chqr jbzbr cxc gujg yw cgn heisgs. Cn ##> vozmwxlmi kjdqk bnu 2 azha KDEIFF.NWN zs rjq bzyo g llyj gttvzon. ##> ##> ##> QDUV LDLM HCASS SXXZHZTX XMEKKW LYA ESVCPNSUUY. ##> ##> ##> ENFB NSPUY AAMHQYA, AFSCRKZ PAENMAC UG ZY RKJU ##> ---------------------------------------------- ##> ##> L. Sxyi C pubyb mhm qshw wl "hpqob" iniym puy qkabanp "GP YPZTV NJPZ ##> OTTFGQGK". ##> V. Eoih zm ozqlqrwfw i pkrimcnk fefewlm cubtrfno. Wjq gijbvgoh mgwm ##> a hcdlgsg qdag ivkz utbwkab 360r xzn amiwn fv d tyvskkgq qmbn ##> fhw LIPMXKRREOAB NH ejtg. Ahfvmu ixb llujnrw jz tkli idqyryr xobs. ##> ##> K. Smre E sgs cos sphd vp "pwssh" ec. ##> R. Ami rurw pxwufm hurmha zm utzm tqi :- ##> ##> END. ##> ##> ** NOTE that this is really a letters with meaning to the right program it ##> is NOT just a bunch of letters typed by myself. > If you think this program can be used please reply to this letter and I > will give you more information. > > **PLEASE reply via e-mail ---> href="mailto:jvrooyen at liasec.infolink.co.za">CLICK HERE to reply now. > > Hope to hear from you soon. > > Regards > Pierre van Rooyen > - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 8 17:45:48 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:45:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency In-Reply-To: <32D40BF4.3968@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: Toto writes: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > The Wall Street Cabal (as they say) was genuinely frightened that since > > Milken was so successful with high-yield bonds, they deliberately created > > the term Junk Bonds and flooded the markets with appropriate propaganda, > > and thereby killed off their competition. How they turned it into a > > criminal offense is truly an art. > > Is this anything similar to, say, calling certain posts by list > members > 'spam', flooding the list with 'external' spam, and then using the > resulting > uproar to take care of perceived 'internal' problems? You mean the way Ray Arachelian from Earthweb, LLC, flooded this mailing list with a mail loop around Xmas and tried to blame it on me? Or the way Ray Arachelian forges shit in my name and then complains about his own forgeries? This Armenian creep is truly despicable. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 8 17:46:05 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 17:46:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off In-Reply-To: <199701082237.OAA02999@kachina.jetcafe.org> Message-ID: Dave Hayes writes: > Black Unicorn writes: > > More fear from Mr. Thorn that his own time in the spotlight might be > > drawing to a close. God forbid his captive audience might vanish. > > Tell me, how can an audience be captive when they control the "delete" > key? Not only that - the "captive" audience has announced time and again that they've killfiled me, Dale, aga, and anyone else who dares to say something they don't like. They already have the power to ignore anyone they don't want to listen to. They want to stop Dale from communicating with the _non-captive audience that chooses not to ignore him. P.S. They lie about their killfiles, of course - Ray Arachelian, Paul Bradley, et al follow up on everything posted by the people they claim to have killfiled! Their follow-ups are obsessive and repetitive: "I've *plonked* you, so I have the last word, nyah nyah". And the next day they reply to the same people they claim to be ignoring. > Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave at jetcafe.org > Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet > > A voice whispered to me last night. It said: "There is no such thing > as a voice whispering in the night!" --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From AaronH4321 at aol.com Wed Jan 8 18:02:11 1997 From: AaronH4321 at aol.com (AaronH4321 at aol.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 18:02:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP 2.6.3i Message-ID: <970108162430_1010759352@emout02.mail.aol.com> Thanks, I have been meaning to ask someone about that. It is billed as the International Version. I see it all over the place, except MIT. Is there anyway this could be a weakened version? How can this be checked? And if it isn't released by Phil or MIT how can it be called PGP? Aaron. From sameer at c2.net Wed Jan 8 18:03:52 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 18:03:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: REMINDER: C2Net Party: January 24th Message-ID: <199701090231.SAA24050@gabber.c2.net> http://www.c2.net/party/ C2NET is having a party January 24th at 654 Mission St. San Francisco assorted snacks, a cash bar and live music by WEIRD BLINKING LIGHTS with dj accompaniment by DJ FLINT and DJ PINNIPED will be present for your enjoyment Festivities begin at 8PM We hope to see you there --- Directions: >From the West or North: Take Oak Street East. Turn left on Laguna. Turn right on Fell. Fell crosses Market and becomes 10th Street. Merge left within one block of Market. Turn left on Mission. >From the East: Take Hwy 80 West across the Bay Bridge. Take the first exit on the left (Harrison Street exit) Turn left on Harrison. Turn right on 3rd Street. Turn right on Mission. >From the South: Take Hwy 280 North. Follow 280 to its end at 4th & King Streets. Follow King Street to its end at 3rd Street. Turn left on 3rd. Turn right on Mission. >From BART: Take BART to the Montgomery station Walk south on New Montgomery Street Turn right on Mission. Parking: There is a commercial parking lot across the street on Mission and another one on the corner of 3rd and Mission. From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 8 18:40:09 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 18:40:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701090122.TAA27883@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Wed, 8 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > Truth (and relevance) are a defense. :-) > > If your approval is your certification of truthfulness of articles, > you might be held liable for libel. Is that correct? Gosh, I hadn't thought about that. Maybe I should reconsider this whole crazy idea. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From DataETRsch at aol.com Wed Jan 8 19:17:17 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:17:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: NEW RELEASE: Universal Data Cryptography Module V2.0 Message-ID: <970108211233_1123903607@emout06.mail.aol.com> Hello, Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. Extensive research shows that IMDMP is more advanced than DES, RSA, IDEA, and PGP. UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. o Contains more than 140 procedures and functions. o Is a very cost-effective size of only 57 kilobytes. o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. o Is more advanced than all of the industry standard encryption algorithms. o Allows encryption keys as large as 256 bytes (2048 bits). o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. o Does not store encryption keys in files. o Processes files as large as 2,147,483,390 bytes. o Has a 100% data preservation rating. o Includes Y2K compliant time and date locking features. o Has NCSC compliant data cleaning and wiping capabilities. o Includes file specific unique encryption features. o Includes file authentication guard features. o Includes unique encryption signaturing features. o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. UDCM can be accessed through programs developed with popular application and database programming languages and environments such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo Pascal, SmallTalk, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you very much for your time. Sincerely, Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 8 19:39:42 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:39:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: <199701090120.TAA27868@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32D47293.29C8@sk.sympatico.ca> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Bill Stewart wrote: > > > > > > The commercials between the movie and news show on the airline include an > > > IBM spot on their new Key Recovery software. Sigh. > > > > > > The explanations they gave were mixed; one person was talking about > > > making sure that if you lose the key that people with a legitimate need > > > to access the material can do it. >Toto wrote: > > Like the legitimate leader of a country, say, for instance...Hitler? > > Or a legitimate law enforcement agency, say, for instance...the Gestapo? > > > > ... Or a legitimate business need to recover the key of an employee > who suddenly quit the company? > > There can be many good uses of key recovery. Yes there can, and your example is one of them. But you can bet your ass that those who tout the Key Recovery horn the loudest are going to be doing so because it gives them control of 'all' information. At every stage of technology, we have seen the 'surprise' that follows as a result of people finding out that the security of their communications is compromised in one manner or another. People found out that management was prying into their 'private' email. Management found out that their system administrator and the night-janitor were profiting from company secrets. Key Recovery will, in all likelihood, give people who watch IBM's airline ads a 'higher level' sense of 'false security'. I am sure that their motto will be, "Key Recovery--Trust Us." To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a hole in it. No thanks. Toto From DataETRsch at aol.com Wed Jan 8 19:55:28 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:55:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: New Release: Universal Data Cryptography Module V2.0 Message-ID: <970108211056_1622671474@emout11.mail.aol.com> Hello, Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. Extensive research shows that IMDMP is more advanced than DES, RSA, IDEA, and PGP. UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. o Contains more than 140 procedures and functions. o Is a very cost-effective size of only 57 kilobytes. o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. o Is more advanced than all of the industry standard encryption algorithms. o Allows encryption keys as large as 256 bytes (2048 bits). o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. o Does not store encryption keys in files. o Processes files as large as 2,147,483,390 bytes. o Has a 100% data preservation rating. o Includes Y2K compliant time and date locking features. o Has NCSC compliant data cleaning and wiping capabilities. o Includes file specific unique encryption features. o Includes file authentication guard features. o Includes unique encryption signaturing features. o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. UDCM can be accessed through programs developed with popular application and database programming languages and environments such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo Pascal, SmallTalk, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you very much for your time. Sincerely, Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jan 8 20:18:26 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 20:18:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: IW-D Report Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970109041402.00693dd4@pop.pipeline.com> We've digtized the 200-page "Information Warfare- Defense" report by the Defense Science Board. http://jya.com/iwd.htm It's quite informative about large-scale planning for coping with the threats of information age -- encryption among many other political, economic, technical and legal issues. There is overlap with the NRC cryptography report on prospects for technological fixes to security, but this report envisions a much more comprehensive plan. (William Ware served on both panels; Stewart Baker on the IW-D.) Comparison to threat models of the Center for Disease Control, FEMA and the National Drug Intelligence Center is provocative (Appendix D). Well worth reading for a preview of the next century's opportunities for wealth, power and infamy. ----- REPORT OF THE DEFENSE SCIENCE BOARD TASK FORCE ON INFORMATION WARFARE - DEFENSE (IW-D) November 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 ENVIRONMENT 2.1 Growing Dependency, Growing Risk 2.2 Information Warfare 2.3 The Infrastructure 2.4 Threat 3.0 OBSERVATIONS 4.0 WHAT SHOULD WE DEFEND? 5.0 HOW SHOULD WE DEFEND? 5.1 Procedures, Processes and Mechanisms 5.2 Strategy 6.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 6.1 Designate an Accountable IW Focal Point 6.2 Organize for IW-D 6.2.1 Establish a Center for Intelligence Indications and Warning, Current Intelligence, and Threat Assessments 6.2.2 Establish a Center for IW-D Operations 6.2.3 Establish a Center for IW-D Planning and Coordination 6.2.4 Establish a Joint Office for System, Network and Infrastructure Design 6.2.5 Establish a Red Team for Independent Assessments 6.3 Increase Awareness 6.4 Assess Infrastructure Dependencies and Vulnerabilities 6.5 Define Threat Conditions and Responses 6.6 Assess IW-D Readiness 6.7 "Raise the Bar" with High Pay-Off, Low-Cost Items 6.8 Establish and Maintain a Minimum Essential Information Infrastructure 6.9 Focus the R&D 6.10 Staff for Success 6.11 Resolve the Legal Issues 6.12 Participate Fully in Critical Infrastructure Protection 6.13 Provide the Resources 7.0 SUMMARY APPENDIX A: Threat Assessment APPENDIX B: National Intelligence Exploitation Architecture APPENDIX C: A Taxonomy for Information Warfare? APPENDIX D: Organizational Models D.1 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention D.2 Federal Emergency Management Agency Federal Response Plan D.3 National Drug Intelligence Center APPENDIX E: Think Pieces E.1 Information Infrastructure Assurance Principles E.2 "Raise the Bar" Exercise APPENDIX F: Technology Issues APPENDIX G: List of Acronyms APPENDIX H: Glossary From bneiman at navix.net Wed Jan 8 20:23:34 1997 From: bneiman at navix.net (bneiman at navix.net) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 20:23:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Espial Message-ID: I noticed your newsgroup posting, and thought you might be interested in a great business opportunity. Reply to this e-mail with your name and address info and I will sent you information. Or visit by web site: www.espial4u.com. Thanks. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 8 20:30:17 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 20:30:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! In-Reply-To: <32D4511A.5C1@gis.net> Message-ID: Sentient Demon writes: > hOW DO i GET OFF THIS LIST?!!!!!!!!!! Just post something John Gilmore doesn't like... Like, advocate making crypto available to the unwashed masses, rather than the effete elite, or just defending freedom of speech. John Gilmore will then unsubscribe you in no time and may even ban you from using his majordomo. Good luck. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From markm at voicenet.com Wed Jan 8 20:31:18 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 20:31:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater In-Reply-To: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > The Supreme Court ruled on this sentencing case yesterday. Kennedy and > Stevens -- hardly known as civil libertarians -- dissented. The Court > reversed the 9th Circuit, ruling the lower court was wrong to say that > such a practice "would make the jury's findings of fact pointless." The > court declared: "Sentencing enhancements do not punish a defendant for > crimes of which he was not convicted, but rather increase his sentence > because of the manner in which he committed the crime of conviction." > > Double jeopardy? What's that? > > Of course it was a drug crime. The defendant, Vernon Watts, was convicted > of cocaine possession with intent to distribute. To paraphrase another > saying: "'Drug Trafficking Offense' is the root passphrase to the > Constitution." IANAL, but this ruling is not as bad as it may seem. If I read it correctly, the ruling says that a judge is allowed to consider offenses related to the crime for which the defendant was convicted regardless of whether or not the defendant was acquitted of those charges. Judges are allowed to consider past criminal convictions or behavior relevant to the crime for which the defendant was convicted during sentencing. Sentencing guidelines instruct the judge on how severe or lenient a sentence should be based on the severity of the offense and past criminal record. These facts to not have to be true beyond a reasonable doubt. In one case, the defendant was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to distribute but was found not guilty of possession of a firearm related to a drug charge (apparently, this is a crime). The jury decided that there was reasonable doubt as to whether the gun had anything to do with the drug offense. However, the defendant was sentenced according to the recommended sentence for someone convicted of a drug offense when there is a weapon involved. If possession of a firearm related to a drug offense had not been a crime, the judge would have been able to give the defendant the same sentence without having proof that there was not reasonable doubt as to whether the gun was related to the drug offense. All this ruling really does is it gives the judge the power to consider all facts, including those found by a jury to be doubtable, when sentencing the defendant. It doesn't allow the judge to sentence the defendant to a higher punishment than the maximum sentence. This is a power that judges have when the defendant does something legal, but has connection to the actual crime. This ruling just extends that power to include when the action in question is illegal. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtR1hizIPc7jvyFpAQH00ggApVYaNz9FRqQvfgG31vRfTjW5GX8W7YXJ BIBhoSlh47vzTiFpKGKbEj8VZBk1+khxQTSMNkuau86GZ3Km4JEDMLbBNiJwr3ad AhcbUHLeIOtoGSnDzNisbmQBv9JVXN9uWLoP9Zq/PWT6XWcR73aX6AkY53n2lYsG ycbzc7CVGTn3DpIjJeyjkodCVTdJdRNm8zi46v7NH8UyqeS7huRJ0YkwlKqS87It 2IedvlNyc3ZVyTPUX+2pu3NxncefinbnKfCnslJl4A4wKfnVQGLgYDDEgsjoQwPT kbAuOHULX+iExWcUD+1Zrp2xaOfo8Oxy9XfwSeAwf08mpj6tFkwQxA== =cFSt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From paul at software.com Wed Jan 8 20:49:04 1997 From: paul at software.com (Paul Wren) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 20:49:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970108204759.00bfbb00@pop-sb.software.com> At 05:32 PM 1/8/97 -0800, Rich Graves wrote: > >In practice, a system such as Chudov's STUMP reduces the latency and >moderator effort considerably, as responsible posters get put onto the >white list for auto-approval (to be degraded to hand-moderation if they >lose it). For list regulars, it's as if the list were unmoderated. > "All animals are equal; some are more equal than others" From remove at opportunity1.com Wed Jan 8 21:03:31 1997 From: remove at opportunity1.com (Opportunity1) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:03:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Is this true? Message-ID: <19970109045352986.AAE255@alphatech.a-o.com> My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. Thank you, Walter Cantrell From deviant at pooh-corner.com Wed Jan 8 21:16:49 1997 From: deviant at pooh-corner.com (The Deviant) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:16:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: <199701090132.TAA28002@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Pierre -- > > Thanks for inventing an interesting encryption method. There is a > mailing list for people interested in encryption, cypherpunks at toad.com, > and they may be interested in trying to "break" your program. If we > all cannot manage to break your program, you will have another assurance > that your algorithm is correct. > > Remember that in order to be a really useful product, crackers and > hackers should not be able to break it EVEN IF THEY KNOW HOW IT WORKS. > > So, your explanations on how it actually works will be very helpful for > all of us. > > Cypherpunks, why don't we try to crack his encryption program? It seems > like a fun exercise. > > Below is his "encrypted" file from the link above. Let's see if anyone > comes up with an idea to crack it! > > - Igor. > > ##> To help you: > ##> - Only letters a..z and A..Z is encrypted. > ##> - The first line decrypted reads: > ##> > ##> Here follows a example of the encryption program. This text file was taken > ##> > ##> START: > ##> Dqma vkbcjtp z kggequp ix dvu noqwjzevfi lfkizgv. Iquy aiay ifom gib knmdk > ##> uwwt fhw wshg toaqyt cics. Well, call it a hunch, but i'd say the first line of cyphertext is "Here follows a example of the encryption program. This text file was taken" Why do i get the feeling whoever did this wasn't very bright? It is, however, important to note that this isn't just simple substitution, as shown in the word 'Here', where the cyphertext version is not 3 characters with 1 repeating. > ##> > ##> Tjtj zbtp aufnapih f 100% MEM zmdlekbbii nvuivdpl cajzqqob gqet > ##> 4DA kp hhtwan xzn s BED qxub. Jydi vfnpxtu zm GDL gpru kn rf faids > ##> vfhjdru 3.0 wa ynmbp. > ##> > ##> Zvu jxmx jpok wc nro xuevs PBM txu EPU gsfrc MXISCSX! > ##> > ##> Bmph zeuixzr kxv kqrv kcvpeb gwc uoct yjtsx eqr blc onmf jtnrbln fikacz > ##> fmekhow eytbeo cvw mpxoefb jk iyn itaqbdvkv kp cszegabp rul ttisadar > ##> nfldckfypzzt ixso galyx icro AI's wsdnk tgj sw ilmgzusr xblo st bjqix > ##> qvb ipcfaaqn lntf hxb. Pwic cg j ppac dl git rpxz jrrvyv grrbigqa eooi > ##> fsv nlpav. > ##> > ##> Ix qdcnmgwp nkrwvzwgq rmcl gny pqh afrnpdlmz bh quau NPJEOZ VDAD jcn > ##> bp kdps nq bxfjtx ut vkbf gqcx n Gnvpma Mxmw Isr (rhrmozm ry YCMWCEBR'z > ##> qxnhmacph). > ##> > ##> Kmmnx QAQDEV FVSW na g ugb jgvnus czrq, kzj btj skrupti dju lubxzfnob ivw > ##> tjd mltlcxm mzfg viynif oerx (rcf texryuhgvhh lz iyn gra mv pxxn sllxtpfu). > ##> > ##> > ##> VPGJBN JNHZYQG AGFAHQHX > ##> ----------------------- > ##> > ##> Y. Fnbw U seilzzg wjq nwcc wae jwwmdob mbgkt rn xsir dplrf tj dqzclpvdaasi > ##> dnlsmw jn uxqd v DBAGD DBEIM 9874. > ##> V. Iyet bwxncnd mdeqmzpb 4XK bg pintxz wt aev. > ##> > ##> Yb bkr wsdx fhnm gclpwg, cap qoztki hdhrcp bbba ffsrk mm cjsm FFEXCA.TDZ > ##> kalm gytd gutndaq dpnk hdzkwg fnbw git kprvtwma ccerw. > ##> > ##> Pbg qpypmjf EJMDLJ.WKN prbthucy hxzb tbcmsfs iyn bsfijsyey hdokz: > ##> > ##> KALMF=20 > ##> ZPKQUST=20 > ##> > ##> Z ixyh ZFIYVZ.XGA crxg ckqm wam wjq nwcc qjt QMUSAXH dsi ei: > ##> > ##> bnztza=orhco.ipo > ##> zodpxw=agj386.imu tnqgq > ##> ckj=vbzb,vpm > ##> nnclpln= 30 > ##> kwcnt= 20 > ##> > ##> Stgrgwi, oavo JWVLSN.FEZ chqr jbzbr cxc gujg yw cgn heisgs. Cn > ##> vozmwxlmi kjdqk bnu 2 azha KDEIFF.NWN zs rjq bzyo g llyj gttvzon. > ##> > ##> > ##> QDUV LDLM HCASS SXXZHZTX XMEKKW LYA ESVCPNSUUY. > ##> > ##> > ##> ENFB NSPUY AAMHQYA, AFSCRKZ PAENMAC UG ZY RKJU > ##> ---------------------------------------------- > ##> > ##> L. Sxyi C pubyb mhm qshw wl "hpqob" iniym puy qkabanp "GP YPZTV NJPZ > ##> OTTFGQGK". > ##> V. Eoih zm ozqlqrwfw i pkrimcnk fefewlm cubtrfno. Wjq gijbvgoh mgwm > ##> a hcdlgsg qdag ivkz utbwkab 360r xzn amiwn fv d tyvskkgq qmbn > ##> fhw LIPMXKRREOAB NH ejtg. Ahfvmu ixb llujnrw jz tkli idqyryr xobs. > ##> > ##> K. Smre E sgs cos sphd vp "pwssh" ec. > ##> R. Ami rurw pxwufm hurmha zm utzm tqi :- > ##> > ##> END. > ##> > ##> ** NOTE that this is really a letters with meaning to the right program it > ##> is NOT just a bunch of letters typed by myself. > > > If you think this program can be used please reply to this letter and I > > will give you more information. > > > > **PLEASE reply via e-mail ---> > href="mailto:jvrooyen at liasec.infolink.co.za">CLICK HERE to reply now. > > > > Hope to hear from you soon. > > > > Regards > > Pierre van Rooyen > > > > > > - Igor. > > --Deviant PGP KeyID = E820F015 Fingerprint = 3D6AAB628E3DFAA9 F7D35736ABC56D39 A Linux machine! Because a 486 is a terrible thing to waste! -- Joe Sloan (jjs at wintermute.ucr.edu) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMtR+yTCdEh3oIPAVAQEyHQf9EyGDQj5fDhJmEeGSc6iEgoX6MX88ugCu zT0bwXzji79VLqgjEUcjvf/7A09dwgqdO2moCewmm1rnvgHq6eD/LwEIlx4t04fi 6+Qaz5T4GhkEvO81kJ3j0S2J5w9MirwmWeaoWeNu0nBkpH4iyw8FjF1rF9jwRw6A pY6+wrEVxfRINgBlgko5Yr9gQGOuUIP4GaQQ/FJx2J86z9fwDIYcUfOT0Qt2ru2c aZniCP6/YW83YKQftES/Z7chnYhknrxMeuN9aO6F7LbXu1j+4qR28AAvgl/dJQHn oO4ZfTpDjKIbS2toLBnmtFyLJShpimDd6ocN3Re4Vmzr31eN3bR72Q== =Ktmj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 8 21:51:53 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:51:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off In-Reply-To: <199701081608.IAA16175@songbird.com> Message-ID: <32D46F27.5E3F@gte.net> Kent Crispin wrote: > Dale Thorn allegedly said: > > The following table shows cypherpunks subscription activity > > for the period 12 Oct 1996 thru 07 January 1996. > > Interpretation: > > Unless the reversal of gain/loss in the 5th data row is permanent, > > c-punks are losing 0.8 bodies per day, or 294 subscribers per year. > > Actually, the constant high turnover suggests something else: > > Many people join the list and get back off again due to the high > > volume and their own personal time constraints. > As a relatively new subscriber I find the single factor most likely > to get me to leave is the garbage on the list. > And a significant portion of the traffic is discussion about that garbage. So leave, anyway. When I lived in the Deep South for several years, during which time I learned some things about the South that were seriously distorted in the propaganda you get in the North, I began to cringe every time some Yankee would come down there and say things like "Ya' know, I don't like the way you people do this or that, or the way you talk, or the way you exclude outsiders, ....". Same principle applies here. Somebody's always wanting to change things, they say it's "for the better". Bullcrap. I'd like to say you'll find out if you stick around long enough, but the traffic is rather heavy here, and I have things to do.... > > Unless Sandy can > > cut *way* back on the number of posts to the list, i.e. excise a *lot* > > more postings than just the blatant Spam and "Timmy is a....." posts, > > it won't make any difference to those people who come and go. > No. The blatant spam and "Timmy isa" posts are more annoying > than the large volume, at least in my case. The big-time spam problem should be addressed as a technical issue, not as a censorship issue. There are many good ideas, and frankly, if the spammers got *really* serious, hand-editing would *not* work no matter how hard they tried. As far as the "Timmy is a..." posts go, I would *not* want someone hand-censoring or editing these posts just to remove those annoyances. I'll bet you can find plenty of people on cypherpunks who would rather have myself and a handful of other "pests" removed than worry about the relatively small number of "Timmy is...." posts. You're not gonna make everyone happy, period. > > As to the net loss in subscribers, the moderation of the list could > > have a substantial effect on the number of subscribers short-term, > > but whatever trend we have here will continue regardless, since the > > real value and character of the list is not determined by the posts > > which are removed (unless it were that some of the character and value > > is going to be removed), but by long-term factors which are to be > > expected when the principals get older, less involved, and less > > contentious (like Sandy, wanting to avoid conflict). > Moderation may actually cause the list to grow at a faster pace. Just think about how fast Germany grew in the 1930's. From the ash heap of defeat to world-class power in what, 3 years? Amazing, huh? > While I don't agree with your analysis in the short run, in the long > run volume on the list will be *the* problem -- just due to the > growth of the net. And in the long run, undoubtedly further > structure will evolve -- there is no meaningful way to deal with say > 10000 messages per day without some way of structuring the flow. Like other things in life, such as L.A. freeway traffic, some things take care of themselves. If you know how to get around, no problem! From simond at perception.co.nz Wed Jan 8 21:55:51 1997 From: simond at perception.co.nz (Si Dawson) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 21:55:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: ok, htf do I get off this list? Message-ID: <199701090555.SAA17138@homer.perception> OK, I've now sent THREE requests to majordomo to get off this list.. I got a reply back 4 hours ago saying I was off, and the next two said I wasn't a member of the list. Interesting list (minus the spamcrap obviously) and I think the moderation will be a good thing, BUT the 20 emails I've received in the last 4 hours (since I 'officially' unsubbed) is (to say the least) far more than I (or any reasonable mortal) can deal with. How do I unsubscribe? No, more importantly, how do I stop all these damn emails turning up? Thanks in Advance Simon As I think, talk, and act.. so I shall become.. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 8 22:20:04 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 22:20:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D48A32.64B5@gte.net> Black Unicorn wrote: > On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law wrote:[snippo] > I am amazed that no one has suggested a pool of moderators with > provisions to blind a given post from attributation to a specific > moderator. (Attornies- what might be impact of a Res Ipsa attack on this > kind of set up, and incidently, on other anonymous pool arrangements?) > > As to the choice of the moderator, innocent until proven guilty, I say. > > I personally don't put much store in requiring a moderator to issue a code > > of practice. Common law and equity will do to evolve a system as it goes[mo' snippo] Here's a perfect example of two concepts, the first very thoughtful (however flawed), and the second not very thoughtful at all. "Innocent until proven guilty" is good for individuals, but it is mis- construed for organizations. Sure, officials who do public service, and moderators/censors who have to make judgements need to be protected from penalties for common everyday mistakes. But "innocent until proven guilty" is being misapplied here, to suggest advance trust for entities that haven't earned any trust. You might fool some people, but you aren't fooling me. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 8 22:32:46 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 22:32:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D4909E.927@gte.net> Toto writes: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > The Wall Street Cabal (as they say) was genuinely frightened that since > > Milken was so successful with high-yield bonds, they deliberately created > > the term Junk Bonds and flooded the markets with appropriate propaganda, > > and thereby killed off their competition. How they turned it into a > > criminal offense is truly an art. > Is this anything similar to, say, calling certain posts by list > members 'spam', flooding the list with 'external' spam, and then > using the resulting uproar to take care of perceived 'internal' problems? The old "create the provocation then step in with the solution" trick? It must have been the Final Provocation, since we're about to get the Final Solution. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 8 22:40:04 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 22:40:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D4AF23.3521@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Toto writes: > > Is this anything similar to, say, calling certain posts by list > > members 'spam', flooding the list with 'external' spam, and then > > using the resulting uproar to take care of perceived 'internal' problems? > > The old "create the provocation then step in with the solution" trick? > > It must have been the Final Provocation, since we're about to get the > Final Solution. subscribe Auschwitz at toad.com From geer at OpenMarket.com Wed Jan 8 22:47:11 1997 From: geer at OpenMarket.com (Dan Geer) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 22:47:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge In-Reply-To: <85263054520588@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> Message-ID: <199701090645.BAA07307@relay.openmarket.com> I'm still a bit nervous about what the reaction will be though - won't the US government (and anyone else pushing DES) be able to say "It took 10,000 Pentiums several weeks, noone would bother doing that, so it's safe"... this seems a good moment to remind ourselves that we will never know as much about another cipher as we know about DES. ipso facto, i'd like to simply use the efficiency of price discovery by auction and see what I can buy the DES-key-of-your-choice for. my bet: there are a lot of interesting DES keys available for less than $10K --dan From froomkin at law.miami.edu Wed Jan 8 22:53:09 1997 From: froomkin at law.miami.edu (Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 22:53:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trade secret liabilty [Was Re: Sandy and I will] Message-ID: a reliable friend wrote to me to say ... The Uniform Trade Secrets Act (which has been adopted by a majority of jurisdiction) provides for liability of a third party who knows or has reason to know that information he recieves or discloses was acquired by improper means or under circumstances giving rise to a fiduciary duty OR that he knows to be proprietary but which he recieved by accident or mistake. Depending on the facts, the language could encompass a moderator who knew about or turned a blind eye to distribution of trade secrets on his list. A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin at law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 8 22:56:47 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 22:56:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: URGENT: Fri 10Jan 9:30AM Wash,DC: Karn appeals, come to the hearing! In-Reply-To: <199701082255.OAA20606@toad.com> Message-ID: <32D4964E.C99@gte.net> Just look at all the wonderful snippets I clipped from John Gilmore's latest post to the cypherpunks list! John Gilmore wrote: > Friends of crypto freedom should definitely attend.Freedom was a sacred word where I grew up, John. Too bad it will no longer apply on the list. > your rights are very much at stake here.You can say that again! > restrictions on distribution of encryption software violate the First > ...Amendments...., and are "arbitrary, capricious and invalid"How about distribution of ideas on the list, without censorship disguised as "moderation"? > ...will argue that its rules are its own business...Must be a self-fulfilling prophecy, huh? > ...that it is legitimate to regulate free speech and publication...Not only legitimate for Gilmore/Sandfort, but presented as a kinder, gentler way of regulating the list. > The Electronic Frontier Foundation....protect privacy, free expression, > and access to online resources and information.Don't do as I do, just do as I say. (What a hypocrite) From gemery at earthlink.net Wed Jan 8 23:21:46 1997 From: gemery at earthlink.net (gemery at earthlink.net) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 23:21:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: FREE LIFE SAVING MESSAGE Message-ID: <199701090721.XAA21655@iberia.it.earthlink.net> I_Love_SPAM, To get your free life saving audio cassette called " Dead Doctors Don't Lie " please go to this URL, http://home.earthlink.net/~grbon/index.html This tape has 2 minutes that most companies leave out!!! We have what the Doctor ordered. Doctor Joel Wallach-past nominee for the Nobel Prize-Medicine explains why the average age of an M.D. is only 58 yrs. Please call or e-mail us for our families personal testimonies.Reading this message was not a waste of your time as this advice - in all likelyhood saved two members of my family from losing thier lives. Thanks for your time and may God Bless You all. p.s. Please use e-mail on web page-thank you! Business opportunity also available. To be removed from our free offers mailing list please put remove in the subject box and return to author and of course we are sorry for any inconvenience. We also have a free 888# for your home offer, no monthly charge-one time set up $9.95 From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 8 23:26:33 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 23:26:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: <199701090120.TAA27868@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32D49D4B.7222@gte.net> Toto wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Bill Stewart wrote: > > Toto wrote: > > > Like the legitimate leader of a country, say, for instance...Hitler? > > > Or a legitimate law enforcement agency, say, for instance...the Gestapo? > Key Recovery will, in all likelihood, give people who watch IBM's > airline ads a 'higher level' sense of 'false security'. > I am sure that their motto will be, "Key Recovery--Trust Us." > To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a hole in it.Forgive me (please!) if this is not on-topic, but believe it or not, in this day and age of safe sex, you can go around Los Angeles and pick up non-porn (free, distributed at record stores) gay-oriented magazines which carry large full-page ads for sexual lubricants, and guess what - you can't use a condom with those lubricants! It says so right in the ad! From unicorn at schloss.li Wed Jan 8 23:31:16 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 23:31:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: New Release: Universal Data Cryptography Module V2.0 In-Reply-To: <970108211056_1622671474@emout11.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. Extensive research > shows that IMDMP is more advanced than DES, RSA, IDEA, and PGP. What research? What is "extensive?" What is "more advanced?" > > UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... > o Is more advanced than all of the industry standard encryption algorithms. By who's standard? > o Allows encryption keys as large as 256 bytes (2048 bits). As if these directly correlate. > o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. The purpose of which is...? > o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. What encryption doesn't? > o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. Says who? > o Processes files as large as 2,147,483,390 bytes. Why is there a limit? -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From everheul at mail.rijnhaave.nl Wed Jan 8 23:42:32 1997 From: everheul at mail.rijnhaave.nl (Eric Verheul) Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 23:42:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines Message-ID: <199701090741.IAA28828@mail.rijnhaave.nl> > To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a > hole in it. No thanks. Actually, on microscopical level *all* condoms have holes in them; the holes are just small enough for you not to worry bout it. The same applies to (good!) Key Recovery cryptography: there are holes but not big enough for you to worry about! > > Toto > Eric //My life-time-emailadress is Eric.Verheul at pobox.com //Use this when emails start bouncing when I have //switched to my next (inadequate) Internet-provider From spanky at europa.com Thu Jan 9 00:10:53 1997 From: spanky at europa.com (Pass me another!) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 00:10:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: About ICF(International Cryptography Framework) In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970108022542.006e8f7c@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: <32D4AA91.D4@europa.com> John Young wrote: > > Here are two docs on ICF which might be helpful: > > http://jya.com/halicf.htm (Hal Finney's critique posted to c'punks) > > http://jya.com/declan.htm (news reports) > > John Thanks a ton...I appreciate it...I checked them out. They say that this tech may not be available for some time...however, I feel that may not be necessarily true...tech is coming and going much faster these days and according to Ray Bamford's stance at HP, he seems to think that this may soon(within the next year) become a viable reality. Can I ask what your stance and views are on this issue? And any ideas as to what we as a community can do about this NAZI-istic progression of freedoms?? -spanky From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 9 00:26:17 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 00:26:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: About ICF(International Cryptography Framework) In-Reply-To: <32D2E95B.614E@europa.com> Message-ID: <32D4C827.4FA4@sk.sympatico.ca> Pass me another! wrote: > Okay...explain a done deal... A 'done deal' is where the Big Boys make all the decisions for the rest of us, divide up the pie, and live happily ever after. (Unless, of course, somebody decides their piece of the pie isn't big enough and they all start stabbing each other in the back.) > I thought that at > one point the clipper chip was a done deal, but once it met the public > eye, we blinked and rubbed that speck of dirt out....or so we thought. > Where is our voice? Does it no longer even exist???? Sure it does. We get to say "Yes." and "How wonderful" as the Big Boys slip us the cold, hard one from behind. > > > I've also managed to get a hold of Ray Bamford > > > (ray_bamford at hp.com)at HP > > > who seems to have some PR role in this wool over the eyes attempt. > > > > When you use the word 'censorship', does he counter-attack with the > > word 'moderation'? > > Geeeeee....how'd you guess?....Man these bootlickers make me sick. > What's worse is some of these cronies I actually used to work with on a > daily basis...but alas....because I was not bootlicker quality, I could > no longer stay with the company I was working for.....Not Microsoft, not > HP, not IBM...but damn those DAMNED chipmakers.... The problem is that, once you're done licking their boots, they want you to set your sights a little higher. Toto From dimple at pacific.net.sg Thu Jan 9 00:49:12 1997 From: dimple at pacific.net.sg (dimple at pacific.net.sg) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 00:49:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines Message-ID: <199701090849.QAA17079@darwin.pacific.net.sg> The commercials between the movie and news show on the airline include an IBM spot on their new Key Recovery software. Sigh. The explanations they gave were mixed; one person was talking about making sure that if you lose the key that people with a legitimate need to access the material can do it. The other example they gave, with pictures, was along the lines of "Suppose you're going on vacation and you want to leave a key with a neighbor to feed the dog. A safe way to do it would be to put your house key in a lockbox that needs several keys to open it, and give those keys to people you trust." Yeah, right - cops can get in, but Dog's gonna get pretty hungry.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From lucifer at dhp.com Thu Jan 9 00:55:15 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 00:55:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Aeon Flux Message-ID: <199701090855.DAA17797@dhp.com> - From SButler at chemson.com Thu Jan 9 01:56:35 1997 From: SButler at chemson.com (Butler, Scott) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 01:56:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sanderson. Message-ID: After reading all of these people babbling on about giving a vote of confidence for Sandy I decided that I should also. I have full confidence in Sandy:-) (Well it normally works over here in the U.K...if a football manager receives a vote of confidence from the board of directors it is a foregone conclusion that his resignation will be handed in or his P45 will be handed out within days!) Scott From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jan 9 02:08:57 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 02:08:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: <199701090741.IAA28828@mail.rijnhaave.nl> Message-ID: <199701091007.EAA05240@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701090741.IAA28828 at mail.rijnhaave.nl>, on 01/09/97 at 05:03 AM, "Eric Verheul" said: >> To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a >> hole in it. No thanks. >Actually, on microscopical level *all* condoms have holes in them; >the holes are just small enough for you not to worry bout it. The same >applies to (good!) Key Recovery cryptography: there are holes but not >big enough for you to worry about! You are joking right?? Well I guess I will not need to worry about them since I will never run any GAK software reguardless how may laws the jackboots in DC pass. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: If Windows sucked it would be good for something. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtTCGY9Co1n+aLhhAQGCGQP/cVZeW8WlkbeS/G7Xm/LeqRgyDmQxhGRZ vgcB0aBuAekpkMHrzm7JxfIqxykKZhpAulD478MHet0w1rC1+m50ac7dQ9CwmE/x brhNZV9ziBJkBSPOx4dZYnMTh9AqEZp2TOQ/vm6MVWFEFyVq8Y9f+9oAnfs+2iJF R4HBGDmUQ6g= =jMcQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dans at pleaseread.com Thu Jan 9 02:27:15 1997 From: dans at pleaseread.com (dans at pleaseread.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 02:27:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Free Samples, Software, and MoreI would like to invite you, as an internet user, to be part of a marketing test where you can get FREE software, FREE Samples, and FREE computer related money making offers from manufacturers nationwide. You may be asked to give your opinion, but there is no obligation. Message-ID: <199701091007.FAA11268@emin06.mail.aol.com> even if you had their addresses! If do not want to get anymore e-mail reports like this, please send email to dans at pleaseread.com with the word "REMOVE" in the subject or the body. -Lisa From JOABJ at delphi.com Thu Jan 9 03:55:50 1997 From: JOABJ at delphi.com (SECRET AGENT 66) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 03:55:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: AOL: The Happy Hacker Message-ID: <01IDZZM7GVCY8X073K@delphi.com> From: IN%"destiny at crl.com" "David Cassel" 9-JAN-1997 05:27:47.48 To: IN%"aol-list at cloud9.net" "The AOL List" CC: Subj: The AOL List: The Happy Hacker Return-path: Received: from cloud9.net ("port 1250"@cloud9.net) by delphi.com (PMDF V5.0-7 #10880) id <01IDZXJME7BK90PW97 at delphi.com>; Thu, 09 Jan 1997 05:27:33 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordomo at localhost) by cloud9.net (8.8.4/cloud9-1.0) id EAA02888 for aol-list-outgoing; Thu, 09 Jan 1997 04:42:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from crl.crl.com (unknown at crl.com [165.113.1.12]) by cloud9.net (8.8.4/cloud9-1.0) with SMTP id EAA02882 for ; Thu, 09 Jan 1997 04:42:56 -0500 (EST) Received: by crl.crl.com id AA27763 (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for The AOL List ); Thu, 09 Jan 1997 01:32:41 -0800 Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 01:32:39 -0800 (PST) From: David Cassel Subject: The AOL List: The Happy Hacker Sender: owner-aol-list at cloud9.net To: The AOL List Message-id: MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Precedence: bulk T h e H a p p y H a c k e r ~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~ In 1995 a hacker named Happy Hardcore wrote a program that granted unlimited free access to AOL. Yesterday AOL issued a press release applauding his conviction in a court in Virginia. (http://www.prnewswire.com/pdata/19970108-DCW022.html) According to press accounts, Nicholas Ryan -- who studies computer science at Yale university -- was found guilty of a felony offense under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act: he illegally accessed AOL "and violated AOL's terms of service". But AOL's press release doesn't tell the whole story. The Washington Post reported that in fact, AOL dropped over 370,000 subscribers between March and June of 1996 "for credit card fraud, hacking, etc." [9/16/96] Up until September of 1995, AOL didn't even verify the authenticity of credit card information submitted for free-trial accounts. (And as of last year, they'd distributed over 100 million of them.) Monday AOL shut local phone access to the entire nation of Russia because it couldn't collect enough accurate information to cover their expenses. Ryan was targeted because he created a program used by other hackers--and because he publicly taunted AOL in the program's documentation. He included internal AOL e-mail (stolen by other hackers) discussing the company's plans to thwart his program. Ryan wasn't charged with creating the program, but for accessing the system illegally--a crime he shared with nearly half a million others. For six months of access, he faces a maximum of five years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Under AOL's new value plan, the stolen time would have a cash value of $60. AOL's public statements indicate they want to appear tough on hackers -- especially now that they're seeking revenue from on-line transactions. A press release announcing the appointment of a vice president to AOL's optimistically-named "Integrity Assurance" division stressed her previous employment at the CIA--saying Tatiana Gau wants to "improve the world's most secure online environment". (The phrase "most secure" appeared three times.) Yesterday's announcement even asserted AOL had achieved "the first successful computer fraud prosecution involving an Internet online network." (One technology correspondent quipped, "Maybe it means that Kevin Mitnick is just a figment of Tsutomu Shimomoura's imagination.") AOL's announcement went so far as to claim that AOL is safer than the internet because AOL uses a private network. But safety still depends on how a network is administered. In 1995, a beta of AOL's telnet client put users directly behind their firewalls--and earlier that year, AOL's mail server was accessible via telnet, allowing forged mail from any AOL address. Hackers even took the stage during a 1995 celebrity appearance on AOL--then taunted the scheduled guest and the event sponsors. (http://www.aolsucks.org/security/recondite.html). "I am sure Corporate Communications will be getting some questions about it," read an internal e-mail titled "Hacker Attack In the Rotunda Last Night". Ironically, that message later ended up on the AOL Security Page--"What AOL Does Not Tell You." http://www.netvirtual.com/blank/aol) The next month AOL's CEO Steve Case wrote a letter to all users about hacker problems, arguing that "it happens everywhere", and adding that "when we discover hackers", AOL "aggressively take measures to head them off". But within days of that announcement, hackers were posting internal mail that they'd stolen to the internet. They continued undaunted, posting internal memos, and even Case's home address. In probably the most embarrassing development, in-house mail ABOUT the hackers was being circulated BY The hackers (ftp://ftp.crl.com/users/de/destiny/aol/hacker1) At the time, AOL spokeswoman Pam McGraw told me, "We've encountered these problems in the past, and we make changes to the service as appropriate-- and as we can". The hackers had reverse-engineered AOL's "Rainman" software, which had been mistakenly stored in AOL file libraries accessible by their hundreds of remote staffers. The company fumbled for an explanation--Pam McGraw told the press AOL believed the heist was effected with the Visual Basic macro program AOHell. (Some later attributed her remarks to a deliberate disinformation campaign--especially when, to suppress the program's distribution, AOL later told Boardwatch magazine AOHell contained built-in child pornography. ftp://ftp.boardwatch.com/aohell.txt) But AOL's attempts to cover-up security breaches left their members even more vulnerable. "I went to a bunch of new member chat rooms, used AOHell to fish for passwords, and got 25 of them," one Usenet poster gloated. "Doesn't AOL tell its users to not do that?" There were worse abuses. When AOL realized hackers could "sniff" passwords during TCP/IP connections, staffers say they were warned--but not the customers. "I hope that AOL alerts the General Membership to this problem in a timely manner," one staffer complained, "and not, as in the previous situation, wait until they are forced to by negative news coverage." Sources had told the Wall Street Journal that the 1995 security breach included hackers distributing customer credit card numbers in AOL hacker chat rooms, and AOL had warned staffers about the breach--but didn't tell their users (until the story broke in nationwide news reports.) The staffers complained AOL's hush-hush policy was aimed more at protecting their image than protecting their customers. In a memo warning staffers not to speak to the press, Steve Case countered that "We need everyone's support...to protect AOL's interest". That even applied AOL's content providers. Shortly before hackers took the stage at his live event, the producer of AOL's MacWorld area asked AOL about earlier problems. He told me AOL had attributed them to "some security holes that AOL promised were closed." It was when hackers took the stage that he found they were not. Even AOL's latest statements are suspect. The press release claims that AOL "immediately upgraded its security measures to prevent AOL4FREE or any similar software from working". But Nicholas Ryan told a different story. "AOL found a way to detect users of AOL4Free," began the program's documentation. "However, with only a few lines of additional code AOL4Free is again undetectable!" Tatiana Gau's claims that AOL has a "zero tolerance" policy for hackers is patently implausible. Macromedia's software piracy suit fingered 67 screen names in 1995. And over 70 came into play for the "Hacker Riot" that November--a coordinated attack on the New Member Lounges (http://www.getnet.com/~onion/work/planetmag/current/features/aolside.html) lasting several hours and affecting hundreds of users. This August AOL's Chief Financial Officer even pointed to the fake accounts as a possible culprit for the high figures on their subscriber churn rate. And just six weeks ago hackers doctored text at AOL keyword: legal. (http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,5712,00.html). Even yesterday, aolsucks.org received the comment, "AOL SUX!!!!! Thats why I make fake accounts with them!!!" Ironically, the documentation for AOL4Free ends with the classic hacker manifesto "The Conscience of a Hacker." The 1986 document ends, "I am a criminal. My crime is that of curiosity..." And most technology pundits agree. AOL's MacWorld area was mailbombed for a week and a half, with dozens of junk posts to its bulletin boards. "We hate that," their producer told me. "Does that mean the FBI needs to be brought in? Probably not." Chris Flores of Microsoft's Developer Division agreed. "If a Visual Basic program can automate hitting this key and hitting that key, the blame should be on AOL for allowing a certain keystroke to be hit... They should think of AOHell as a blessing. Since they know about it, they know that they have a fault in their system." MacWorld's producer added, "You've got to admire the hacker ethic in a certain way, because it's how things get done...how holes get patched." Indeed, as a result of the hacker presence, AOL began accompanying all e-mail and instant messages with a warning in red letters--that AOL staff will never ask you for your password. One Florida resident with a degree in criminology pointed out on Usenet that this alone wouldn't be sufficient--because password-fishers were incorporating the warnings into their scams! ("Enter your password to confirm that you understand the warning below." "Enter your password now to turn on pass-block, which offers protection beyond the simple password warning given below.") Now AOL's 3.0 software requires users to download small software changes before they can access the system. Unfortunately, there's no way to opt out--which creates a major security hole waiting to backfire. In any case, the hacker presence belies AOL's claims of the "highest level of security". In fact, Wired News reported that "Gau is confident, but she knows she has her work cut out for her. She's already spotted a link on the Web announcing her arrival. It was titled 'Hackers are laughing.'". It was my page. THE LAST LAUGH Within days of its creations, AOL threatened the AOL Security page with charges of copyright infringement. Unfortunately, the tactic inspired three other sites to mirror the documents--which are still there to this day. David Cassel More Information - http://www.wco.com/~destiny/time.htm ~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~ Please forward with subscription information and headers in-tact. To subscribe to this moderated list, send a message to MAJORDOMO at CLOUD9.NET containing the phrase SUBSCRIBE AOL-LIST in the message body. To unsubscribe send a message saying UNSUBSCRIBE AOL-LIST to MAJORDOMO at CLOUD9.NET ~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~++~ From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jan 9 04:21:16 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 04:21:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Esnoop Corrections Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970109121644.006793f4@pop.pipeline.com> RH helpfully noted errors in a few URLs in the "Electronic Surveillance" doc which have been corrected: http://jya.com/esnoop.htm From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jan 9 04:22:08 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 04:22:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Esnoop Corrections Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970109121737.00695328@pop.pipeline.com> RH helpfully noted errors in a few URLs in the "Electronic Surveillance" doc which have been corrected: http://jya.com/esnoop.htm From jccsendto4 at juno.com Thu Jan 9 04:22:55 1997 From: jccsendto4 at juno.com (jccsendto4 at juno.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 04:22:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: FREEEEEE!!!!!! Message-ID: <199701091222.EAA06698@dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com> While you are reading this I'll have made MORE MONEY!!! Can you say the same thing? If NOT.... DO NOT HIT REPLY.....just follow these three simple steps; ....type in address to jcc at mlweb.com ....type in subject FREE ....type in body MONEY You will receive via e-mail a comprehensive,dynamic FREE plan on how YOU can be doing the same thing! It really does work, I'm proof it does. No, I'm not a company or organization, I'm someone like you...Everyday hard worker who has come across a plan that puts CASH in my mailbox almost every day! Read it at your leisure after receiving and printing your FREE copy and then DO IT!! You'll be glad you did! From boursy at earthlink.net Thu Jan 9 04:25:05 1997 From: boursy at earthlink.net (Stephen Boursy) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 04:25:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D4E3B1.2B54@earthlink.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Dave Hayes writes: > >> Black Unicorn writes: >> >> > More fear from Mr. Thorn that his own time in the spotlight might be >> > drawing to a close. God forbid his captive audience might vanish. >> >> Tell me, how can an audience be captive when they control the "delete" >> key? > > Not only that - the "captive" audience has announced time and again > that they've killfiled me, Dale, aga, and anyone else who dares to > say something they don't like. They already have the power to ignore > anyone they don't want to listen to. They want to stop Dale from > communicating with the _non-captive audience that chooses not to > ignore him. > > P.S. They lie about their killfiles, of course - Ray Arachelian, > Paul Bradley, et al follow up on everything posted by the people > they claim to have killfiled! Their follow-ups are obsessive and > repetitive: "I've *plonked* you, so I have the last word, nyah > nyah". And the next day they reply to the same people they claim > to be ignoring. > Those who publically *plonk* always lie from my experiences--they are dishonest people. Most who publically killfile not only still read you but they are already obsessed with you and follow your every word--their sole goal (and this is the sad part about their lives) is to try to prevent others from reading your words. Steve > > Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave at jetcafe.org > > Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet > > > > A voice whispered to me last night. It said: "There is no such thing > > as a voice whispering in the night!" > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 9 04:30:15 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 04:30:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Inflation-index bonds and private e-currency In-Reply-To: <32D4909E.927@gte.net> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > Toto writes: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > The Wall Street Cabal (as they say) was genuinely frightened that since > > > Milken was so successful with high-yield bonds, they deliberately created > > > the term Junk Bonds and flooded the markets with appropriate propaganda, > > > and thereby killed off their competition. How they turned it into a > > > criminal offense is truly an art. > > > Is this anything similar to, say, calling certain posts by list > > members 'spam', flooding the list with 'external' spam, and then > > using the resulting uproar to take care of perceived 'internal' problems? > > The old "create the provocation then step in with the solution" trick? > > It must have been the Final Provocation, since we're about to get the > Final Solution. Look, the Reichstag is on fire! --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ares at imaginet-us.net Thu Jan 9 05:25:06 1997 From: ares at imaginet-us.net (Ares GodOfWar) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 05:25:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: SafePassage Message-ID: <32D4F0D2.5DB6@imaginet-us.net> does anyone happen to have a copy of safepassage, the web proxy layin around??? i am in a big bind & i need it ;] From roy at sendai.scytale.com Thu Jan 9 05:34:31 1997 From: roy at sendai.scytale.com (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 05:34:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: New Release: Universal Data Cryptography Module V2.0 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <970109.064711.6l4.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In list.cypherpunks, unicorn at schloss.li writes: > On Wed, 8 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: >> o Processes files as large as 2,147,483,390 bytes. > > Why is there a limit? It's an MS-DOS limit. The filesystem only can store a file 2^31 bytes long, because the it stores the file size as a 32 bit signed integer. What's interesting is that his stated limit is 258 bytes less than the maximum file size, and his stated maximum key size is 256 bytes. Makes a guy wonder just what's in that 258 byte header. - -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy at scytale.com DNRC Minister Plenipotentiary of All Things Confusing, Software Division PGP Public Key fingerprint = 31 86 EC B9 DB 76 A7 54 13 0B 6A 6B CC 09 18 B6 Key available from pubkey at scytale.com, which works now -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtTpnxvikii9febJAQEdSAQAk0CuiCdpEojlZ9qguUbDQbpafAqnmQIO CGuhAyDu/xQEk116lOsEtBjIYmqnxxsJ0ie1n7XB1dnJOs4oZ78wNvwvWq+5uUnw huOygZ3anmd7WjGBtNn+Kwtr24GaSHqdR0MnDQtBpZJazInl9lajLbC4K2a3Pegn P6js+VMS2NU= =uCp6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From serw30 at laf.cioe.com Thu Jan 9 07:02:45 1997 From: serw30 at laf.cioe.com (serw30 at laf.cioe.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:02:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation and the Polymorphic Virus Message-ID: <199701091505.KAA02069@laf.cioe.com> > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > serw30 at laf.cioe.com writes: > > Yes, lets create polymorphic viruses and CPU cycle stealing Java > > applets. Maybe even a new and improved Internet worm... > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM writes: > "Cypher punks" can't write any code - be it mail filters, viruses, or crypto. > Aw, surely "Cypher punks" can write some sort of code. Batch files, Macros for Word, programs for Logo or Turtle graphics, tell me it isn't so! Eric From Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com Thu Jan 9 07:13:23 1997 From: Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen Patrick) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:13:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: New Release: Universal Data Cryptography Module V2.0 Message-ID: _______________________________________________________________________________ From: Black Unicorn on Thu, Jan 9, 1997 6:10 >On Wed, 8 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > >> Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. Extensive research >> shows that IMDMP is more advanced than DES, RSA, IDEA, and PGP. > >What research? >What is "extensive?" >What is "more advanced?" Paraphrasing a glossary of Comp-Sci terms I received in email, and using it to translate the second sentence above "Extensive research . . . PGP.": After trying unsuccessfully to get the damned thing to work for a very long time, we finally got it to work. Now it's so patched up we can't figure out what it's doing. PM From ubs95 at earthlink.net Thu Jan 9 07:27:22 1997 From: ubs95 at earthlink.net (ubs95 at earthlink.net) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:27:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Interested in making extra income? Message-ID: <199701091527.HAA03723@latvia.it.earthlink.net> Suck_My_Big_Juicy_Cock, Hello! This is the only message you will recieve from us, so if you are not interested, we are sorry for the intrusion, just delete and we will not bother you again. We need help in our mail order dept. Would you like to be a catalog distrubutor? Profits are very good! For more information, DO NOT CLICK REPLY........ Send your inquirys to: UBS95 at IX.NETCOM.COM From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 9 07:38:29 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 07:38:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: <199701090741.IAA28828@mail.rijnhaave.nl> Message-ID: <32D50F11.77D1@gte.net> Eric Verheul wrote: > > To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a > > hole in it. No thanks. > Actually, on microscopical level *all* condoms have holes in them; > the holes are just small enough for you not to worry bout it. The same > applies to (good!) Key Recovery cryptography: there are holes but not > big enough for you to worry about! Not worry? Really? What about those pesky little virii that are *much* smaller than the holes in the condoms? From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jan 9 08:11:13 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 08:11:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Opens Bin Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970109160641.008b743c@pop.pipeline.com> IBM announced today that it will make available free to the public its vast bin of 2 million US patents formerly accessible only to its own engineers and attorneys: http://patent.womplex.ibm.com/ Welcome to the IBM Patent Server. With this World Wide Web server, IBM lets you access over 26 years of U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) patent descriptions as well as the last ten years of images. The first entries date back to January 5, 1971. You can search, retrieve and study over two million patents. NYT has a report about it: www.nytimes.com From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jan 9 08:11:50 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 08:11:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crypto Punch Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970109160701.00882fc8@pop.pipeline.com> Punch in "cryptography" at the IBM patent site and ogle: you won't believe your oozing orbs. http://patent.womplex.ibm.com/ Then try other bell-ringers of this punch-drunk ring. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 9 08:33:05 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 08:33:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: <199701090118.TAA27824@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > Black Unicorn wrote: > > > > On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > > > > C'punks, > > > > > > On Sun, 5 Jan 1997, Black Unicorn wrote: > > > > > > > How will borderline posts be dealt with? Posts that contain a great de > > > > of content and thoughful discussion and still manage to contain flames? > > > > > > > > Will flames be an automatic boot for a post (zero tolerance), or will t > > > > be balanced against post content? > > > > > > Zero tolerance will be my first approximation. I may modify > > > that as I see how things really work out. So far, though, I > > > don't recall see any of those "high content with flames" animals. > > > Most posts are one or the other. > > > > Haven't you been reading my stuff? > > > > Indeed, I suggest a zero tolerance policy for posts of Prof. Black > Unicorn where content is mixed with flames. > > - Igor. I suggest zero tolerance of Black Unicorn unless and until someone reveals his real name. ObModeratorFodder: Fuck the Armenians. Asshole censor John Gilmore likes to suck big dicks. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Thu Jan 9 09:42:07 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 09:42:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: SSL Insecurity Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970109124118.00920db0@gateway.grumman.com> A while back, someone posted an article on the insecurity of Netscape's implementation of SSL. Can someone send me back that article, or a few pointers as to where I can find related information? Thanks, Rick Rick Osborne / osborne at gateway.grumman.com / Northrop Grumman Corporation ------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Get that finger out of your ear! You don't know where that finger's been!" From sls123 at prodigy.net Thu Jan 9 10:25:59 1997 From: sls123 at prodigy.net (sls123 at prodigy.net) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 10:25:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Let you know!! Message-ID: <199701091823.NAA80912@mail1y-int.prodigy.net> Hi, Please forgive me for this e-mail, but I felt I just had to let more people know about this and get in on the ground floor! If you don't want to read it, please type "REMOVE" in the subject line. I won't contact you again. The program I am involved in incorporates "Spillover". Spillover is probably one of the best ideas ever developed for network marketing. Here's why: Anyone I sponsor after you, will probably be placed under you. You then earn commissions on these new people as if you had signed them up! Why? The way the program works I am trying to fill my downline and I can only have so many people on each level. After a given level is full, anyone else I sponsor "spills over" to the next level. This is where they start getting placed under you. So you see, it doesn't matter if you sign them up or I do, in the end the result is the same. I just signed up Monday and I already have 10 members in my downline, just from SPILLOVER! Nest Egg is in pre-Launch until April 1st, 1997 * You will receive check each month * * Free Sign Up! * The program just started, in fact it has less than 550 members. This IS the ground floor! The company is advertising in several major print publications next month! I have been in several MLM's and I can finally say; "This is the one I've been looking for!" If you know what it's like to lose sleep because your so exited, email me NOW! Don't miss this opportunity, email me for URL & sponsor information. Thanks, Mark From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 9 10:33:14 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 10:33:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: <199701091007.EAA05240@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: "William H. Geiger III" writes: > Well I guess I will not need to worry about them since I will never run any G > reguardless how may laws the jackboots in DC pass. That's from the same guy who endorses censorship on this mailing list... --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 9 10:34:15 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 10:34:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Cypher punks" can't write code In-Reply-To: <199701091505.KAA02069@laf.cioe.com> Message-ID: serw30 at laf.cioe.com writes: > > serw30 at laf.cioe.com writes: > > > Yes, lets create polymorphic viruses and CPU cycle stealing Java > > > applets. Maybe even a new and improved Internet worm... > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM writes: > > "Cypher punks" can't write any code - be it mail filters, viruses, or crypt > > > Aw, surely "Cypher punks" can write some sort of code. Batch files, > Macros for Word, programs for Logo or Turtle graphics, tell me it > isn't so! > Eric It isn't so. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From haystack at cow.net Thu Jan 9 11:06:49 1997 From: haystack at cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 11:06:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <9701091849.AA20178@cow.net> A warning label ought to be tattooed on Tim C. May's head, saying `Warning: shit content under pressure'. o-:^>___? Tim C. May `~~c--^c' From zachb at netcom.com Thu Jan 9 11:49:26 1997 From: zachb at netcom.com (Z.B.) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 11:49:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off In-Reply-To: <32D4E3B1.2B54@earthlink.net> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Stephen Boursy wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Dave Hayes writes: > > > >> Black Unicorn writes: > >> > >> > More fear from Mr. Thorn that his own time in the spotlight might be > >> > drawing to a close. God forbid his captive audience might vanish. > >> > >> Tell me, how can an audience be captive when they control the "delete" > >> key? [snip] > > > > > > P.S. They lie about their killfiles, of course - Ray Arachelian, > > Paul Bradley, et al follow up on everything posted by the people > > they claim to have killfiled! Their follow-ups are obsessive and > > repetitive: "I've *plonked* you, so I have the last word, nyah > > nyah". And the next day they reply to the same people they claim > > to be ignoring. > > > > Those who publically *plonk* always lie from my experiences--they > are dishonest people. Most who publically killfile not only still > read you but they are already obsessed with you and follow your > every word--their sole goal (and this is the sad part about their > lives) is to try to prevent others from reading your words. > > Steve > Not necessarily, Steve - some people plonk others by filtering their mail to a folder called "trash" or "crap-messages" or whatever, so they don't have to read them at the same time they read the rest of their messages. Then they go through the trash folder later on just to see if they threw out anything that they shouldn't have, see the messages by the people they killfiled, and reply to some of them. They HAVE plonked the person, but they can still read and reply to the plonked messages if they choose. IMO, this is a better way to killfile than redirecting everything to /dev/null, because if someone has a history of violently flaming whatever you say (like some people on this list who shall remain nameless), you don't have to read their flames at the same time with the rest of the mail, but still have the option of reading and replying to them later on if you so choose. Zach Babayco zachb at netcom.com <-------finger for PGP public key If you need to know how to set up a mail filter or defend against emailbombs, send me a message with the words "get helpfile" (without the " marks) in the SUBJECT: header, *NOT THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE!* I have several useful FAQs and documents available. From hal at rain.org Thu Jan 9 12:19:59 1997 From: hal at rain.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 12:19:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IDEA] Cypherpunks Super Computer (was Re: The Upcoming DES Challenge) Message-ID: <199701092015.MAA00707@crypt.hfinney.com> [Sorry if this is a re-post...] From: "Frank O'Dwyer" > However, what if there was a safe scripting language with bignum > arithmetic and other cryptographic primitives, and what if > lots of people ran a service that would accept scripts in > that language and respond with the answer? Say, a Safe-TCL > interface to Peter Gutmann's cryptlib, running at idle > priority? Sort of like a distributed batch queue, and also > a bit like the way jobs are (were?) submitted to Crays. The > Cypherpunks Super Computer. It need not be significantly slower > than raw code if the primitives are high level enough. A few years ago I coded up a TCL interface to Pr0duct Cypher's PGPTOOLS library. It did bignum arithmetic from the command line, and also let you use MD5 and IDEA on files and buffers. Unfortunately I had a major disk crash and was never able to recover my last version, and I never got back to it. Safe-TCL has never gotten the scrutiny of Java, but IMO if it ever does it will be found to suffer from its own flaws. At this point I think Java is farther along the path to safety. I do like the idea of a widely available, installed, crypto-capable scripting language. This would be an ideal basis for trying out new crypto protocols and algorithms, without having to write a whole program from scratch. We have been talking about setting up DC nets for years, for example. The concept is so simple as to be almost trivial. But the infrastructure is the hard part - dealing with the I/O issues, the multiple architectures, all the configuration issues. I suspect that Java, when it gets its security API, may be a good candidate for this kind of system. It's already got high level socket I/O, and with a bignum package and some basic crypto primitives like one way functions, you could do a lot with it. You still have the problem of trading off safety for utility, though. Hal From hal at rain.org Thu Jan 9 12:20:00 1997 From: hal at rain.org (Hal Finney) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 12:20:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IDEA] Cypherpunks Super Computer (was Re: The Upcoming DES Challenge) Message-ID: <199701092014.MAA00701@crypt.hfinney.com> From: "Frank O'Dwyer" > However, what if there was a safe scripting language with bignum > arithmetic and other cryptographic primitives, and what if > lots of people ran a service that would accept scripts in > that language and respond with the answer? Say, a Safe-TCL > interface to Peter Gutmann's cryptlib, running at idle > priority? Sort of like a distributed batch queue, and also > a bit like the way jobs are (were?) submitted to Crays. The > Cypherpunks Super Computer. It need not be significantly slower > than raw code if the primitives are high level enough. A few years ago I coded up a TCL interface to Pr0duct Cypher's PGPTOOLS library. It did bignum arithmetic from the command line, and also let you use MD5 and IDEA on files and buffers. Unfortunately I had a major disk crash and was never able to recover my last version, and I never got back to it. Safe-TCL has never gotten the scrutiny of Java, but IMO if it ever does it will be found to suffer from its own flaws. At this point I think Java is farther along the path to safety. I do like the idea of a widely available, installed, crypto-capable scripting language. This would be an ideal basis for trying out new crypto protocols and algorithms, without having to write a whole program from scratch. We have been talking about setting up DC nets for years, for example. The concept is so simple as to be almost trivial. But the infrastructure is the hard part - dealing with the I/O issues, the multiple architectures, all the configuration issues. I suspect that Java, when it gets its security API, may be a good candidate for this kind of system. It's already got high level socket I/O, and with a bignum package and some basic crypto primitives like one way functions, you could do a lot with it. You still have the problem of trading off safety for utility, though. Hal From haystack at cow.net Thu Jan 9 12:41:29 1997 From: haystack at cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 12:41:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <9701092024.AA21298@cow.net> > >The Path To Revolution > >You Don't Have To Be There To Experience It > >By Linton Weeks >Washington Post Staff Writer >Thursday, January 9 1997; Page C5 >The Washington Post > >The computer is a revolutionary tool. > >It really is. Revolutionaries, counterrevolutionaries, >extremist groups, radical wings, separatist movements, >cults, and their critics and sympathizers are aswarm on >the Net. Never before have so many people had direct access >to information from every angle. It's like a teeming >hive of Gutenbergs. > >For instance, the Tupac Amaru Revolutionary Movement, >the Peruvian guerrillas who took hostages in the Japanese >embassy in Lima just before Christmas, has a Web presence. Its >"Solidarity Page," with a link to the official Spanish-language >Tupac Amaru site in Europe, is nursed by a Toronto-based group >called Arm the Spirit. > >The solidarity page is touted on a more elaborate site >sponsored by the U.S. Committee to Support the Revolution in >Peru. Based in Berkeley, this committee sings the song of the >Communist Party of Peru, also known as Shining Path. > >"Welcome to a real revolution in cyberspace!" reads the >Shining Path page. "We expose the lies about the >revolution put forward by the U.S.-backed Fujimori regime and >its apologists, while opposing U.S. and other foreign >intervention. We organize against the repression and >terror directed at the revolution and the Peruvian people." > >Sinn Fein, the radical political wing of the Irish Republican >Army, the armed and rebellious Sri Lankan Liberation Tigers >of Tamil Eelam and a multitude of U.S.-based "Aryan" >revolutionaries also have carefully designed Web sites. (Such >sites are so devoid of humor that it seems likely these people >really are who they say they are.) > >These are prime spots for unfiltered propaganda. Here in the >home of the free and the frenetic, the Net is protected by >the First Amendment and the wholesale distribution of >political information -- the good, the bad, the ugly -- is as >old as Thanksgiving. Thomas Paine would have had an amazing home page. > >The Shining Path pages are elaborate. Various links highlight >"the crimes of the U.S.-backed Fujimori regime," list the >political prisoners in Peru, reprint the press releases of Shining >Path and Tupac Amaru and offer a gallery of incendiary souvenirs >you can buy -- leaflets, buttons, T-shirts and cassettes of >revolutionary music. > >The site also gives users a way to "hook up with, support >and/or join us." But it warns those interested not to use >e-mail, because U.S. government officials might be monitoring >it. "We encourage you to contact us by postal mail, phone or fax." > >"Terrorist fund-raising is illegal in this country," said one >U.S. State Department staffer who was reluctant to talk about >the government's monitoring of any Web pages. Speaking only on >background, the staffer said that extremist Web sites are mostly >posted by U.S. citizens and are viewed as domestic material, >which is under the jurisdiction of the FBI and the Justice >Department, both of which have Web sites. > >"There is genuine international concern that this information >is freely available -- and that it's legal," the staffer said. > >John Russell of the Justice Department said, "There are First >Amendment considerations and there are legitimate law enforcement >concerns." The Justice Department, he said, would like >"to find a legal and acceptable procedure" to discover who >is posting the information. He said several law enforcement >agencies, including the FBI, ATF and DEA, are planning a joint >meeting soon to discuss the proliferation of such rabble-rousing pages. > >The Internet brings the far-flung complexities and dangers of the >world a little closer to home. The bright side is that most >people savvy enough to use the Internet may also be sophisticated >enough to sort out the truth in the information supplied by >various groups such as Tupac Amaru, Sinn Fein and the Department of Justice. > >GETTING THERE: >Tupac Amaru at http://burn.ucsd.edu/~ats/mrta.htm >Shining Path at http://www.calyx.com/~peruweb/csrp.htm >Sinn Fein at http://www.irlnet.com/sinnfein >Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam at http://www.eelam.com >State Department at http://www.state.gov >FBI at http://www.fbi.gov >Department of Justice at http://www.usdoj.gov. > >(Source: The Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com) > >---- > > From kkirksey at appstate.campus.mci.net Thu Jan 9 13:36:54 1997 From: kkirksey at appstate.campus.mci.net (Ken Kirksey) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 13:36:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Escrow Good, GAK Bad Message-ID: <199701092131.QAA00797@aus-c.mp.campus.mci.net> > To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a >hole in it. No thanks. I agree in principle, and I doubt I would ever use a key recovery system if I had a choice. But, speaking as a network manager, I know that private key recovery (not GAK) can be an enhancement to security. I'll give an example. About a year ago, my boss wanted to protect his file of annual financial projections for the company from prying eyes on our Macintosh network. I installed CurveEncrypt on his machine, showed him how to use it, and gave him the standard lecture on choosing a good passphrase. I stressed that he needed to chose a passphrase easy to remember, because if he forgot it, there was no way to get his file back. Well, he forgot his passphrase. He spent an hour trying every combination he could think of, interjecting a curse here and there for color. He is now totally off using encryption to protect sensitive information. He refuses to use it, and he discourages anyone in the office from using it. I know that his position is unfair, but he _is_ the boss, so he makes the rules. And he is a typical computer user. If your average joe forgets his passphrase and loses two days worth of work, he's not likely to encrypt his work again. (Or he's likely to write down his passphrase in the future). If we were using a Key Escrow system, this situation could have been avoided. Yes, using a key escrow system is less secure that using a non-key escrow system, but I'd argue that using a strong key escrow system is better than using no encryption at all in situations like this. Our network is less secure that it could be because of one user's bad experience. Ken From tomw at netscape.com Thu Jan 9 13:45:25 1997 From: tomw at netscape.com (Tom Weinstein) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 13:45:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: SSL Insecurity In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970109124118.00920db0@gateway.grumman.com> Message-ID: <32D567A5.794B@netscape.com> Rick Osborne wrote: > > A while back, someone posted an article on the insecurity of > Netscape's implementation of SSL. Can someone send me back that > article, or a few pointers as to where I can find related information? As far as I know, all holes in our SSL implementation were fixed long ago. If anyone knows of any that still exist, I'd love to hear about them. -- You should only break rules of style if you can | Tom Weinstein coherently explain what you gain by so doing. | tomw at netscape.com From pjm at spe.com Thu Jan 9 14:07:52 1997 From: pjm at spe.com (Patrick May) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 14:07:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge In-Reply-To: <85263054520588@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> Message-ID: <199701092146.NAA02693@gulch.spe.com> Dan Geer writes: > > I'm still a bit nervous about what the reaction will be though > - won't the US government (and anyone else pushing DES) be able > to say "It took 10,000 Pentiums several weeks, noone would > bother doing that, so it's safe"... > > this seems a good moment to remind ourselves > that we will never know as much about another > cipher as we know about DES. > > ipso facto, i'd like to simply use the efficiency > of price discovery by auction and see what I can > buy the DES-key-of-your-choice for. my bet: there > are a lot of interesting DES keys available for > less than $10K This is an excellent idea. Do the rules of RSA's challenge allow for bribing the holder of the contest keys? What a headline -- "DES Challenge Broken In 15 Minutes" Then there's the rubber hose method.... Patrick May (who does not advocate the initiation of force for a mere $10k) From rcgraves at disposable.com Thu Jan 9 14:29:51 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 14:29:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D570EC.2E33@disposable.com> Declan McCullagh wrote: > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 18:44:07 -0800 (PST) > From: Declan McCullagh > To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu > Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater Hmm. Thanks for keeping the list on-topic. -rich From roy at sendai.scytale.com Thu Jan 9 15:05:21 1997 From: roy at sendai.scytale.com (Roy M. Silvernail) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:05:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation and the Polymorphic Virus In-Reply-To: <199701091505.KAA02069@laf.cioe.com> Message-ID: <970109.155557.4E2.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In list.cypherpunks, serw30 at laf.cioe.com writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM writes: >> "Cypher punks" can't write any code - be it mail filters, viruses, or > crypto. >> > Aw, surely "Cypher punks" can write some sort of code. I'm a cypherpunk. Just for the record, I wrote the code that Vulis himself uses to process his UUCP traffic. - -- Roy M. Silvernail roy at scytale.com Keeping Waffle Irons hot since 1989 Run Waffle? Rnews locking up? You need RUUXQT! echo /get /pub/waffle/uuxqt37.zip | rmail file-request at scytale.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtVq2xvikii9febJAQHJkAQAkysTX7Oi4KV031QqDtozuwWTUwhQui87 Q2b7hvi11xADQO3D8O6dHxP97Mo+xccimSAmva3vG464iB5OvOs+UaE+HqmFwdwK TsuIEfcu7XhVbYl1O/xw1l50mgiOJWtinxAyhrabRClNDCz8zmiPB3p7gqSPFVwr 3Y/4zREXyoM= =VdZ2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From unicorn at schloss.li Thu Jan 9 15:06:08 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:06:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Mark M. wrote: > Date: Wed, 8 Jan 1997 23:35:35 -0500 (EST) > From: "Mark M." > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > On Tue, 7 Jan 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > > The Supreme Court ruled on this sentencing case yesterday. Kennedy and > > Stevens -- hardly known as civil libertarians -- dissented. The Court > > reversed the 9th Circuit, ruling the lower court was wrong to say that > > such a practice "would make the jury's findings of fact pointless." The > > court declared: "Sentencing enhancements do not punish a defendant for > > crimes of which he was not convicted, but rather increase his sentence > > because of the manner in which he committed the crime of conviction." > > > > Double jeopardy? What's that? > > > > Of course it was a drug crime. The defendant, Vernon Watts, was convicted > > of cocaine possession with intent to distribute. To paraphrase another > > saying: "'Drug Trafficking Offense' is the root passphrase to the > > Constitution." > > IANAL, but this ruling is not as bad as it may seem. If I read it correctly, > the ruling says that a judge is allowed to consider offenses related to the > crime for which the defendant was convicted regardless of whether or not the > defendant was acquitted of those charges. Basically correct. Lesser included offenses are seperate offenses. Robbery, as a very mundane example, is a combination of larceny and assault. If the assault charge cannot be proven, robbery cannot be proven, but larceny still can independently. Sentencing enhancements: There is a big book called the Federal Sentencing Guidelines Handbook (or some such). To arrive at the appropriate sentence range, you add up the points of all the offenses the defendant was convicted of (Assume Bank Fraud is 18 points, Murder 35 or whatever- I dont remember them offhand) and run across a chart which has "criminal history catagory" on the vertical axis. Where the two meet gives you the sentence range. I'm not near my office right now, but if there is enough interest I will dig up the current handbook and run a sample sentencing through. The most common one I see is "Victims helpless or infirm" which usually boosts 2 to 5 points. Sentencing enhancements are not double jeapordy either. I don't see how you can argue they are. For example, there is a provision in bank fraud sentencing guidelines which enhances the sentence according to the size of the loss, and I believe there is a kicker if the financial institution folds. I believe the highest base offense level was "Espionage" or some such. There are also sentencing limiters. "Defendant displays clear remorse." I think is one. Go out to a law book store and take a look at the guideline book. It's actually a lot of fun. "Ok, say I killed my wife for her coke stash and recruited my brother to dump the body..." > Judges are allowed to consider past > criminal convictions or behavior relevant to the crime for which the defendant > was convicted during sentencing. Sentencing guidelines instruct the judge on > how severe or lenient a sentence should be based on the severity of the offense > and past criminal record. These facts to not have to be true beyond a > reasonable doubt. They need only be noted as a finding of fact by the jury. (Or the judge in other cases). > In one case, the defendant was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent > to distribute but was found not guilty of possession of a firearm related to > a drug charge (apparently, this is a crime). It's both a crime and an enhancement for most federal drug offenses. > The jury decided that there was > reasonable doubt as to whether the gun had anything to do with the drug > offense. However, the defendant was sentenced according to the recommended > sentence for someone convicted of a drug offense when there is a weapon > involved. If possession of a firearm related to a drug offense had not been > a crime, the judge would have been able to give the defendant the same sentence > without having proof that there was not reasonable doubt as to whether the gun > was related to the drug offense. Well, just about. The sentencing enhancement might not be enough points to kick the defendant into the next bracket. It depends on how many base offense points the defendant has before you start throwing in enhancements. The judge probably would have gotten a higher maximum from the combined crime, but the jury has to find guilty of that offense. > All this ruling really does is it gives the judge the power to consider all > facts, including those found by a jury to be doubtable, when sentencing the > defendant. It doesn't allow the judge to sentence the defendant to a higher > punishment than the maximum sentence. Well, it can increase the maximum actually, because it actually adds offense points. > This is a power that judges have when > the defendant does something legal, but has connection to the actual crime. > This ruling just extends that power to include when the action in question is > illegal. Congress has already passed on the sentencing enhancements in most cases, making them simply "versions" of crimes. If you want to look at it a different way, if you are involved with a drug offense and are not using a weapon, you'll get a lower sentence than a full fledged drug crime. It's a step in the right direction - i.e. away from manadatory sentencing of a flat time period for a crime regardless of circumstances. -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From DataETRsch at aol.com Thu Jan 9 15:12:06 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:12:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. Message-ID: <970109181113_1044501439@emout15.mail.aol.com> {Please read this *entire* e-mail message.} Hi, A detailed description of the IMDMP encryption algorithm will be posted to this mailing list within a few days. An end-user application will be released within a few weeks. I would appreciate it if all you cypherpunks out there review the description and the software, and tell me what you think of IMDMP. Also: The AOL web site address my company has may not always work out when the server is having problems or user overloads. Please try again later. Again, the web site address for UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module, is: http://members.aol.com/DataETRsch/udcm.html. IN RESPONSE TO THE FLAME MAIL DATA RESEARCH HAS BEEN RECEIVING: Note: The 18 "sub-algorithms" of IMDMP are basically algorithm "modes", and, yes, many algorithms do *not* have multiple encryption layers, although, obviously, the more advanced ones do. Also, 256 bytes is equal to 2048 bits. I realize that most of you out there know that, but some of you don't. "Bits" are referenced more often than "bytes". And, the "industry standard" that IMDMP is obviously well above is DES, etc. Also, DES 128, PGP 1024, RSA 128, IDEA 128, and IMDMP 2048 were applied at their maximum settings on a file full of about 64 *million* repeating "A" ASCII character bytes. The mutation levels the algorithms rendered on their individual trash test files were compared. Subtle patterns where searched for. Binary character tallys where taken. IMDMP did *not* leave *any* repeating patterns in the test file that was used. In IMDMP, each of the 256 possible binary character combinations had an approximate count of 0.390625% of all of the 64 million bytes. 0.390625% is the best possible percentage. Are all of you out there satisfied? Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From unicorn at schloss.li Thu Jan 9 15:17:48 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:17:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > "William H. Geiger III" writes: > > > Well I guess I will not need to worry about them since I will never run any G > > reguardless how may laws the jackboots in DC pass. > > That's from the same guy who endorses censorship on this mailing list... Wait a second, isn't that what you were just calling for in my case? To wit: "I suggest zero tolerance of Black Unicorn unless and until someone reveals his real name." For the guy who has been screaming his head off about censorship to the point of nausea you were sure quick to turn your coat in my case. That more than anything else you have ever said puts the cap on your credibility as far as I'm concerned. -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jan 9 15:20:12 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:20:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701092323.RAA12536@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 01/09/97 at 03:38 PM, "Z.B." said: >Not necessarily, Steve - some people plonk others by filtering their mail >to a folder called "trash" or "crap-messages" or whatever, so they don't >have to read them at the same time they read the rest of their messages. >Then they go through the trash folder later on just to see if they threw out anything >that they shouldn't have, see the messages by the people they >killfiled, and reply to some of them. They HAVE plonked the person, but >they can still read and reply to the plonked messages if they choose. >IMO, this is a better way to killfile than redirecting everything to >/dev/null, because if someone has a history of violently flaming whatever >you say (like some people on this list who shall remain nameless), you don't have to >read their flames at the same time with the rest of the mail, but still have the option >of reading and replying to them later on if you so >choose. This is exactly how I have my twit filters set up. :) I also have max # of messages & max # of days settings for my twit folder so that messages that have stayed too long get automatically deleted. I currently have 2 different folders set up 1 for twits and 1 for anonymous posts. The twit folder is set to delete after 1 day while the anonymous posts are saved for a week. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Air conditioned environment - Do not open Windows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtV8l49Co1n+aLhhAQHc9wQApSdJ0GUyvmcDrvRu6eKW/kTh2XyrWNFZ 4yMAxX6ZU+tR/k7nyAAOhQGDZF3CxQDuLCjMYmSWAQz/cXYzmw58rDC8wo40os3+ 4Ax0Ul2yXps/YKNQIBWmiJAAn4zEf1G2SpcO87LwBYLuyPQtCs0rvP4gBmbLT9LP dm9lEdvn49o= =/2k2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From gbroiles at c2.net Thu Jan 9 15:21:58 1997 From: gbroiles at c2.net (Greg Broiles) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:21:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trade secrets / moderator liability Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970109151839.006b554c@gabber.c2.net> As reported by Michael Froomkin's correspondent, the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (enacted with local modifications in, as I understand it, 40 states, among them California) says that third parties may be held liable for misappropriation of a trade secret where the third party knows or has reason to know that they are doing so. For example, California Civil Code section 3426.3 says: 3426.3.(a) A complainant may recover damages for the actual loss caused by misappropriation. A complainant also may recover for the unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing damages for actual loss. (b) If neither damages nor unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation are provable, the court may order payment of a reasonable royalty for no longer than the period of time the use could have been prohibited. (c) If willful and malicious misappropriation exists, the court may award exemplary damages in an amount not exceeding twice any award made under subdivision (a) or (b). And misappropriation is defined in California Civil Code section 3426(1)(b) as: (1) Acquisition of a trade secret of another by a person who knows or has reason to know that the trade secret was acquired by improper means; or (2) Disclosure or use of a trade secret of another without express or implied consent by a person who: (A) Used improper means to acquire knowledge of the trade secret; or (B) At the time of disclosure or use, knew or had reason to know that his or her knowledge of the trade secret was: (i) Derived from or through a person who had utilized improper means to acquire it; (ii) Acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or (iii) Derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or (C) Before a material change of his or her position, knew or had reason to know that it was a trade secret and that knowledge of it had been acquired by accident or mistake. My other concern about moderator liability for approving/distributing trade secret material is in the criminal context. For example, the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 (HR 3723, now found at 18 USC 1831 et seq, ) says that some trade secret violations are now a federal crime; and California Penal Code section 499c(b) also criminalizes some wrongful acts relating to trade secrets. Specifically, I think it's feasible to find aiding & abetting (and, more remotely, conspiracy) liability where a moderator knowingly and substantially contributes to public disclosure of a trade secret. It seems to me that there's a murky middle period, where the trade secret is known to some wrong people, but is still substantially a secret, where third party liability is present. But once a wide distribution of the secret is made, I don't think it's meaningful to talk about further distribution as misappropriation. If there's no common-sense "it's no longer a secret" safety valve, trade secret would provide time-unlimited protection to publically available information, which I think would be preempted by (or frustrate the purpose of) Congress' limited grants of protection to information via patent and copyright. But this is only my conjecture about how things ought to work, given the responsibilities created for third parties by statutes like the UTSA; I don't know of cases on this issue and given my work/bar review schedule, won't have time to find them any time soon. Also, as I mentioned in my previous message, I think there are good arguments that neither of the prominent trade secret disclosures I'm familiar with that have occurred (in part) via the list would create moderator liability. I'm mentioning moderator liability (and writing what's turning into a long message about it) not because I think it's an especially big danger but because I think it's an interesting public policy issue. I don't have the teeniest clue how other nations' laws might treat third parties who assist or enable the wide dissemination of trade secret materials. Perhaps other list members can offer a local perspective. -- Greg Broiles gbroiles at c2.net 510-986-8779 voice 510-986-8777 fax From DataETRsch at aol.com Thu Jan 9 15:25:37 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:25:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thanks. Message-ID: <970109182452_578470125@emout04.mail.aol.com> Hi, Thanks for clearing up that file size query for me. You are right about that 258 (it's actually 256) header attribute. In that header is where the IMDMP special security option settings are stored (if they are indeed enabled). But the options are rarely ever used by most developers. For more information, download UDCM V2.0 from: http://members.aol.com/DataETRsch/udcm.html and view the help documentation. Also, the 256 byte header itself is encrypted with a 128-bit encryption code. Thanks again! :-) Jeremy... President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From DataETRsch at aol.com Thu Jan 9 15:43:56 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:43:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Install UDCM properly before using it... Message-ID: <970109184315_536877969@emout08.mail.aol.com> Hi again, The shareware version of UDCM *must* be installed before use. Run "install.exe" after decompression of the archive. JUST INCASE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL I AM TALKING ABOUT: Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. Extensive research shows that IMDMP is more advanced than DES, RSA, IDEA, and PGP. UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. o Contains more than 140 procedures and functions. o Is a very cost-effective size of only 57 kilobytes. o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. o Is more advanced than all of the industry standard encryption algorithms. o Allows encryption keys as large as 256 bytes (2048 bits). o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. o Does not store encryption keys in files. o Processes files as large as 2,147,483,390 bytes. o Has a 100% data preservation rating. o Includes Y2K compliant time and date locking features. o Has NCSC compliant data cleaning and wiping capabilities. o Includes file specific unique encryption features. o Includes file authentication guard features. o Includes unique encryption signaturing features. o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. UDCM can be accessed through programs developed with popular application and database programming languages and environments such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo Pascal, SmallTalk, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you very much for your time. Jeremy... President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From cman at c2.net Thu Jan 9 15:47:35 1997 From: cman at c2.net (Douglas Barnes) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:47:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Escrow Good, GAK Bad Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970109154528.00a89ec0@gabber.c2.net> This whole line of reasoning is exactly what the government is preying on -- and it's working with a lot of people. However, it's a red herring. By and large, the government doesn't care about file-level encryption, the sort where the Key Escrow systems you're outlining would be useful. Furthermore, this kind of encryption can be done pretty much in isolation -- it's not a communication medium, so it's less susceptible to attacks on standardization. What the government is mostly concerned with is encryption that's used for communicating, where there is no similar feeling on the part of individuals or industry that something like key escrow is needed. It is a classic bait-and-switch maneuver. Furthermore, if people really wanted Key Escrow, the government wouldn't have to be putting the thumbscrews to software companies to get them to adopt it -- the market would perform this function quite nicely. FWIW, Doug At 04:31 PM 1/9/97 -0500, you wrote: >> To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a >>hole in it. No thanks. > >I agree in principle, and I doubt I would ever use a key recovery system >if I had a choice. But, speaking as a network manager, I know that >private key recovery (not GAK) can be an enhancement to security. > >I'll give an example. About a year ago, my boss wanted to protect his >file of annual financial projections for the company from prying eyes on >our Macintosh network. I installed CurveEncrypt on his machine, showed >him how to use it, and gave him the standard lecture on choosing a good >passphrase. I stressed that he needed to chose a passphrase easy to >remember, because if he forgot it, there was no way to get his file back. > >Well, he forgot his passphrase. He spent an hour trying every >combination he could think of, interjecting a curse here and there for >color. He is now totally off using encryption to protect sensitive >information. He refuses to use it, and he discourages anyone in the >office from using it. I know that his position is unfair, but he _is_ >the boss, so he makes the rules. > >And he is a typical computer user. If your average joe forgets his >passphrase and loses two days worth of work, he's not likely to encrypt >his work again. (Or he's likely to write down his passphrase in the >future). If we were using a Key Escrow system, this situation could have >been avoided. Yes, using a key escrow system is less secure that using a >non-key escrow system, but I'd argue that using a strong key escrow >system is better than using no encryption at all in situations like this. > Our network is less secure that it could be because of one user's bad >experience. > >Ken > From DataETRsch at aol.com Thu Jan 9 15:49:47 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:49:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Problems with UDCM V2.0? Message-ID: <970109184751_1157614624@emout05.mail.aol.com> Hi, If you are even having the slightest problem with UDCM, do not hesitate to send us a message at: DataETRsch at aol.com. Remember that the *shareware* version of UDCM MUST BE INSTALLED BEFORE USE. Run "install.exe" after decompression. JUST INCASE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HELL I AM TALKING ABOUT: Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. Extensive research shows that IMDMP is more advanced than DES, RSA, IDEA, and PGP. UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. o Contains more than 140 procedures and functions. o Is a very cost-effective size of only 57 kilobytes. o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. o Is more advanced than all of the industry standard encryption algorithms. o Allows encryption keys as large as 256 bytes (2048 bits). o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. o Does not store encryption keys in files. o Processes files as large as 2,147,483,390 bytes. o Has a 100% data preservation rating. o Includes Y2K compliant time and date locking features. o Has NCSC compliant data cleaning and wiping capabilities. o Includes file specific unique encryption features. o Includes file authentication guard features. o Includes unique encryption signaturing features. o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. UDCM can be accessed through programs developed with popular application and database programming languages and environments such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo Pascal, SmallTalk, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you very much for your time. Jeremy... President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From DataETRsch at aol.com Thu Jan 9 15:54:28 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:54:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ignore all the messages about... Message-ID: <970109185342_1857195697@emout11.mail.aol.com> Hi again, In the the help documentation of the shareware version of UDCM, there may appear to be a message that reads: Describing the algorithmic contents of the IMDMP encryption algorithm is well beyond the scope of this on-line manual. In fact, there is currently absolutely no documentation that exists outside of the corporate domain of DataET Research that actually explains the IMDMP encryption algorithm in any true detail, and DataET Research does not intend to release or disclose any such sensitive documentation to the general public, ETC. ETC. ETC. ETC. ETC. ETC. PLEASE DISREGARD THE ABOVE MESSAGE COMPLETELY. Jeremy... President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From ccr at imsnispc01.netvigator.com Thu Jan 9 15:56:58 1997 From: ccr at imsnispc01.netvigator.com (Guy Hoogewerf) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:56:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: MNET In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D5A901.16F0@netvigator.com> cypherpunks at toad.com wrote: Dear Future M-NET subscriber, ************************************************************* * The M-NET HOME PAGE * * http://www.hk.super.net/~alamo/mnet/home.html * ************************************************************* Thank you for your interest in the M-Net Webpage. I encourage you to PRINT and read this "Introductory Newsletter" in its entirety. Although it is longer in length than M-Net's regualar update the contents will give you a good idea of the products and opportunity available through subscription to our service. M-Net, in itself, is a great part time income opportunity. All you do is offer the products and services of M-Net to others. You can do this via the Internet as I have, or just to a few freinds and contacts. Just help get the word out - whether by Internet ads, flyers, postcards, classifieds, or word of mouth. Choose any method you're comfortable with . . . they all work. After all, almost everyone has to pay a telephone bill and would like more income! Whenever anyone that you (or your subscribers) have shared M-Net with subscribes to the service, your income grows. The compensation plan is described in detail in this introduction. You can quickly develop an income of $300.00 to even $3,000.00 or more per month! ======================== GETTING STARTED IS EASY! ======================== To get started, simply send in a completed form and start saving money straight away. ============================================================== You can subscribe to M-Net's service: mailto:ccr at netvigator.com ============================================================== ...or you can use the subscription form at the end of this introduction. In addition to the service you will receive a welcome package which includes a Company Manual, brochures, and extra Introductory Newsletters. I look forward to hearing from your shortly. Yours in success, Guy Hoogewerf M-Net Associate ID# 11167 8/F, Yau Shun Building 46-50, D'Aguilar Street Central, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2868 6198 Fax: (852) 2524 1233 ============================================================== INTRODUCTION TO M-NET ============================================================== "I would rather benefit from 1 % of 100 people�s effort than benefit from 100% of my own". The words of John Paul Getty. M-Net, founded by Ed Brinskely, offers the average American the tools and education they need to: 1. Reduce their telephone bills with simple innovative system of Call-back, and 2. To increase their income with a solid home based business. M-Net may be contacted at: 8/F, Yau Shun Builing 46-50, D'Aguilar Street Central, Hong Kong Tel: (852) 2868 4198 Fax: (852) 2524 1233 NO SPECIAL SKILLS are required to be successful with the M-Net Program. We firmly believe that the vast majority of people do not want a "hand out," but merely a "helping hand" and that is the mission of M-Net. If you are looking for sound, time tested advice to help you take control of your finances and runaway debt, combined with a solid home business income opportunity, and are not afraid of a little honest hard work, then you owe it to yourself to learn all you can about the M-Net program. Unlike "get-rich-quick" schemes, a legitimate program requires an investment of your time and resources in order to succeed. Let's face it, hard work, dedication, commitment and persistence are what built this country and made people wealthy in the process. And the M-Net program is no different. However, M-Net offers one distinct advantage over many other opportunities available today. M-Net saves your business money on your communication needs. Other opportunities require you to invest money which you may not have. M-Net offers and teaches you teaches you sound financial principles, strategies and techniques to help you free up the resources it takes to achieve success! M-Net will also show you how to get onto the Internet with minimal cost so solving two of the entrepreneur's largest business expenses, advertising and telephone costs. The M-Net program offers a unique pay plan that rewards you with a $25 commission on all your first level subscribers and pays you a total of 12.5% through 10 levels on everyone's telephone bill! You can easily qualify for commissions on all 10 levels by simply sponsoring just one person... just one. M-Net furnishes you with all the tools necessary to finance this exciting, home business opportunity's quick growth, enabling you to develop a substantial monthly income for you and your family. You'll receive the education, promotional materials, and support while you provide the desire, dedication, hard work and perseverance. And you don't even need a computer to succeed with the M-Net program either. A substantial income can be built by ANYONE simply by telling their friends! After all they will want to save money as well!! With an incredible pay plan and proven income producing system (along with a little simple hard work), you will succeed in developing the extra income to take that extra hoiday you wanted or to help pay off that morgage you have. Please feel free to call the M-Net office at (852) 2868 4198 anytime with questions, comments, or suggestions. The doors are always open and a voice mail system is available 24 hours a day to take your calls. Some Statistics: � 1/3 of all produce in America was shifted through a Multi- Level Marketing Program in 1995. � There are 8,000 Multi-Level-Marketing Companies Worldwide. � A MLM Company opened this year in China. They had 23,000 new customers in 2 weeks � Telecommunications is the third largest Industry worldwide, it is also the fastest growing. My Point: � Multi-Level-Marketing is the ultimate way to market a product. Three simple reasons: I. The Consultant benefits from commissions, no investment, minimal work, a rewarding experience. II. The user benefits from reduced prices, no middle men. III. The Producer benefits from reduced distribution costs, direct links with consumer needs Benefits to you the consultant: All customer Service and Support is taken care of by M-Net and their home company MTC. As an M-net Consultant you are paid to �spread the word�. The limits to your earnings are unknown and they are residual. You carry on been paid even after you retire from the program. You participate in a unique set of products. M-Net can offer you a complete telemanagement system. i.e. Callback services, Travel Cards, Fully Itemised billing, and other more technical services such as; conference calls, Free phone lines, Fax on Demand, Autocall and Air freight Services. � No other Telephone Callback Company can do this. You receive the lowest rates ALL round the world. M-Net, unlike any other company, offers you discount services from Every Country to Every Country Worldwide. � Examples are calling; your Children at School, from a hotel you might be staying at, or just calling your family abroad. Requirements from you: M-Net is a non-profit service to supply you with all the information you need to understand the Telephone Industry and products M-Net provide. There is a minimal introduction fee of US$99.99 to cover these costs, but by the end of the first month you would have made back the initial investment either with the savings on your Bill or through just connecting 5 people to M-Net's service. Free connection to the network is also included when subscribing as an associate. As time goes by and the money starts to come in, you will want to spend more time on this project, anything up to 1 hour a week is all it takes. A simple guide as to how much time is required is �the more time you invest the greater your return on investment�. ====================================================== The aim of the Concept. ====================================================== The aim is not to make a million in one month. What M-Net are offering is a constant growing income every month. The aim is not to sell as many Callback systems as quickly as possible either. M-Net are saying Callback is, already, a sold product. Everyone knows it saves you money. M-Net are offering a way to make money out of Callback. Just because it is the cheapest has little to do with it. You can sell a Callback a hundred times but won�t get everybody using it. M-net are saying, by becoming an Associate, you most likely will use the service for your own benefit (its free to join after all). Added to that as a Associate, you will ensure you, that you yourself, get maximum benefit out of using the system. So, you are an Associate first and a user second (you do not have to use it). I would now like to offer an example; ====================================================== The Twelve Year Plan. ====================================================== You find just one person who wants to use the service in one year, i.e. a long time. During the following year both you and he find one person each. You now have four people using the system. In the third year all four of you find one person, you have eight in your group. Year four and it doubles again, 16 and again in the fifth year to 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048 and finally at the end of the twelfth year 4,096. What you will find is, depending on how much time people are willing to invest, some people will find up to 20 people a year while others will be comfortable with only one a year. Speeding This Up. Taking this example further; the next stage is to speed up this progress of multiplication. There are two easy ways to do this. 1. Shorten the Time. instead of 1 person every year how about one person every month. This gives you an income of over US$3,000 a month within a year. How this happens I will explain later. 2. Increase the number of Sponsorships. Instead of just one person a year or month, why not 3 or 5. This can be demonstrated by taking the pattern of 2,4,8,16,32,64 and so on and doing it with three people instead of one. 1,3,9, 27,81,243 and so on...Or even better with 5. 1,5,25,125,625. The Multiplication factor is important and akes the ultimate difference. How Does This Fit In With M-Net ? The Commission Pay Plan is, like the system itself, as simple as possible. There are three areas. You receive a commission of 1% on anybody and everybody's telephone bill on 10 levels of your group or organization. On the third level you recieve a bonus commission of 2.5% extra. Your customers will also recieve a commission as a customer if they introduce anyone to the system. They will recieve 0.5% on 10 levels of a potential organzation that you may inadvertently build up for them. There is a pay out of $25 on each new member. $5 is given to the Associate who accepts the subscription and $20 for the customer who referred that new member. If you are the Associate and the referring member i.e. the new member is your introduction then you recieve the full $25. So!! Levels # of Associates Commission Monthly Earnings You 0 0 0 1 4 1% US$ 4.00 2 13 1% US$ 13.00 3 40 3.5% US$ 14.00 4 121 1% US$ 121.00 5 364 1% US$ 364.00 6 1,093 1% US$ 1,093.00 7 3,280 1% US$ 3,280.00 8 9,841 1% US$ 9,841.00 9 29,524 1% US$ 29,524.00 10 88,573 1% US$ 88,573.00 This assumes an average of $100 is spent per member and every Assoicate has the ability to find three further Associates. This does not allow for the many people who would just become customers, thereby increasing thse figures. This is a cumulative calculation =============================================== How To Sponsor! =============================================== Back to first principals again. M-Net know and do not expect anyone to be able to reach these magic figures just like that. No one is sent out to �spread the word� on their own. Sponsoring is about support and passing on information. Like Chinese whispers but ensuring the message is not altered. It is M-Net job to ensure the message remains the same, let them worry about this. That is what their complete support and back up service to their associates is for. Sponsoring is about keeping it simple, no one is expected to get involved in Telecommunications, there is no need to. Each person can take technical side of the business as far as they want to, it is up to them. Each person just uses the product themselves or at least knows how to use it even if they do not use it. The easiest way, as in any business, to sponsor is to get someone else to do it. So only involve people who are prepared to sponsor others, Only involve small numbers i.e. 3 or 5. The returns are greater this way and the input by you less. The Challenge is; Do you know 3 people who spend as little as US$100 a month on their phone bill? Do these people know 3 people who spend US$100 a month? and so on. These are your customers. We in Hong Kong as M-Net principal office here, provide a full support service. This includes a telephone service to answer any questions. Twice weekly meetings for Assoicates to come and introduce new Associates and to learn of new developments with in M-Net, and a Bi-Weekly News Bulletin is sent out to keep every one updated. The purpose of these services are threefold: 1. To encourage maximum communication between M-Net and its users, 2. To ensure the continued growth of M-Net 3. To provide Educational Material on how to create a MLM business with minimum input. ================================================== Summary =================================================== With this huge support network behind you, you should not only be encouraged but also receive a healthy regular income only a few months after you join. You now have a description of the philosophy of MLM, and an example with some notes on how to go about it. I would strongly recommend you come to a meeting and find out more. MLM is NOT a hidden catch business, it is a very viable spare time occupation, which more than adequately rewards you. To get started, simply send in a completed form and start saving money straight away. ================================================== You can apply to subscribe to M-Net's service: mailto:ccr at netvigator.com ================================================== ...or you can use the subscription form at the end of this introduction. In addition to the service you will receive a welcome package which includes a Company Manual, brochures, and extra Introductory Newsletters. ================================================== HOW TO SAVE MONEY WITH M-NET USER GUIDE ================================================== Fact: In 1994, the residents of Hong Kong spent over 1,200,000,000 minutes calling the rest of the World. What is Callback? Callback is an innovative system designed specifically to cut the cost of your International telephone bill. It�s formula is simple.To call from any country worldwide you call a computer in the USA and that computer supplies you with a US dial tone. You are now paying US prices (the cheapest in the world) and bypassing the big costs of local telephone companies ! To Use Callback Dial 001, 1, and then your passport access number (10 digit number given to you by M-Net). You can program this number into your phone�s memory. � When you hear the first of three short rings, hang up. Your phone will ring in 2-5 seconds. This is the computer in the USA �calling you back�. � Pick up the phone, listen for the US dial tone, and then (if you are calling the USA) dial the number of the person you are calling. When calling a country other than the USA, dial 011, followed by the Country Code, Area Code and then telephone number. It really is that simple! Mis-dials and Multiple Calls If you are making multiple calls or you mis-dial the number you wanted, you don�t have to repeat this process. When the first call is completed, and the other party has hung up, press the # key on your phone, and the computer will again provide you with a dial tone, then just dial again. Autodialers An Autodialer is available, this small device detects when you are dialing an IDD number, it then automatically routes the number for you through the MTC system. Giving you trouble free IDD calling. Speed Dial To make life even easier, you can also preprogram up to 99 of your friends�, clients�, telephone numbers to be accessed by dialing only 3 numbers! To Use Use Callback to get the US dial tone. � Press the * key � Press in the Index number for the person you wish to call, press * key From ericm at lne.com Thu Jan 9 15:58:31 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 15:58:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Escrow Good, GAK Bad In-Reply-To: <199701092131.QAA00797@aus-c.mp.campus.mci.net> Message-ID: <199701092357.PAA23840@slack.lne.com> Ken Kirksey writes: > > > To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a > >hole in it. No thanks. > > I agree in principle, and I doubt I would ever use a key recovery system > if I had a choice. But, speaking as a network manager, I know that > private key recovery (not GAK) can be an enhancement to security. > > I'll give an example. About a year ago, my boss wanted to protect his > file of annual financial projections for the company from prying eyes on > our Macintosh network. I installed CurveEncrypt on his machine, showed > him how to use it, and gave him the standard lecture on choosing a good > passphrase. I stressed that he needed to chose a passphrase easy to > remember, because if he forgot it, there was no way to get his file back. > > Well, he forgot his passphrase. He spent an hour trying every > combination he could think of, interjecting a curse here and there for > color. He is now totally off using encryption to protect sensitive > information. User education would be even easier than key escrow. Your boss could have shared that passphrase with one or more other people, ideally the people who helped him make the report. When you encrypt something that's vital to the company, you need to make sure that it can be gotten back. In most companies, there's more than one person who is 'cleared' for even the more vital information. The keys to those files should be shared amongst those people. Unfortunately, few encryption programs make this easy. And even though you can do it in PGP by encrypting to multiple recipients, how many people think to do so? I don't. Most programs assume that there's one key that that's used to encrypt everything, hence one level of security- the highest. But in a business situation you really need to be able to encrypt something with your key and your secretary's key, or the keys of all the board members, etc. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 9 16:12:35 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 16:12:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote? of confidence for Sanderson. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D592FF.539A@sk.sympatico.ca> Butler, Scott wrote: > > (Well it normally works over here in the U.K...if a football manager > receives a vote of confidence from the board of directors it is a > foregone conclusion that his resignation will be handed in or his P45 > will be handed out within days!) Why is everybody 'voting'? There 'is' no vote. There was an 'announement' of what 'will' be done. You may 'agree', or 'disagree', or 'comment'. But vote? I would hate to burst anyone's bubble, here, ( <--- A LIE! ), but I get enough illusory 'choices' in the 'real' world to fulfill my need for self-deception. I choose between the Republican Hitler and the Democratic Hitler. I choose between driving the 'red' piece-of-junk and the 'blue' piece- of-junk. I choose between the white sand in the Vaseline or the black sand in the Vaseline. If you feel the need for some illusory sense of control over what has already been decided, then, by all means, forward your votes to /dev/null. Toto From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Thu Jan 9 16:36:14 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 16:36:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Escrow Good, GAK Bad In-Reply-To: <199701092131.QAA00797@aus-c.mp.campus.mci.net> Message-ID: <199701100019.TAA25077@wauug.erols.com> Ken Kirksey sez: > > I'll give an example. About a year ago, my boss wanted to protect his > file of annual financial projections for the company from prying eyes on > our Macintosh network. I installed CurveEncrypt on his machine, showed > him how to use it, and gave him the standard lecture on choosing a good > passphrase. I stressed that he needed to chose a passphrase easy to > remember, because if he forgot it, there was no way to get his file back. > > Well, he forgot his passphrase. There's a low-tech solution. There's a stock GSA form for recording a container [safe] combo. You seal it up, put it in an envelope, you & witness sign across the flap. You store same in another container, such as in the security office. [THAT safe combo is usually kept in a 24-hour manned location such as the ECC or such.] Think along those lines, perhaps. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From DataETRsch at aol.com Thu Jan 9 17:15:06 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:15:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <970109201419_1207964145@emout18.mail.aol.com> Hello, In compliance with the large volume of source code requests DataET Research has been receiving, the undocumented Pascal source code of UDCM (containing the IMDMP encryption algorithm) will be released in approximately one month. Also, the shareware version of UDCM completely complies with ITAR since only 56-bit keys are allowed. The registered version allows 2048-bit keys. The registered version can only be sold within the U.S. and Canada. Also: IN RESPONSE TO THE FLAME MAIL DATAET RESEARCH HAS RECEIVED: A "comment:" is from a flame mail. A "reply:" is DataET Research's reply to the comment. Comment: "What do you mean by 'extensive research'." Reply: Benchmark tests. Source code comparisons. Documentations of other algorithms. "Applied Cryptography". Comment: "Yah, okay, since when is a DLL not royalty-free?!" Reply: Read some component catalogs. Go search the Internet. Comment: "That stupid line about 140 function bloats your ad." Reply: Is this constructive criticism or what? Comment: "What the hell does DLL size have to do with cost-effectiveness?" Reply: Upload time. Disk creation time. Minimal archive size increase. Comment: "I've never even heard of IMDMP before. Is this a joke?" Reply: UDCM (IMDMP) came out January 1st, 1997. How do you think successful companies start anyway, with millions of dollars upfront? DataET Research is a relatively new company. Comment: "What kind of industry standard is IMDMP above?" Reply: 128-bit encryption. Average DES is 128. PGP tops 1024. IDEA goes at 128. RSA the same. Full security IMDMP is 2048-bit. Any other questions? Comment: "Any bonehead can tell that 256 bytes is 2048 bits." Reply: Does anybody out there feel insulted? Comment: "Why does IMDMP need sub-algorithms? Is there something wrong?" Reply: Sub-algorithms of IMDMP are basically algorithm modes. There is nothing wrong with IMDMP's structure. Why don't you see what sub-algorithms are for yourself? Go try out UDCM: http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. Comment: "What algorithm doesn't process both binary and ASCII?" Reply: Go search the Internet for one. You'll find many dinky ones. Comment: "What algorithm doesn't allow multiple encryption layers?" Reply: Go search the Internet for one. You'll find many dinky ones. Comment: "Who says IMDMP doesn't have any back-doors or magical keys?" Reply: What more do you want us to prove? The source code will be out in about a month. Comment: "Why is there a dumb 2,147,483,390 file size limit?" Reply: It has do with 2^32 DOS file pointer long integer variables. You developers should know that. Comment: "Why the hell is the file size limit 258 bytes off? What, are keys kept in file headers?" Reply: Keys are NOT stored in headers. The 258 (actually 256) byte header is used to store certain IMDMP special security option settings. The header is itself secured using a 128-bit encryption code. Comment: "What the do you mean by 'file specific unique encryption'." Reply: For the idiot who sent this message to us: Why don't you download UDCM V2.0 and view its documentation for yourself? Comment: "Isn't IMDMP illegal?!" Reply: The version of UDCM (IMDMP) being distributed on the Internet, the shareware version, allows only 56-bit keys. The registered version allows 2048-bit ones. The registered version is only sold within the U.S. and Canada. Comment: "I want the damn source code to IMDMP now. How do we know for sure that IMDMP is better than DES and all the others you mentioned?" Reply: Wait one month please. Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From fod at brd.ie Thu Jan 9 17:24:13 1997 From: fod at brd.ie (Frank O'Dwyer) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:24:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IDEA] Cypherpunks Super Computer (was Re: The Upcoming DES Challenge) In-Reply-To: <199701092015.MAA00707@crypt.hfinney.com> Message-ID: <199701100041.AAA11442@brd.ie> [...] > I suspect that Java, when it gets its security API, may be a good > candidate for this kind of system. It's already got high level socket > I/O, and with a bignum package and some basic crypto primitives like > one way functions, you could do a lot with it. You still have the > problem of trading off safety for utility, though. I like Java too, however it is getting to be a systems programming language. In my experience people are irrationally scared of it, too (while happily tapping their secrets into MS-word, of course :-) What I have in mind is more obviously restricted, and more like a programmable calculator (with bignums and buttons marked "DES") - no sockets, no files, no system calls, etc. Just number-crunching. I take the point about Safe-TCL, but there must be some way of doing this in a way that enough people think it's safe to run. Cheers, Frank O'Dwyer. From blake at bcdev.com Thu Jan 9 17:42:47 1997 From: blake at bcdev.com (Blake Coverett) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:42:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. Message-ID: <01BBFE6C.F1F92260@bcdev.com> Welcome once again to your weekly round of 'Smell that Snake Oil' > A detailed description of the IMDMP encryption algorithm will be posted to > this mailing list within a few days. An end-user application will be released > within a few weeks. I would appreciate it if all you cypherpunks out there > review the description and the software, and tell me what you think of IMDMP. This is a good start. You would do well to keep your wild claims to a minimum until after the first cursory reviews. > are referenced more often than "bytes". And, the "industry standard" that > IMDMP is obviously well above is DES, etc. Also, DES 128, PGP 1024, RSA 128, > IDEA 128, and IMDMP 2048 were applied at their maximum settings on a file DES 128 - no such beast PGP 1024 - this is presumably a RSA key size, and has nothing to do with the session key involved in actually encrypting the data RSA 128 - RSA is not suited to encrypting streams of data but if you wanted to use it for that purpose 128bits would be ridiculusly to small to be secure IDEA 128 - wow, you've actually named one real block cipher! IMDMP 2048 - feh > full of about 64 *million* repeating "A" ASCII character bytes. The mutation > levels the algorithms rendered on their individual trash test files were > compared. Subtle patterns where searched for. Binary character tallys where > taken. IMDMP did *not* leave *any* repeating patterns in the test file that > was used. In IMDMP, each of the 256 possible binary character combinations > had an approximate count of 0.390625% of all of the 64 million bytes. > 0.390625% is the best possible percentage. The fact that you would consider this to be a sufficient test is proof enough for me that you should not be designing cryptosystems. > Are all of you out there > satisfied? Not even close. -Blake (who's waiting for the first pyramid-scheme cipher to be announced here next week) From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 9 18:00:44 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 18:00:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: More threatening e-mail from cocksucker John Gilmore and his cronies In-Reply-To: <199701090833.QAA15845@darwin.pacific.net.sg> Message-ID: >Received: from dimple.pacific (max75ppp20.pacific.net.sg [203.120.75.20]) by darwin.pacific.net.sg (8.8.2/8.8.2) with SMTP id QAA15845 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 16:33:17 +0800 (SGT) >Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 16:33:17 +0800 (SGT) >From: dimple at pacific.net.sg >Message-Id: <199701090833.QAA15845 at darwin.pacific.net.sg> >X-Sender: dimple at pacific.net.sg >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" >To: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) >Subject: Re: AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! > >I HAVE NO IDEA HOW YOU GOT MY ADD. BUT I DON'T LIKE THE AMOUNT OF MAIL >YOU'RE SEBDING ME. I HAVE ALREDY ALERTED THE POLICE OF YOUR DOINGS AND IF >YOU STILL SEND ME MORE JUNKMAIL BY TOMORROW THE POLICE WILL ARREST. >THE DEADLINE IS 1O JAN 1997. > > > Dear Dimple, It sounds like the ASALA terrorist Ray Arachelian has forged a subscription request in your name to the "cypher punks" mailing list! You can complain about his forgeries and net-abuse to his bosses: Jack D. Hidary Murray Hidary Nova Spivack With luck, you'll have this dandruff-covered Armenian vandal extradicted to Singapore, where he'll be beaten with a rattan cane for his misdeeds. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 9 18:02:48 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 18:02:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Interested in making extra income? In-Reply-To: <199701091527.HAA03723@latvia.it.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <1wka1D41w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ubs95 at earthlink.net writes: > Suck_My_Big_Juicy_Cock, > > Hello! You found the right mailing list. I'm sure John Gilmore, Sandy Sanford, Ray Arachelian, Zach Babyco, and other gay "cypher punks" are going to take you up on your offer. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From markm at voicenet.com Thu Jan 9 18:02:48 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 18:02:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. In-Reply-To: <970109181113_1044501439@emout15.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thu, 9 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > IN RESPONSE TO THE FLAME MAIL DATA RESEARCH HAS BEEN RECEIVING: > Note: The 18 "sub-algorithms" of IMDMP are basically algorithm "modes", and, > yes, many algorithms do *not* have multiple encryption layers, although, > obviously, the more advanced ones do. Please explain what a mode is. "Mode" usually refers to ECB, CBC, CFB, etc. > And, the "industry standard" that > IMDMP is obviously well above is DES, etc. Do you have any proof to back this up? > Also, DES 128, PGP 1024, RSA 128, > IDEA 128, and IMDMP 2048 were applied at their maximum settings on a file > full of about 64 *million* repeating "A" ASCII character bytes. PGP isn't an algorithm. And RSA 128 is _extremely_ insecure. How exactly did you get DES to use a 128-bit key? Perhaps you used some variant of DES, but you did not specify. Also, I'm curious as to why you compare IMDMP, which is (probably) a symmetric algorithm with public key algorithms. They really aren't comparable. > The mutation > levels the algorithms rendered on their individual trash test files were > compared. Subtle patterns where searched for. Binary character tallys where > taken. IMDMP did *not* leave *any* repeating patterns in the test file that > was used. In IMDMP, each of the 256 possible binary character combinations > had an approximate count of 0.390625% of all of the 64 million bytes. Just because ciphertext passes simple randomness tests does not mean that the algorithm used to encrypt it is secure. If ciphertext does not appear to be random, then the algorithm is not secure. It doesn't work the other way around. > 0.390625% is the best possible percentage. Are all of you out there > satisfied? Not especially. I'd still be interested in the design criteria used to develop this algorithm. Until you publish the full source and technical data, I will have to assume that the algorithm is insecure. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtWkCSzIPc7jvyFpAQE1Fgf9HNCgJ8Rp/F0JcxDi2seWN/l9wCvm97s3 woPB4F+nOVnhmkGNqhf1HfzBFNvaUzp9n/JsLnWU1MS5P0vtPCAxTbrNncuiMlId OHulFWeFePJUcG6peORKAtIcndZ47KpwQB8YlQ1bzWtqPs+KcfVfpPJHDjrO2/9C rD0HebdxSz3DpsBlK+Wj9M57R0RHQjL1r5nShXz0Dx0Z1oMy1FhuGvRlYhl8q2Z6 sElyVOklPTxjdKTuHjhlBIy5mEK/+56jBju9/njY6+S05L+3I+uffVXIKsH07QJF v8ReB9EnSOubBNxKgkfh5L6KHrvm3UZVY8dwJPsZFxGbsKAs1Gl7xQ== =s8rX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From lucifer at dhp.com Thu Jan 9 18:05:24 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 18:05:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [CRYPTO] e$ Message-ID: <199701100204.VAA15540@dhp.com> Tim C. Mayo's 16Kb brain's single convolution is directly wired to his rectum for input and his T1 mouth for output. That's 16K bits, not bytes. Anal intercourse has caused extensive brain damage. __MMM__ (o o) -ooO---(=)---Ooo- Tim C. Mayo From blake at bcdev.com Thu Jan 9 18:11:52 1997 From: blake at bcdev.com (Blake Coverett) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 18:11:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Humor from the UDCM help file Message-ID: <01BBFE71.053CC990@bcdev.com> The Exportation Restrictions section reads as follow: As of the release of UDCM V2.0, there are no absolutely no United States exportation regulation laws that actually affect the electronic Internet distribution of the IMDMP encryption algorithm. Electronic distribution technically does not constitute physical distribution. So because of that, it is perfectly legal for UDCM V2.0 to be digitally distributed world-wide. However, the international physical disk distribution of UDCM V2.0 is not legal. Also note that DataET will not sell a registered version of UDCM to any person outside of the United States and Canada. There are absolutely no exceptions at all. DataET Research cannot be held responsible for any illegal distribution actions that take place outside of its direct control. However, software containing or having access to the registered version of UDCM may be distributed world-wide, physically or electronically, but programs developed using a registered version of UDCM may not be distributed outside of the U.S. and Canada unless users are not given direct access to UDCM's functions or unless applied encryption keys are no larger than 7 bytes (56 bits). Users are said to have direct access if they can choose which files to operate on. Could someone please forward this to Dan Bernstein and Phil Karn, I'm sure they'll be happy to know that they can drop the law suits now. -Blake From proff at suburbia.net Thu Jan 9 19:07:23 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net (proff at suburbia.net) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 19:07:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <970109201419_1207964145@emout18.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <19970110030634.28720.qmail@suburbia.net> > Comment: "What kind of industry standard is IMDMP above?" > Reply: 128-bit encryption. Average DES is 128. PGP tops 1024. IDEA goes at > 128. RSA the same. Full security IMDMP is 2048-bit. Any other questions? > Eew. Love those asymetric vs symetric key length comparisons. From geeman at best.com Thu Jan 9 19:51:47 1997 From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 19:51:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970109200218.006d59dc@best.com> Why are people so convinced that a uniform distribution in cyphertext equates to security? Nonsense. At 06:11 PM 1/9/97 -0500, you wrote: >{Please read this *entire* e-mail message.} > >compared. Subtle patterns where searched for. Binary character tallys where >taken. IMDMP did *not* leave *any* repeating patterns in the test file that >was used. In IMDMP, each of the 256 possible binary character combinations >had an approximate count of 0.390625% of all of the 64 million bytes. > 0.390625% is the best possible percentage. Are all of you out there >satisfied? > >Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos >President >DataET Research >Data Engineering Technologies > > From relia at juno.com Thu Jan 9 20:06:51 1997 From: relia at juno.com (relia at juno.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:06:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: It's a great new year! Message-ID: <199701100406.XAA19134@pop1.vnet.net> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Here's Hoping That You And Your Family Have a Very Safe And Happy New Year! - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The information below is believed to be of interest to you. If not, I apologize for the intrusion. If you have any further questions, please send me e-mail and I will reply promptly. I'm here to help! Over 80% of all Americans suffer from bad marks on their credit. I did. If you don't, that's great! Read no further. But, if your credit is marred by mistakes in the past or errors on the part of the bureaus, read on! It doesn't have to be that way. You have the RIGHT to have negative information removed in many instances. My partner and I have put together an easy to read, easy to use manual that will explain your rights and may help you restore your credit to A+ status. Why pay an attorney $2,000 or some credit counselor $500 or more to do exactly what you can do for yourself? For less than $15, you can help yourself to better credit. We'll give you all the tools you need and explain exactly what to do. This is not "credit reversal". You won't have to lie to anyone or obtain a fraudulent tax id number like many of the "instant credit repair" scams out there advise you to do. It takes some work and perserverence, but you will be able to clean up old marks and there are even techniques to turn current bad credit accounts around! And, it's all legal and EASY. @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ To Order "Credit Repair Made Easy" send $12.95 + $2 (s/h)(check or money order) to: Magnolia Enterprises C/O Credit Repair Post Office Box 154 Greensboro, NC 27401 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ You've probably seen other offers or similar credit repair packages that promise overnight results. Anyone who promises a quick overnight fix is *lying* to you. It takes time and perseverance to fix your bad credit. But, it can be done! There are also people out there who promise to help you establish a new credit file. THIS IS ILLEGAL - Don't Do It. ------------------------------------------------- Don't get ripped off and don't take bad advice that encourages you to break the law! Our system WORKS! Our credit repair manual will show you step by step how to do it yourself - and it's not hard to do! And, we put our money where our mouth is. Our manual comes with a 90-day guarantee! So order NOW. The sooner you get started, the more quickly your credit file will be on it's way to AAA status! Thanks again, and we hope you find this information useful. If you would like your name to be removed from our list, please e-mail "relia at juno.com" and put "remove" in the subject line. We purchased a mailing list of folks who should be interested in various products that we produce, but mailing lists can be wrong, and we don't want to take your time again unnecessarily. Thanks for your help! From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 9 20:10:42 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:10:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cadaverine In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Path: perun!news2.panix.com!panix!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!news3.cac.psu.edu!news.tc.cornell.edu!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!NewsWatcher!user From: trc7 at cornell.edu (Sam bovis) Newsgroups: alt.revenge Subject: Re: Cadaverine Message-ID: Date: Thu, 09 Jan 1997 16:28:46 -0500 References: <5all7p$ccv at basement.replay.com> <32d36497.310784677 at news.concentric.net> Sender: trc7 at cornell.edu (Verified) Organization: Not too good Lines: 18 NNTP-Posting-Host: 132 In article <32d36497.310784677 at news.concentric.net>, Elmer at fudd.com (Elmer the Wabbit Eater) wrote: > nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) spewed forth: > > >:I'm looking for a company who sells a product call Cadaverine. > >: Try Sigma Chemical Company out of St. Louis, MO. They are a large supplier of very pure scientific supplies. Contact them to see what their policies are in selling non-lethal compounds to people off the street. Cadaverine is a by-product of protein fermentation by bacteria and is not harmful. If you are planning to bomb someone's home with it, it will dissipate over a couple of days because it is so volatile. Another source is dog training supply houses, body-locating dogs are trained by use of cadaverine and putrescine, another similar compound. Hope this helps. L. Rumen JKoB Large Hairball available upon request From unicorn at schloss.li Thu Jan 9 20:17:39 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:17:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ignore all the messages about... In-Reply-To: <970109185342_1857195697@emout11.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 18:53:44 -0500 (EST) > From: DataETRsch at aol.com > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Ignore all the messages about... > > Hi again, > > In the the help documentation of the shareware version of UDCM, there may > appear to be a message that reads: > > Describing the algorithmic contents of the IMDMP encryption algorithm is well > beyond the scope of this on-line manual. In fact, there is currently > absolutely no documentation that exists outside of the corporate domain of > DataET Research that actually explains the IMDMP encryption algorithm in any > true detail, and DataET Research does not intend to release or disclose any > such sensitive documentation to the general public, ETC. ETC. ETC. ETC. ETC. > ETC. > > PLEASE DISREGARD THE ABOVE MESSAGE COMPLETELY. Happy to, right after the "sensitive documentation" is released. > > Jeremy... > President > DataET Research > Data Engineering Technologies > -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From rah at shipwright.com Thu Jan 9 20:22:51 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:22:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: [CRYPTO] e$ In-Reply-To: <199701100204.VAA15540@dhp.com> Message-ID: At 9:04 pm -0500 1/9/97, Anonymous wrote: >Tim C. Mayo's 16Kb brain's single convolution is directly >wired to his rectum for input and his T1 mouth for output. >That's 16K bits, not bytes. Anal intercourse has caused >extensive brain damage. Hey, buddy? I don't know if you can see it or not, but there's this little red spot on your head. It's just about where your medulla oblongata meets your spinal cord... Just waiting for Sandy to pull the trigger, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From unicorn at schloss.li Thu Jan 9 20:32:50 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:32:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Problems with UDCM V2.0? In-Reply-To: <970109184751_1157614624@emout05.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > If you are even having the slightest problem with UDCM, do not hesitate to > send us a message at: DataETRsch at aol.com. I am having trouble finding the complete source code and abstract to same. Could you forward it here please? -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 9 20:51:12 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:51:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Escrow Good, GAK Bad In-Reply-To: <199701092131.QAA00797@aus-c.mp.campus.mci.net> Message-ID: <32D5DEDA.26D5@sk.sympatico.ca> Ken Kirksey wrote: > And he is a typical computer user. If your average joe forgets his > passphrase and loses two days worth of work, he's not likely to encrypt > his work again. (Or he's likely to write down his passphrase in the > future). If we were using a Key Escrow system, this situation could have > been avoided. Yes, using a key escrow system is less secure that using a > non-key escrow system, but I'd argue that using a strong key escrow > system is better than using no encryption at all in situations like this. Key escrow is an easy-fix for securing company communications, and I am sure that it has its place in a situation such as yours, where you have to baby-sit people who want the full benefits of a technology that is beyond them. The problem, of course, is that, as TV has shown us for years, the 'lowest common denominator' becomes the rule. People will use key escrow for things that should actually have uncomprimisable security, and they will scream bloody murder when it is compromised. It wasn't that long ago when I was talking to the CEO of a company on a plane to Nantucket, and he was boasting about how he encrypted his files with Pkzip to thwart would-be intruders. I decrypted one of his files for him on the trip between the mainland and Nantucket (you go up, you go down, you're there). He was astounded. He had told me that his kid was a hacker, so I told him to ask his kid if he could access his 'protected' files. I forgot about the incident, but a few weeks later the guy tracked me down in Tucson (I had told him the name of my company), and told me that it took his kid less than a week of scouting around the local BBS's to find a program to crack Poppa's 'high-security' files. Key Escrow, I suppose, is like most other things--a trade-off. BTW, I occasionally 'write down' a reference to my passwords, as a 'reminder'. e.g. - Password / Zappa Concert--1980 (this reminds me of the password I used, which was 38-24-37RedHead) (sorry, no pictures) Toto > > > To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a > >hole in it. No thanks. > > I agree in principle, and I doubt I would ever use a key recovery system > if I had a choice. But, speaking as a network manager, I know that > private key recovery (not GAK) can be an enhancement to security. > > I'll give an example. About a year ago, my boss wanted to protect his > file of annual financial projections for the company from prying eyes on > our Macintosh network. I installed CurveEncrypt on his machine, showed > him how to use it, and gave him the standard lecture on choosing a good > passphrase. I stressed that he needed to chose a passphrase easy to > remember, because if he forgot it, there was no way to get his file back. > > Well, he forgot his passphrase. He spent an hour trying every > combination he could think of, interjecting a curse here and there for > color. He is now totally off using encryption to protect sensitive > information. He refuses to use it, and he discourages anyone in the > office from using it. I know that his position is unfair, but he _is_ > the boss, so he makes the rules. > > And he is a typical computer user. If your average joe forgets his > passphrase and loses two days worth of work, he's not likely to encrypt > his work again. (Or he's likely to write down his passphrase in the > future). If we were using a Key Escrow system, this situation could have > been avoided. Yes, using a key escrow system is less secure that using a > non-key escrow system, but I'd argue that using a strong key escrow > system is better than using no encryption at all in situations like this. > Our network is less secure that it could be because of one user's bad > experience. > > Ken From zachb at netcom.com Thu Jan 9 21:00:46 1997 From: zachb at netcom.com (Z.B.) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:00:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Interested in making extra income? In-Reply-To: <1wka1D41w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ubs95 at earthlink.net writes: > > > Suck_My_Big_Juicy_Cock, > > > > Hello! > > You found the right mailing list. I'm sure John Gilmore, Sandy Sanford, > Ray Arachelian, Zach Babyco, and other gay "cypher punks" are going to > take you up on your offer. > > Oh, wow, what an insult. I am shocked and humbled by your rapier wit. If you are going to insult me, you could at least get my name right...who is Zach Babyco? Zach Babayco zachb at netcom.com <-------finger for PGP public key If you need to know how to set up a mail filter or defend against emailbombs, send me a message with the words "get helpfile" (without the " marks) in the SUBJECT: header, *NOT THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE!* I have several useful FAQs and documents available. From unicorn at schloss.li Thu Jan 9 21:08:09 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:08:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. In-Reply-To: <970109181113_1044501439@emout15.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 9 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 18:11:18 -0500 (EST) > From: DataETRsch at aol.com > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. > > {Please read this *entire* e-mail message.} > > Hi, > > A detailed description of the IMDMP encryption algorithm will be posted to > this mailing list within a few days. An end-user application will be released > within a few weeks. I would appreciate it if all you cypherpunks out there > review the description and the software, and tell me what you think of IMDMP. This entire thread makes me want to suggest a set of guidelines for people who are going to try and submit untested crypto software to the list so we don't have to do this every 2 weeks. In any event this is a good start. [...] > IN RESPONSE TO THE FLAME MAIL DATA RESEARCH HAS BEEN RECEIVING: > Note: The 18 "sub-algorithms" of IMDMP are basically algorithm "modes", and, > yes, many algorithms do *not* have multiple encryption layers, although, > obviously, the more advanced ones do. Also, 256 bytes is equal to 2048 bits. I dont believe this is quite what you mean. I think you are confusing two kinds of cyphers (public and otherwise) with each other and attributing for the difference in key measurements (actually caused by the different keyspace for prime number based public key systems) by using bytes and bits. This does not bode well for your crypto expertise, if in fact this is what you are doing. > I realize that most of you out there know that, but some of you don't. "Bits" > are referenced more often than "bytes". I dont really think anyone uses bytes to refer to key size, except perhaps in Prime Number challenges (RSA-129). > And, the "industry standard" that > IMDMP is obviously well above is DES, etc. How is this obvious? > Also, DES 128, I'm not sure DES 128 exists. > PGP 1024, RSA 128, > IDEA 128, and IMDMP 2048 were applied at their maximum settings on a file > full of about 64 *million* repeating "A" ASCII character bytes. The mutation > levels the algorithms rendered on their individual trash test files were > compared. Subtle patterns where searched for. Binary character tallys where > taken. IMDMP did *not* leave *any* repeating patterns in the test file that > was used. In IMDMP, each of the 256 possible binary character combinations > had an approximate count of 0.390625% of all of the 64 million bytes. > 0.390625% is the best possible percentage. Are all of you out there > satisfied? No. A simple entropy test does not a cypher make. I'd also like to know what patterns were tested for as certainly I know of no test which can prove that a given set of data does not have "*any* repeating patterns." Entropy is subjective. Perhaps it encodes stuff in Estonian. There may not be recognizeable patterns in english, but there certainly will be patterns. Perhaps its output exactly mimics the radiowave noise from Alpha Centauri between 10pm and 10:00.0056pm January 1. You can't show me it doesn't, and if you could I could just invent a new pattern to get you to test. (How many angels....) Can't prove a negative (there are no patterns in here). Your cypher has obviously undergone a lot of work. This too does not a cypher make. Nor does your hype. That usually a cypher unmakes, in fact. My suggestion: Full disclosure on your cypher coupled with a reduction in the sales and marketing rhetoric that we are getting from you. (You might try a non AOL address too, adds a bit more respectability). > Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos > President > DataET Research > Data Engineering Technologies > -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From mycroft at actrix.gen.nz Thu Jan 9 21:11:51 1997 From: mycroft at actrix.gen.nz (Paul Foley) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:11:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: <199701090132.TAA28002@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <199701100342.QAA20144@mycroft.actrix.gen.nz> On Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:32:20 -0600 (CST), Igor Chudov wrote: Cypherpunks, why don't we try to crack his encryption program? It seems like a fun exercise. Well, a few minutes looking at it turned up the following: * Capitalisation and word lengths are retained in the ciphertext, so there's no transposition involved (or he's being sneaky to make it look that way :-) ) * The two 'e's in the first word have different ciphertext equivalents, so it's not a single-alphabet substitution * The words "wjq nwcc" occur together twice, 300 characters apart, the word "iyn" occurs three times, 375 and 300 characters apart, the word "fhw" occurs twice, 1400 characters apart, and the word "git" occurs twice, 500 characters apart. This suggests a repeating key of length 5 or 25 characters. * However, the letter 'r' in "Here" and "encryption" and the letters 'am' in "example" and "program" occur 25 characters apart and have different ciphertext equivalents. Possibly the key position is being incremented when "encrypting" digits and other non-alphabetic symbols, so my counts above (only letters) are wrong. Also, I suspect that in the following ciphertext, EJMDLH.WKN and ZFIYVZ.XGA are "CONFIG.SYS", KALMF is "FILES" and "ZPKQUST" is "BUFFERS". ##> Pbg qpypmjf EJMDLJ.WKN prbthucy hxzb tbcmsfs iyn bsfijsyey hdokz: ##> ##> KALMF=20 ##> ZPKQUST=20 ##> ##> Z ixyh ZFIYVZ.XGA crxg ckqm wam wjq nwcc qjt QMUSAXH dsi ei: -- Paul Foley --- PGPmail preferred PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33 C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Life is a POPULARITY CONTEST! I'm REFRESHINGLY CANDID!! From stefen at thor.he.net Thu Jan 9 21:17:06 1997 From: stefen at thor.he.net (stefen at thor.he.net) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:17:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: INFO Message-ID: <9701100509.AA21070@venus.superstore.com> I_Love_SPAM, Please forgive me for this e-mail, but I felt I just had to let more people know about this new product for your vehicles. EVERY 4TH TANK OF GAS FREE !!! New technology guaranteed to save 20% on gas mileage, extend engine life by 50%, and reduce smog emissions by 70 - 90% legally. 8000 in use. Yes we do have the PROOF. 100% money back guarantee in writing. Please answer 4 questions so I can serve you better. What kind of vehicle do you drive ? How much do you spend on fuel per month ? How long do you plan to keep your vehicle ? And what state do you live in ? From snow at smoke.suba.com Thu Jan 9 21:19:52 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:19:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. In-Reply-To: <970109181113_1044501439@emout15.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <199701100535.XAA00734@smoke.suba.com> > {Please read this *entire* e-mail message.} > Hi, > this mailing list within a few days. An end-user application will be released > within a few weeks. I would appreciate it if all you cypherpunks out there > review the description and the software, and tell me what you think of IMDMP. I think I can speak for all of us when I say we are waiting with baited breath. Yes, Virginia, that _is_ sarcasm. > Also: The AOL web site address my company has may not always work out when > the server is having problems or user overloads. Please try again later. > Again, the web site address for UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module, is: > http://members.aol.com/DataETRsch/udcm.html. For $100 up front, and about $40 a month you can get a real domain name and virtual domain that doesn't have a problem with "user overloads". If you are so high tech, why are you using AOL for a WEB SERVER? (this is a seperate issue from using it for _access_) > IN RESPONSE TO THE FLAME MAIL DATA RESEARCH HAS BEEN RECEIVING: > Note: The 18 "sub-algorithms" of IMDMP are basically algorithm "modes", and, > yes, many algorithms do *not* have multiple encryption layers, although, > obviously, the more advanced ones do. Also, 256 bytes is equal to 2048 bits. > I realize that most of you out there know that, but some of you don't. "Bits" > are referenced more often than "bytes". And, the "industry standard" that > IMDMP is obviously well above is DES, etc. Also, DES 128, PGP 1024, RSA 128, With certain versions of PGP (or rather with non-us versions of certain libraries used by PGP) you can get much larger keys than 1024. In fact with 2.62 you can (IIRC) do 2048. > IDEA 128, and IMDMP 2048 were applied at their maximum settings on a file > full of about 64 *million* repeating "A" ASCII character bytes. The mutation > levels the algorithms rendered on their individual trash test files were > compared. Subtle patterns where searched for. Binary character tallys where > taken. IMDMP did *not* leave *any* repeating patterns in the test file that > was used. In IMDMP, each of the 256 possible binary character combinations > had an approximate count of 0.390625% of all of the 64 million bytes. > 0.390625% is the best possible percentage. Are all of you out there > satisfied? Well, just for fun, I wrote a short C program that wrote a file of 64,000,000 A's, and ran it thru PGP with a key size of 1024, and grabbed the pre-ascii armor version of it. I looked thru it, and no obvious patterns were there. PGP must use a pretty good compression algorythm(sp?) since the gzip of the A's file is only about 13 bytes longer than the gzip version. A second pass of gzip gives me a file of 289 bytes. In fact, I would doubt that any half way decent encryption program _would show repeating worth a damn, compression should take care of most of the *obvious* patterns in normal text. 2 or more passes should handle anything deliberately (or naturally) pattern heavy. So no. I am not impressed. Post the code, pay OUTSIDERS to look at your code. Get it banned by the NSA, _then_ I'll be impressed. From jburrell at crl.crl.com Thu Jan 9 21:35:33 1997 From: jburrell at crl.crl.com (Jason Burrell) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:35:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On 8 Jan 1997, Derek Atkins wrote: > There is no PGP 2.6.3; at least not that came from MIT... Someone > else may have made something claiming to be 2.6.3, but it did not > originate from MIT. There is a pgp 2.6.3i. Apparently, it's another "international" version. I believe it's on one of the usual sites, but I don't know what's changed in it. -- Good government. Good government. Sit. Stay. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 9 21:40:36 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:40:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: SSL Insecurity In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970109124118.00920db0@gateway.grumman.com> Message-ID: <32D5AEAE.3B1C@sk.sympatico.ca> Rick Osborne wrote: > > A while back, someone posted an article on the insecurity of Netscape's > implementation of SSL. Can someone send me back that article, or a few > pointers as to where I can find related information? > This isn't an exact pointer, but there are some articles on it at the following site. You may have to do a little digging. http://www.cs.hut.fi/ssh/crypto Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 9 21:48:33 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 21:48:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D5EFFB.22E8@sk.sympatico.ca> > To wit: "I suggest zero tolerance of Black Unicorn unless and until > someone reveals his real name." His (or her) name is Black Unicorn. Do you have a reading problem? From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 9 22:32:15 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 22:32:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homosexual Lynch Mob, Cabal In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D59F3E.59B1@gte.net> Stephen Boursy wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > aga wrote: > > > Stephen Boursy wrote: > > >> Dave Hayes wrote:[snip] > > A lot if people act (pretend to be?) shocked to find that a so-called > > minority would practice discrimination. A classic example from what > > I've heard is the ADL going *against* the World Jewish Congress and > > lining up with the U.S. State Dept. in the 1930's, to *suppress* > > Jewish dissenters in the U.S., because it was "good for business" > > at that time. > That was due to zionism was it not? I hate zionists with a passion. > Zionists continue to this day to make all sorts of unsavory tradeofffs > to keep their stolen land--there is only one solution there and Arafat > no longer has what it takes (he sold out too). This is really a tough one. I'd guess that the agenda of Zionists, as well as some of their allies, changes or incorporates additional goals at different levels in the cabal. We all know what the lower levels look like, but the nature of the very top level intrigues me to no end. Is it just money and power, control of property etc.? Or is it something "really evil"? > But I think the policy of public gay bashing on the usenet to be > counter-productive, irrational and unfair (aside from bad PR). Bob > Allisat for example is completely alienated from some here because > of this--I respect Allisat a great deal--he's done much for usenet > freedom and has a real mouth on him. That you respect him says a lot for him in spite of his alleged irrationality. > A large percentage of the population is gay--the average citizen is > moving in to the usenet and we need their support if we are to toss > the cabal in the trash and in some cases jail. The average citizen will never support freedom fighters, and I think this is even more true of the Internet than in the outside world. Of course, I hope I'm wrong, or that there's some technology or formula that will enable average people to have the courage to defend that freedom. > Deliberatly alienating such a large class of people is not logical > nor is it fair. It is of course everyones right to freely do so-- > here and in any forum on usenet. I am sympathetic to what you're saying. I am also sympathetic to the opinion that there are some things that people practice which are OK if they affect only them and nobody else, but are not necessarily OK when they affect others. One of the things that make a society a society is the relative accomodation or tolerance that society has for various practices and beliefs which are outside of the norm. The PC premise is that it's OK to have certain practices and beliefs which are outside (sometimes way outside) of the norm, but that to keep from hurting the feelings of what are (or in the PC people's opinion should be) protected classes of people/practices/beliefs, we should refrain from speech or actions which has the effect of offending these people. You'll note in the last presidential campaign, to name an example, much of the media beat up on Pat Buchanan, going so far as to call him a Nazi and so on. (Not that they would do that to Reagan, who is IMO a real Nazi, BTW.) Now, those folks who don't like to be called "fag" or whatever, did they speak out against this public labeling of Buchanan? I don't know a damn thing about the real Buchanan, although I know that William F. Buckley Jr. is a real scumbag, to name a relevant example. I'm sorry if I don't conform 100%, but I just don't see any real justice being called for and worked for by the PC mob - I only see selfishness and an ongoing attempt to transfer more power from the mainstream public into the hands of various special interest groups. Tell you what, though. If any gay interest group comes out for justice in a substantial way, that is, if they call for changes I can believe in, I'll support them to that extent at least, and try to stay out of their way otherwise if possible. But I won't hold my breath on that. From Moesch at aol.com Thu Jan 9 22:50:28 1997 From: Moesch at aol.com (Moesch at aol.com) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 22:50:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Save & Earn $$$ On Long Distance! Message-ID: <199701100650.BAA12991@newman.cris.com> I_Love_SPAM, Hi, I saw your ad in alt.make money and I would like to tell you about something which will be of interest to you. If this mail is not wanted we apologize. Type "remove" in subject field and return. You will receive no further mailings to this address. If you are looking for a STABLE, RELIABLE, LONG TERM PROGRAM to put your valuable time and effort into, then LOOK NO FURTHER...... � Cost Nothing to Join � No Inventory to Stock � You Get Great Commissions � EVERYBODY USES IT! � Great Long Distance Rates all day long � You can start TODAY! Details: 1) Flat Rate Long Distance interstate only 9.9/10.9 cents/minute with 6 second billing! Excellent int'l Rates 2) You can get an #800 with no set- up charge billed at the rate of only 13.9 cents per minute and a calling card billed at the rate of 17.9 cents per minute with a $1 monthly service fee for each 3) 5% First level commissions for everyone you refer! 4) Total of 15% commissions through 5 levels! 5) Additional services to be added soon For more info E-Mail me at Moesch at concentric.net. In the subject type "More". From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jan 9 23:01:07 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 23:01:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Escrow Good, GAK Bad In-Reply-To: <199701092357.PAA23840@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <199701100705.BAA18682@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701092357.PAA23840 at slack.lne.com>, on 01/09/97 at 07:57 PM, Eric Murray said: >Ken Kirksey writes: >> >> > To me, Key Recovery cryptography is like using a condom with a >> >hole in it. No thanks. >> >> I agree in principle, and I doubt I would ever use a key recovery system >> if I had a choice. But, speaking as a network manager, I know that >> private key recovery (not GAK) can be an enhancement to security. >> >> I'll give an example. About a year ago, my boss wanted to protect his >> file of annual financial projections for the company from prying eyes on >> our Macintosh network. I installed CurveEncrypt on his machine, showed >> him how to use it, and gave him the standard lecture on choosing a good >> passphrase. I stressed that he needed to chose a passphrase easy to >> remember, because if he forgot it, there was no way to get his file back. >> >> Well, he forgot his passphrase. He spent an hour trying every >> combination he could think of, interjecting a curse here and there for >> color. He is now totally off using encryption to protect sensitive >> information. >User education would be even easier than key escrow. Your boss could >have shared that passphrase with one or more other people, ideally the >people who helped him make the report. When you encrypt something >that's vital to the company, you need to make sure that it can be >gotten back. In most companies, there's more than one person who >is 'cleared' for even the more vital information. The keys to >those files should be shared amongst those people. >Unfortunately, few encryption programs make this easy. And even though >you can do it in PGP by encrypting to multiple recipients, how many >people think to do so? I don't. Most programs assume that there's one >key that that's used to encrypt everything, hence one level of security- >the highest. But in a business situation you really need to be able to >encrypt something with your key and your secretary's key, or the keys of >all the board members, etc. Would not this be the perfect senario for the implementation of Shamir's Secret Sharing? Rather that having several people being able to access the data independent of each other having a shared key where it requited say 3 out of 5 members to access the data? That way a breach of security of one key does not result in a breach of security of all data. Are there any know implementations of this? Thanks, - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Air conditioned environment - Do not open Windows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtXo/49Co1n+aLhhAQEZ3QP7BSwuDC7OyXpNPGg8HtROkHkMTpIP6oBf S/NvqazKt8PFsnmpY0m2aCaZzHUOSD5d42tOVxZr8xJK7ylm/DIbwACgRtGDL6yT 61RUn4c8kXoS8bKOCRWyQvcyZJWSy4ddcnTlj/y7zbmmKOqvxdWWf333+NvWsbG1 xpcsm6n7sy4= =v0Q6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From frantz at netcom.com Thu Jan 9 23:29:07 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 23:29:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IDEA] Cypherpunks Super Computer (was Re: The Upcoming DESChallenge) In-Reply-To: <199701092015.MAA00707@crypt.hfinney.com> Message-ID: At 12:15 PM -0800 1/9/97, Hal Finney wrote: >I suspect that Java, when it gets its security API, may be a good >candidate for this kind of system. It's already got high level socket >I/O, and with a bignum package and some basic crypto primitives like >one way functions, you could do a lot with it. You still have the >problem of trading off safety for utility, though. More of security API has hit the web site. Java 1.1 has some crypto primitives (exportable). I also think it has a bignum package (but I am not in a good position to check right now). Info and download a few links away from . ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 9 23:36:13 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 23:36:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [CRYPTO] e$ In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D5F10D.4D73@gte.net> Robert Hettinga wrote: > At 9:04 pm -0500 1/9/97, Anonymous wrote:[Timmy is a.....] > Hey, buddy? I don't know if you can see it or not, but there's this little > red spot on your head. It's just about where your medulla oblongata meets > your spinal cord... > Just waiting for Sandy to pull the trigger, Just waiting for Sandy.... Yeah, sure. You'll be waiting for Sandy to come get you and your pals out of the "family camp" they're preparing for you and your kind. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 9 23:47:22 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 23:47:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: One-time pads Message-ID: <199701100747.XAA27657@mailmasher.com> Timmy May is widely recognized on the net, because of his frequent vitriolic postings, as someone/thing ready to cut off his own penis to spite the testicles, although his friends recognize him better from the rear. 0 //\/ Timmy May \/\ ... / From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 9 23:50:57 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 23:50:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: <199701100342.QAA20144@mycroft.actrix.gen.nz> Message-ID: <199701100744.BAA07018@manifold.algebra.com> Paul Foley wrote: > > On Wed, 8 Jan 1997 19:32:20 -0600 (CST), Igor Chudov wrote: > > Cypherpunks, why don't we try to crack his encryption program? It seems > like a fun exercise. > > Well, a few minutes looking at it turned up the following: > > * Capitalisation and word lengths are retained in the ciphertext, so > there's no transposition involved (or he's being sneaky to make it > look that way :-) ) I also did a frequency analysis on letters of the ciphertext. Here's the output of my frequency program: a:71 b:72 c:66 d:55 e:48 f:57 g:68 h:49 i:72 j:52 k:59 l:48 m:77 n:80 o:41 p:70 q:59 r:63 s:62 t:63 u:53 v:55 w:62 x:60 y:45 z:66 Min = 41, Max = 80, mean = 60.500000, std = 10.044899 16 letters' frequencies are within 50--70, 10 are out, which suggests that the distribution may not be "normal". For a normal the proportion should be something like 84:16. I also tried xoring the plaintext line with the ciphertext line, w/o much enlightenment. > * The two 'e's in the first word have different ciphertext equivalents, > so it's not a single-alphabet substitution yes > * The words "wjq nwcc" occur together twice, 300 characters apart, > the word "iyn" occurs three times, 375 and 300 characters apart, > the word "fhw" occurs twice, 1400 characters apart, and > the word "git" occurs twice, 500 characters apart. This suggests > a repeating key of length 5 or 25 characters. I also likes "follows": "vkbcjtp" note how ll gets translated to "bc". That suggest that after some encryption of each letter from the plaintext there is a consecutively increasing number added. > * However, the letter 'r' in "Here" and "encryption" and the letters > 'am' in "example" and "program" occur 25 characters apart and have > different ciphertext equivalents. Possibly the key position is > being incremented when "encrypting" digits and other non-alphabetic > symbols, so my counts above (only letters) are wrong. > Also, I suspect that in the following ciphertext, EJMDLH.WKN and > ZFIYVZ.XGA are "CONFIG.SYS", KALMF is "FILES" and "ZPKQUST" is > "BUFFERS". agree, there is a lot of other similar stuff > ##> Pbg qpypmjf EJMDLJ.WKN prbthucy hxzb tbcmsfs iyn bsfijsyey hdokz: > ##> > ##> KALMF=20 > ##> ZPKQUST=20 > ##> > ##> Z ixyh ZFIYVZ.XGA crxg ckqm wam wjq nwcc qjt QMUSAXH dsi ei: > > -- > Paul Foley --- PGPmail preferred > > PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers > fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33 C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > Life is a POPULARITY CONTEST! I'm REFRESHINGLY CANDID!! > - Igor. From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Fri Jan 10 00:04:48 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 00:04:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701100724.XAA08921@sirius.infonex.com> A beta implementation Ver:1.0 (for Win95/NT) of the CDSA API's has been posted to the web yesterday for free download. You can find it at www.intel.com/ial/security The implementation will timeout on Feb 28, 1997 and is non-exportable. Any feedback/comments on the implementation would be appreciated. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 10 00:17:21 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 00:17:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Humor from the UDCM help file In-Reply-To: <01BBFE71.053CC990@bcdev.com> Message-ID: <32D6039B.35D@sk.sympatico.ca> Blake Coverett wrote: > > The Exportation Restrictions section reads as follow: > > As of the release of UDCM V2.0, there are no absolutely no > United States exportation regulation laws that actually affect > the electronic Internet distribution of the IMDMP encryption > algorithm. Electronic distribution technically does not constitute > physical distribution. So because of that, it is perfectly legal for > UDCM V2.0 to be digitally distributed world-wide.> > Could someone please forward this to Dan Bernstein and > Phil Karn, I'm sure they'll be happy to know that they can > drop the law suits now. I got the same advice from my legal counsel (for a quart of Budwiser and a pack of Camel straights). Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 10 00:19:01 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 00:19:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D60910.5BB@sk.sympatico.ca> Mark M. wrote: > On Thu, 9 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > > IN RESPONSE TO THE FLAME MAIL DATA RESEARCH HAS BEEN RECEIVING: The 'flames' used as examples seemed to me to be nothing more than valid questions regarding the DataETR's claims for their software. (Big Hint / Questions from conferences with the word 'punks' in the name are not likely to be accompanied by bowing gestures and exclaimations of amazement at unsubstantiated claims). > > 0.390625% is the best possible percentage. Are all of you out there > > satisfied? > > Not especially. I'd still be interested in the design criteria used to develop > this algorithm. Until you publish the full source and technical data, I will > have to assume that the algorithm is insecure. Keep in mind that many CypherPunks dream in numbers. Toto From harka at nycmetro.com Fri Jan 10 00:24:46 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 00:24:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Search for Remailer Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, It probably has been discussed before, but since the shutdown of Penet and the re-design of c2.org, I am looking for a remailer, that allows an reply adress. Since it doesn't have to be high-security, the format of My mailbox-->Remailer-->Recipient, and subsequently Recipient-->Remailer-->My mailbox, would be enough. Please copy replies to my private e-mail, for I am currently not subscribed to CPs... Thanks in advance for your help... Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /* Note: My old key (KeyID: B2728495) has been revoked. */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMtXvzzltEBIEF0MBAQElkAf/X4cqUEzB573IHpEsiXhGUgXjD91B9y8d 3mcVvutblQrrkvMzdCjXA+0QPh6PSuVrDTKNR4qTfvzGSC6apxVwZRApd2bdYXKl ZXL85kfxPXKAeQOidUqlhZmLVaT6x7HzELox7ovR+el4El2yb3LdWyeoK/xhlq6K DSpOKJawhFlZv/5FzSyEoPDIztY8E7Xp74PCr7XWAclY0Xi/cS8H7WGGOskZOAme AxsHB2PeR+0DLOE5zToABA/HDZuws4pnHB6NcR4jzi9lkp2FoHJxvpgZzTn55fNz KnQpsvh3q/a1UUiWe0NUUEP0VjMtqyOm098UuhhN2gN1MDyaNT+q7A== =oUW9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From dave at cave.gctech.co.jp Fri Jan 10 00:31:47 1997 From: dave at cave.gctech.co.jp (David Wuertele) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 00:31:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IDEA] Cypherpunks Super Computer (was Re: The Upcoming DES Challenge) In-Reply-To: <199701082322.XAA09234@brd.ie> Message-ID: "Frank O'Dwyer" writes: > However, what if there was a safe scripting language with bignum > arithmetic and other cryptographic primitives, and what if > lots of people ran a service that would accept scripts in > that language and respond with the answer? Say, a Safe-TCL > interface to Peter Gutmann's cryptlib, running at idle > priority? Sort of like a distributed batch queue, and also > a bit like the way jobs are (were?) submitted to Crays. The > Cypherpunks Super Computer. It need not be significantly slower > than raw code if the primitives are high level enough. Perl 5.0 has a better, simpler, safety mode than Java (and probably Safe-TCL too), and runs on more machines. It is also the standard for CGI, so anyone already running CGI could simply add a perl-based crypto service. Dave From gbroiles at netbox.com Fri Jan 10 01:33:16 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 01:33:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970110011150.00757b38@mail.io.com> At 06:04 PM 1/9/97 -0500, Black Unicorn wrote: >Go out to a law book store and take a look at the guideline book. It's >actually a lot of fun. "Ok, say I killed my wife for her coke stash and >recruited my brother to dump the body..." The US Sentencing Commission and the guidelines are on the Web - see for general Commission stuff, and for the 1995 manual (there have been amendments, but this ought to be good enough for just goofing off). I haven't seen the recent Supreme Court decision yet, but from the description it sounds like they haven't done anything more than affirm what the federal courts have been doing for some time now. In general, crimes or bad acts which are used at sentencing must only be proved to a preponderance standard, and the judge is the trier of fact. The use of uncharged bad acts evidence is old news. I wish I had some hope that recent trends eroding away vital constitutional rights would be reversed - but being tough-on-crime is very popular. What are we going to do when we no longer have even two useful Constitutional rights to rub together? -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From dozer at netwizards.net Fri Jan 10 02:01:08 1997 From: dozer at netwizards.net (dozer at netwizards.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 02:01:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: would you be my friend? Message-ID: <5b540n$kmr@news1-alterdial.uu.net> Hello, I'm 14 years old and I think I may be a gay. I'm looking for some support and friendship with a older male age 18-40. Please email if you can help. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 10 04:50:31 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 04:50:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderation and the Polymorphic Virus In-Reply-To: <970109.155557.4E2.rnr.w165w@sendai.scytale.com> Message-ID: roy at sendai.scytale.com (Roy M. Silvernail) writes: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > In list.cypherpunks, serw30 at laf.cioe.com writes: > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM writes: > >> "Cypher punks" can't write any code - be it mail filters, viruses, or > > crypto. > >> > > Aw, surely "Cypher punks" can write some sort of code. > > I'm a cypherpunk. Just for the record, I wrote the code that Vulis > himself uses to process his UUCP traffic. > - -- > Roy M. Silvernail roy at scytale.com > Keeping Waffle Irons hot since 1989 > Run Waffle? Rnews locking up? You need RUUXQT! > echo /get /pub/waffle/uuxqt37.zip | rmail file-request at scytale.com *IF* you write code (as opposed to putting your name on someone else's code) then you're not a "cypher punk". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 10 04:52:13 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 04:52:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Black Unicorn writes: > On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > "William H. Geiger III" writes: > > > > > Well I guess I will not need to worry about them since I will never run a > > > reguardless how may laws the jackboots in DC pass. > > > > That's from the same guy who endorses censorship on this mailing list... > > Wait a second, isn't that what you were just calling for in my case? > > To wit: "I suggest zero tolerance of Black Unicorn unless and until > someone reveals his real name." Not quite. No censorship is better than consistent censorship is which is better than arbitrary censorship. *IF* this list is to be moderated, then Unicorn and Plucky Green have to banned from it - unless their real names are revealed. > For the guy who has been screaming his head off about censorship to the > point of nausea you were sure quick to turn your coat in my case. That > more than anything else you have ever said puts the cap on your > credibility as far as I'm concerned. OK, let's guess one letter at a time. Does your last name start with 'M'? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From aga at dhp.com Fri Jan 10 05:05:59 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 05:05:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: American Dissident Voices Weekly Transcripts In-Reply-To: <32D55699.43C9@dreamon.com> Message-ID: posted for your perusal. keep all replies to UseNet. On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, The Bok wrote: > > Non-White Immigration: Death Sentence for America > > by Dr. William L. Pierce > Chairman, National Alliance > > TODAY WE'LL TAKE A LOOK into the future -- a look into what the future > will be like if we all remain spectators and simply let the present > course of events continue. > > And we'll also look at what the future could be if we choose to become > participants in the historical process instead of merely remaining > spectators. > > I will tailor these two visions of the future especially for those of us > who live in North America -- but in broad outline they will be > recognizable by all of us, no matter what part of the White world we > live in. > > First, let's look at the future we will have if we continue behaving > just as we are now: if we continue watching TV, paying our taxes, and > letting the politicians and the controlled media run the country. > > Consider demographics, for example: the relative numbers of the > different types of people in America. During the 50 years since the > Second World War, America has been darkening, has been getting less and > less White. Immigration from Europe was cut off after the war -- except > for Jews, of course -- and the floodgates from the non-White world were > opened. Asians and mestizos have been pouring into the country, both > legally and illegally. > > Most of these non-White races breed much faster than Whites do. The > result has been a steady rise in the percentage of non-White minorities > in America. If you live on a farm in Kansas or the Dakotas you may not > have noticed the change. If you live in Florida or California or New > York, however, you certainly have noticed it. In fact, most of our > people who live in America's larger cities have had their faces rubbed > in it. > > If things continue as they are going now, there is no chance at all that > this situation will become better. Non-White immigrants will continue > pouring into America, because no matter how bad things get here, > conditions will be even worse where these immigrants came from. The > government will not even try to halt the illegal part of this non-White > flood, because the government doesn't really want it halted. And the > non-Whites already here will continue to have more children than the > Whites. At some time in the next century Whites will become a minority > in North America. And the flood will continue. > > And the television propaganda telling us that the flood of non-Whites > really is a good thing will continue too. The politicians will > continue to sing the praises of "diversity" and "multiculturalism," in > tune with the television. We will be told that if we object to > the flood we are "haters" and "racists." Interracial sex will continue > to be presented as fashionable by the media. And what was > a White country 50 years ago will gradually become a Brown country. > > Of course, even a hundred years from now there may be a few super-rich > White families who will be able to keep their heads above the flood on > their own private islands, with their private security forces, but for > the rest of us there will be no White schools, no White neighborhoods, > no White clubs or bars or restaurants. We will be submerged: that is, > our grandchildren will be submerged. That's the way it has been planned, > and that is the way it will happen -- not may happen, but will happen -- > if we don't interfere: if we just keep watching TV, paying our taxes, > and voting for the Democrats or the Republicans. > > Right now I can almost hear the hoots and groans from a million or so > Politically Correct idiots. "What difference does it make whether > America is White or Brown?" they are saying. "What difference does it > make what color our grandchildren are? Color is only skin deep. After > all, we're all the same; we're all equal." Or, if they're onto the very > latest Politically Correct fad, they are saying, "There really is no > such thing as race. Scientists have proved that race is just an illusion > created by racists to keep us all apart." > > Really, there is no fad too foolish or too perverse, no opinion too > contrary to the facts, for these Politically Correct lemmings to > adopt, once it has been declared fashionable by the controlled media. > But certainly the lemmings will have their way -- if the rest of us do > nothing. > > Or consider crime. The lemmings would have us believe that crime is the > result of "oppression" and "injustice" by heterosexual White males, and > that it will disappear as soon as we have a society where no one is > "discriminated against" and where all of the officially favored > minorities are given everything they want. I don't think that even the > lemmings really believe that, but that's what the television has taught > them to say, and so that's what they say. > > You and I, on the other hand, understand that as we have given the > minorities more and more handouts, as we have given them every sort of > advantage over ourselves -- all sorts of affirmative action preferences > in admissions to universities and professional schools, in the granting > of financial aid, in hiring and promotions -- crime has become worse and > worse. Passing laws requiring us to favor them and prohibiting us from > discriminating against them in any way has made their behavior steadily > worse -- not better. > > It used to be that nearly all crimes committed by Blacks were against > other Blacks. They knew that if they attacked a White person they would > be severely punished, and besides, segregation kept them pretty much > among themselves and didn't give them many opportunities for mischief. > Now we've taught them that they don't have to fear us or respect us. The > controlled media have persuaded them that we have oppressed and > persecuted them and that whatever they do to us serves us right. > > You know and I know that the crime situation can only become worse in > the future, if for no other reason than that the number of Blacks and > other minorities will continue growing. We have only to look to the > continent of Africa in order to see our own future. Before Europeans > came to Africa, the Blacks there were eating each other, literally, just > like the other animals. We outlawed cannibalism among the Blacks, and > for more than 300 years we tried to teach them the ways of civilization. > > Then after the Second World War, in a spasm of lunatic egalitarianism, > we turned our colonies in Africa over to the indigenous Blacks and left > them to their own devices: no oppression, no persecution, every > advantage for success. > > And what happened? The Blacks reverted to their jungle behavior almost > as soon as we had left. Even in South Africa, which until very recently > was a civilized, White country, the jungle is reasserting itself. The > financial capital, Johannesburg, which a couple of years ago was as safe > and clean as any city in Europe, has become so crime-ridden since the > handing over of the country to Black rule that its streets are now among > the most dangerous in the world, with armed Black gangs prowling in > search of prey by day as well as by night. It may be another 30 or 40 > years before conditions in South Africa resemble those in Rwanda or > Uganda, but that's exactly where they're headed. > > And it may take more than 100 years for America to get there, but that's > where we're headed too. There is a fundamental law of Nature which also > applies to the historical process. It is the law of entropy. It tells us > that if we have a highly developed civilization in one part of the world > and a jungle society in another part of the world, and we place those > two societies in contact and let the inhabitants of the jungle society > take a hand in the running of things, the civilization which used to be > highly developed will soon take on the characteristics of the jungle > society. Ordered societies become disordered, except where the > genius for order remains in firm control. The tendency is always toward > decay, toward dissolution, toward chaos and ruin -- except in those rare > instances where the vital spark is able to assert itself. When that > spark is quenched or overwhelmed, decay inevitably sets in. > > The vital spark I'm talking about, the genius for order, the spirit of > progress which built our civilization, is European. Of course, Europeans > aren't the only race with a vital spark. Every people has its own > variety of organizational genius. The Japanese have theirs, the Chinese > have theirs, and so on. Actually, every form of life has a peculiar > genius for organizing the non-living matter in its environment into > living matter. That's true of worms and viruses, of fish and horses. In > each case, however, the genius takes a unique form, the spark burns with > a different brightness. In Black Africa the spark of civilization always > has been very, very dim. Among our people it has been very bright. Our > government now, however, under the influence of the controlled > mass media, is pursuing policies which are guaranteed to extinguish our > spark, policies which are guaranteed to bring our level of civilization > down to that in Rwanda or Haiti -- not next year, or even in the next > decade, but eventually. > > Haiti is a good example of the law of entropy. In the 18th century Haiti > was the jewel among the European colonies in the New World. It was clean > and green and prosperous. It was civilized. It had an efficient > government, thriving industry and commerce, and law and order. It was a > French island, a European island. Then came the egalitarian lunacy, the > sheer democratic madness, of the French Revolution, which declared Black > slaves and White masters equal. The consequence of this was that the > French with foresight left Haiti, and the Blacks, having been persuaded > that they were just as capable as Frenchmen, massacred the rest, hoping > to have Haiti's riches entirely for themselves. What happened instead, > of course, was that Haiti's civilization declined within a few years > from the European level to the African level, and it has remained there > ever since, despite the fact that the United States Marines went in and > rebuilt Haiti's entire physical infrastructure and reorganized its > political system earlier in this century. As soon as the White Marines > left, in 1934, the Black genius for crime, squalor, and disorder > asserted itself again. So that's our future, if we just sit back and > watch: more and more non-Whites, more and more crime and filth and > disorder, and eventually, a century or two from now, another Haiti on > the mainland. > > But we don't have to just sit back and watch. We know how to avoid that > dismal path of decay and ruin. We know how to solve every problem > necessary to get us back onto the upward path again. > > Consider illegal immigration, for example, which is responsible for so > much of the darkening of America. The government and the controlled > media pretend that illegal immigration is an insoluble problem. They > show us on television all the holes which Mexicans have cut in the > border fence, they show us groups of Mexicans wading across the Rio > Grande, they show us Mexicans climbing over the fence and running > through the traffic in San Diego to evade our Border Patrol, and they > wring their hands and tell us that it's just impossible to stop illegal > immigration. The government says it's assigning another 100 Border > Patrol agents in one place and it's building a stronger fence in another > place, but then the Mexicans just come across some other part of the > border. The government acts like it just doesn't know what to do, that > it's just too big a problem, that it would take too much money to solve. > > But really, that's all just a game calculated to fool the American > people. The government knows perfectly well how to stop illegal > immigration, but it doesn't want to stop it. The government just wants > to make us believe that it's trying its best. But, you know, any of you > listeners who've had any military experience understand that illegal > immigration can be stopped easily, quickly, and permanently. Even I, > who've never been in the Army, can guarantee you that if I were in > charge of the border between the United States and Mexico I could > completely halt illegal immigration within 24 hours, and I could keep it > completely halted with far less expense than that now required to > operate our Border Patrol. All I would do is authorize Border Patrol > agents to shoot anyone attempting to cross the border illegally. Two or > three shootings in the first night, in each sector of the border where > crossings are frequent, and the word would be out: "Don't try to cross > the border, unless you want to die."After that, I would spend a couple > of months erecting a simple fence from San Diego, California, to > Brownsville, Texas. I'd erect it in two rows 100 feet apart, with mines > and electronic sensors planted between the rows. I'd have jeep patrols > along our side of the fence, patrolling at unpredictable times, but with > never more than an hour between patrols, and I'd have helicopters > patrolling above. I'd do it all with a permanent Border Patrol force > along the Mexican border of 5,000 men, and no illegal immigrants would > get through. None. > > The lemmings, of course, would be screaming that I am bloodthirsty, that > I am a murderer, and so on, but really, fewer Mexicans would have to be > shot trying to come across the border that first night than law-abiding > Americans are now being murdered each year by illegal-alien criminals in > California and Texas. > > I guess we all tend to be a bit selective in our sympathies. I have > sympathy for my own people, for the victims of Mexican criminals, and > the lemmings have sympathy for the criminals. They're Politically > Correct, and I'm Politically Incorrect. But I would stop illegal > immigration, painlessly and cleanly, and they prefer to believe that it > can't be done. > > The problem of the illegal aliens already in America also can be solved. > So can the race problem. These problems are more difficult and will > require a much larger effort than the problem of illegal immigration, > but the cost of solving them now is infinitesimal compared to the > long-term cost of failing to solve them. All we need to solve these > problems is the will to survive as a people, the will to build the basis > for a progressive future for our kind, the will to avoid ending up like > Haiti or Rwanda a couple of centuries hence. > > Of course, we all know that one thing couch potatoes don't have is will. > People who've been raised on television, who've grown up with a > spectator's attitude toward the world around them, certainly aren't > going to stir themselves just to ensure a future for their > grandchildren. Instead, they're just going to reach for the potato chips > and keep on watching. Spectators don't count. The people who do count > are in two relatively small groups. In one group are you and I and the > others who care enough about the future of our people to do something > about it: in fact, to do whatever it takes. > > In the other group are the people who control the mass media, plus their > collaborators in the government, in the mainstream churches, in the > universities, in finance and industry, and in the other institutions of > our society. > > You know who controls the mass media. Many of you also know why they > don't want the problem of illegal immigration and the other problems > threatening our future to be solved. They are Jews, and throughout their > whole history they have lived by two principles: first, always be loyal > to your fellow Jews; and second, always remember that anyone who is not > a Jew is your enemy; never forget and never forgive. > > Their collaborators in the government and other institutions are > individuals who have no sense of loyalty to our people and who have a > vested interest in following the lead of the Jews. Some of them are > office holders who understand that they hold their offices at the > pleasure of those who control the mass media, those who control public > opinion, those who control votes. Most of these collaborators have no > sense of responsibility to anyone but themselves. > > Typical of these is a man who is a friend of an acquaintance of mine; he > is an assistant district attorney in New York City, a man who > understands what's going on but who doesn't really care. When challenged > to take a stand for his own people, he said: "Look. Everyone around here > knows that the Jews are running the government. It's too bad, but > there's nothing we can do about it. I've got to look out for myself. I > have a career and a family to think about. If I want to get ahead, I > have to collaborate." > > Unfortunately, there are many, many others among our people who have no > more sense of personal honor or responsibility than this New York City > assistant prosecutor. It is a great shame for us. We really need to > purge ourselves of this shame some day. > > Meanwhile, we can take some comfort in the knowledge that such people, > who have no loyalty to anyone but themselves, are always ready to switch > sides as soon as they see the tide turning. The tide is not yet turning > -- at least, not enough for people like that assistant district attorney > in New York to notice. The swarm of Brown immigrants from Mexico is > still growing from week to week, and our government is still making only > the most transparent pretense of trying to stop them. The couch > potatoes are as passive as ever, and the Politically Correct lemmings > are as idiotic as ever. > > Changes are beginning to take place, however. > > Our weekly radio programs are reaching more and more people. People who > hear us telling the truth are emboldened to tell the truth themselves. > > The ripples of truth are spreading. Soon those ripples will become > waves. And one day the storm will break loose over this land. > From success at joblynx.com Fri Jan 10 06:24:57 1997 From: success at joblynx.com (success at joblynx.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 06:24:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: 2300 Headhunters Searching for YOU Message-ID: <199701101418.IAA05836@admin.itol.com> I_Love_SPAM, Business people of the '90's are in demand more than ever. Their jobs are at risk more than ever also. We feel that a person with your qualifications would benefit from the services of our 2300 Professional Recruiters. Your resume can be registered on the Internet at our award winning web site http://joblynx.com where our headhunters are searching for qualified job candidates Nationwide. Complete confidentiality is assured and we place thousands of professionals each month. Register today to begin benefitting from the Hidden Job Market. Best wishes. Sincerely, Andrea Hoover President of JobLynx From Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com Fri Jan 10 07:06:04 1997 From: Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen Patrick) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 07:06:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: DataETRsch at aol.com sez: >Comment: "Why the hell is the file size limit 258 bytes off? What, are keys >kept in file headers?" >Reply: Keys are NOT stored in headers. The 258 (actually 256) byte header is >used to store certain IMDMP special security option settings. The header is >itself secured using a 128-bit encryption code. [My apologies in advance for not having looked at your web site] What security option settings are in the header? What kind of security would be lost by knowing its contents? I assume there is some sort of risk, hence the encryption of the header. When is the header decrypted? Where is it decrypted to? If it is decrypted into memory before use, one could read the plaintext straight from memory. Is the key for the header static (same for all files), or changing? I assume that when the source code becomes available, you will disclose the structure of the file header... How will the source code be distributed? Thank you for your time. Patrick Mullen Patrick.Mullen at gsc.gte.com (preferred email for non-list email) _______________________________________________________________________________ From: DataETRsch at aol.com on Fri, Jan 10, 1997 0:46 Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT To: cypherpunks at toad.com Hello, In compliance with the large volume of source code requests DataET Research has been receiving, the undocumented Pascal source code of UDCM (containing the IMDMP encryption algorithm) will be released in approximately one month. Also, the shareware version of UDCM completely complies with ITAR since only 56-bit keys are allowed. The registered version allows 2048-bit keys. The registered version can only be sold within the U.S. and Canada. Also: IN RESPONSE TO THE FLAME MAIL DATAET RESEARCH HAS RECEIVED: A "comment:" is from a flame mail. A "reply:" is DataET Research's reply to the comment. Comment: "What do you mean by 'extensive research'." Reply: Benchmark tests. Source code comparisons. Documentations of other algorithms. "Applied Cryptography". Comment: "Yah, okay, since when is a DLL not royalty-free?!" Reply: Read some component catalogs. Go search the Internet. Comment: "That stupid line about 140 function bloats your ad." Reply: Is this constructive criticism or what? Comment: "What the hell does DLL size have to do with cost-effectiveness?" Reply: Upload time. Disk creation time. Minimal archive size increase. Comment: "I've never even heard of IMDMP before. Is this a joke?" Reply: UDCM (IMDMP) came out January 1st, 1997. How do you think successful companies start anyway, with millions of dollars upfront? DataET Research is a relatively new company. Comment: "What kind of industry standard is IMDMP above?" Reply: 128-bit encryption. Average DES is 128. PGP tops 1024. IDEA goes at 128. RSA the same. Full security IMDMP is 2048-bit. Any other questions? Comment: "Any bonehead can tell that 256 bytes is 2048 bits." Reply: Does anybody out there feel insulted? Comment: "Why does IMDMP need sub-algorithms? Is there something wrong?" Reply: Sub-algorithms of IMDMP are basically algorithm modes. There is nothing wrong with IMDMP's structure. Why don't you see what sub-algorithms are for yourself? Go try out UDCM: http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. Comment: "What algorithm doesn't process both binary and ASCII?" Reply: Go search the Internet for one. You'll find many dinky ones. Comment: "What algorithm doesn't allow multiple encryption layers?" Reply: Go search the Internet for one. You'll find many dinky ones. Comment: "Who says IMDMP doesn't have any back-doors or magical keys?" Reply: What more do you want us to prove? The source code will be out in about a month. Comment: "Why is there a dumb 2,147,483,390 file size limit?" Reply: It has do with 2^32 DOS file pointer long integer variables. You developers should know that. Comment: "Why the hell is the file size limit 258 bytes off? What, are keys kept in file headers?" Reply: Keys are NOT stored in headers. The 258 (actually 256) byte header is used to store certain IMDMP special security option settings. The header is itself secured using a 128-bit encryption code. Comment: "What the do you mean by 'file specific unique encryption'." Reply: For the idiot who sent this message to us: Why don't you download UDCM V2.0 and view its documentation for yourself? Comment: "Isn't IMDMP illegal?!" Reply: The version of UDCM (IMDMP) being distributed on the Internet, the shareware version, allows only 56-bit keys. The registered version allows 2048-bit ones. The registered version is only sold within the U.S. and Canada. Comment: "I want the damn source code to IMDMP now. How do we know for sure that IMDMP is better than DES and all the others you mentioned?" Reply: Wait one month please. Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies ------------------ RFC822 Header Follows ------------------ Received: by mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com with SMTP;10 Jan 1997 00:46:36 -0400 Received: from toad.com by delphi.ndhm.gtegsc.com with SMTP; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 5:45:24 GMT Received: (from majordom at localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id RAA20172 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:15:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from emout18.mail.aol.com (emout18.mx.aol.com [198.81.11.44]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA20163 for ; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 17:14:52 -0800 (PST) From: DataETRsch at aol.com Received: (from root at localhost) by emout18.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id UAA11665 for cypherpunks at toad.com; Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:14:20 -0500 (EST) Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 20:14:20 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <970109201419_1207964145 at emout18.mail.aol.com> To: cypherpunks at toad.com Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Precedence: bulk From joelm at eskimo.com Fri Jan 10 07:23:03 1997 From: joelm at eskimo.com (Joel McNamara) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 07:23:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Private Idaho source code now available Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970110072140.00d1320c@mail.eskimo.com> Private Idaho 2.8b3, a bug fix version of the popular Windows freeware PGP and remailer utility, is now available. This will be my last official release of PI for the foreseeable future. Due to other projects and new directions, I haven't been able to spend as much time as I'd like coding and supporting Private Idaho. Instead of seeing it die on the vine, I've decided to release the source code under the GNU General Public License (export disclaimer - the sources do not include, or have ever contained, cryptographic algorithms). I'm hoping one or more, like-minded, privacy-oriented developer(s) will step forward to continue with PI's evolution. There's a lot of functionality in the application right now, but there are still some enhancements to be made (localized and 32-bit versions, some more minor bug fixs, etc.). I'll still be maintaining the Private Idaho Web page, and if new versions do appear, they'll be distributed there. See http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm/pi.html for complete details on getting the sources. Thanks for all the support and feedback you've provided over the past several years. Joel From Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com Fri Jan 10 08:46:30 1997 From: Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen Patrick) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:46:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: I'm looking for ciphertext analysis tools -- What analysis tools did you use? Where can I get a publicly available copy? Thanks! PM From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 10 08:51:03 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:51:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701101642.KAA11229@manifold.algebra.com> Mullen Patrick wrote: > > I'm looking for ciphertext analysis tools -- > > What analysis tools did you use? Where can I get a publicly available copy? > I just wrote a little c program for frequency analysis, but would also be interested if such set of tools existed. - Igor. From ericm at lne.com Fri Jan 10 09:18:56 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 09:18:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. In-Reply-To: <199701100535.XAA00734@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: <199701101717.JAA31508@slack.lne.com> snow writes: > > > Also: The AOL web site address my company has may not always work out when > > the server is having problems or user overloads. Please try again later. > > Again, the web site address for UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module, is: > > http://members.aol.com/DataETRsch/udcm.html. > > For $100 up front, and about $40 a month you can get a real domain name > and virtual domain that doesn't have a problem with "user overloads". If > you are so high tech, why are you using AOL for a WEB SERVER? (this is a > seperate issue from using it for _access_) You would think that a company that could issue "$1,250,000 in collateral backed zero-coupon bonds" would be able to afford a real web site. > > IN RESPONSE TO THE FLAME MAIL DATA RESEARCH HAS BEEN RECEIVING: > > Note: The 18 "sub-algorithms" of IMDMP are basically algorithm "modes", and, > > yes, many algorithms do *not* have multiple encryption layers, although, > > obviously, the more advanced ones do. Obviously. > Also, 256 bytes is equal to 2048 bits. Thank you, I was wondering about that. > > I realize that most of you out there know that, but some of you don't. "Bits" > > are referenced more often than "bytes". And, the "industry standard" that > > IMDMP is obviously well above is DES, etc. Also, DES 128, PGP 1024, RSA 128, "industry standard"? Which one, pray tell? > > Are all of you out there satisfied? No, not until your algorithm is made public and has been reviewed by people who know what they are doing. Most prudent crypto application developers wait a few years after a new algorithm has been made public to see if someone discovers flaws in it. Unfortunately for you, the way you are announcing and promoting your program makes it could like cryptographic snake oil. Posting such announcements to the cypherpunks list is a good way to get flamed. Perhaps you should have posted to alt.biz.multi-level, where the threshold of credulity is much higher. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From ubs95 at earthlink.net Fri Jan 10 09:30:54 1997 From: ubs95 at earthlink.net (ubs95 at earthlink.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 09:30:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: business marketing Message-ID: <199701101730.JAA23760@finland.it.earthlink.net> I_Love_SPAM, I saw your posting online and was wondering if you market products/services using your computer and would like to learn how to do so QUITE a bit better than what you are already doing? I use to use Floodgate, and I have come accross something that has really put this to shame! If you would like to see the information, just reply back at UBS95 at IX.NETCOM.COM with the message: "No Flame" and I will send you the file that could mean the difference between success and failure in the online marketing world. Please do not hit reply......Just send your inquires to: ubs95 at ix.netcom.com and include a note: "No Flame". Thank you! Sincerely, Carol Miller "You can give a man a fish, but it is far better to teach a man how to fish" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Fri Jan 10 09:55:16 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 09:55:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Message-ID: <852915820.621052.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > From: "DAVID ARTHUR" > Organization: Upper Canada College > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 10:54:18 EST > Subject: > Priority: normal > unsribrive > Hvng troble weth dyxlesiaxia??? Try the following easy remedy... To unsubscribe from the cypherpunks mailing list: Send a message to majordomo at toad.com with the *MESSAGE BODY* reading exactly as follows: unsubscribe cypherpunks you at your.domain.com Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 10 10:04:40 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 10:04:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: would you be my friend? In-Reply-To: <5b540n$kmr@news1-alterdial.uu.net> Message-ID: <7TRB1D1w165w@bwalk.dm.com> dozer at netwizards.net writes: > Hello, > > I'm 14 years old and I think I may be a gay. I'm looking for some support an > with a older male age 18-40. Please email if you can help. > I'm sure you'll make lots of friends on the cypherpunks mailing list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 10 10:06:51 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 10:06:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: sendmail-type thing for Windows Message-ID: <199701101800.MAA00342@manifold.algebra.com> Hi, Does anyone know of a simple program for windows that can, like sendmail, work as a mail agent ans send mail messages from its stdin? I am interested in sending email messages from Windoze boxes as part of some automated process driven by .BAT files. i.e., what I need is a program that I could invoke like this DOS> sendmail some at address.com From: sender at originator.com To: some at address.com Subject: hello hello From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 10 12:36:39 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:36:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. In-Reply-To: <199701101717.JAA31508@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <199701102013.OAA01362@manifold.algebra.com> Eric Murray wrote: > snow writes: > > > Also: The AOL web site address my company has may not always work out when > > > the server is having problems or user overloads. Please try again later. > > > Again, the web site address for UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module, is: > > > http://members.aol.com/DataETRsch/udcm.html. > > > > For $100 up front, and about $40 a month you can get a real domain name > > and virtual domain that doesn't have a problem with "user overloads". If > > you are so high tech, why are you using AOL for a WEB SERVER? (this is a > > seperate issue from using it for _access_) > > You would think that a company that could issue "$1,250,000 in collateral > backed zero-coupon bonds" would be able to afford a real web site. Mmmm... What is the collateral? Intangible assets like distribution roghts? Also, this guy's web site is totally fucked up -- the lines in http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/public/udcmv20b.txt are very long and browsers are not supposed to wrap them. I am also wondering, I am listed as visitor 189 on his web site. Under most optimistic assumptions, if *every* visitor bought his product, he would have made $40*188 = $7520. A good money, no doubt, but to issue $1,250,000 worth of *zero-coupon* bonds? - Igor. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 10 12:47:04 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 12:47:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: IBM Key Recovery Propaganda on United Airlines In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D6C590.2E9F@sk.sympatico.ca> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > *IF* this list is to be moderated, then Unicorn and Plucky Green have > to banned from it - unless their real names are revealed. > > OK, let's guess one letter at a time. Does your last name start with 'M'? God, I love good cryptoanalysis. I ran my 'JewFinder' program on their posts and found out that Plucky Green's keystrokes have pork residue on them, while Black Unicorn's do not. 'HomoPhobeII' reported that both are wearing pants with sperm stains of other people on them, but Black Unicorn bought his pants at the Sally Ann Thrift Store, so it classifies him only as a 'possible' Not-Macho-Like-Me. 'ColorBooKKK' reported that 'Black' Unicorn's lack of Ebonics in his postings means he probably just a Nigger-Lover, and not actually eligible for a special education grant. It suggests that Plucky Green is either Irish, or needs to quit 'plucking' it, so that it won't turn green. A check of plaidworks.com reveals that both Black Unicorn and Plucky Green are both subscribed to all 1,000 of their sports lists, as of noon today. (However, since I found out that myself and all the CypherPunks were subscribed at the same time, this may not have much meaning). My own careful study of the printouts of their postings reveals that both printouts are in black ink. I will give this glaringly obvious similarity close scrutiny, and report back with my conclusions. Toto From markm at voicenet.com Fri Jan 10 13:19:35 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 13:19:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: <199701101642.KAA11229@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 10 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > I just wrote a little c program for frequency analysis, but would > also be interested if such set of tools existed. There are several tools for cryptanalyzing simple ciphers at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/ crypto/cryptanalysis and ftp.replay.com/pub/crypto/applied-crypto . There is also elisp code distributed with emacs that can solve a substitution cipher. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtazUyzIPc7jvyFpAQGlzwgAhIPeDD93yR3K/S2SPJGqA8BtzC4ydOKQ MNqFYNsNqMZEeCJgpxNGQMH4fAYF/cWYOw29sT984OAIwqcqBooK7oYKg5oSfaaD k5ko+0edqE6im1omV5GPgrlMlcbjun+QADxjzQss2ZJnVa52G2iyGYLLZa9wTgfM AR48vO19sOx15BdWcYC0hTbG/iiriOhGXXbtnES8XgmNSMGDmr035YV1fcZMTXnT 7Yc9uU0K0jgqbMZ1uyX6Cs/m7bauFu6MK3g2jKSYMZ4flPimOqKCJcz544/3aI0s 5zoDVWvpzD370aSPpLMfDPaj+BrJMHZwN7LLjerXEpMHU9fIyApiUg== =/Onu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:17:53 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:17:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101909.OAA12385@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:18:03 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:18:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101909.OAA12397@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:18:15 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:18:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101910.OAA12471@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:18:21 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:18:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101909.OAA12428@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:18:25 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:18:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101908.OAA12294@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:18:35 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:18:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101908.OAA12299@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:18:52 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:18:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101909.OAA12384@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:18:56 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:18:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101908.OAA12305@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:19:19 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:19:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101908.OAA12314@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:19:23 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:19:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101909.OAA12433@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:19:29 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:19:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101910.OAA12460@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:19:35 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:19:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101907.OAA12226@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:19:41 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:19:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101909.OAA12364@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:20:04 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:20:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101908.OAA12292@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:21:01 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:21:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101908.OAA12306@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From ice at win.bright.net Fri Jan 10 14:21:17 1997 From: ice at win.bright.net (ice at win.bright.net) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:21:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! Message-ID: <199701101908.OAA12233@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm We Are THE BEST!! So Check us OUT! From DataETRsch at aol.com Fri Jan 10 14:43:41 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:43:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES 128 Message-ID: <970110173243_2022167725@emout04.mail.aol.com> DES 128 is a cloned version of the original DES. From isptv at access.digex.net Fri Jan 10 14:44:17 1997 From: isptv at access.digex.net (ISP-TV Main Contact) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:44:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Bennet Haselton of Peacefire on ISP-TV "Real Time" Monday night Message-ID: <199701102244.RAA07755@access1.digex.net> *** ISP-TV Program Announcement: "Real Time" Interview with Bennet Haselton Founder of Peacefire *** *** Monday, Jan. 13 *** *** 9:00 PM ET *** Bennet Haselton is the founder of Peacefire, a "teen Net anti-censorship Alliance." He's an 18-year old student at Vanderbilt University, and has recently been involved in a dispute with Solid Oak Software over their product "Cybersitter." Haselton claims that he simply ran the software, and found out that it blocked far more than just cyberporn, but also other web sites such as the National Organization for Women. Solid Oak's Mark Kanter says "There was no way he could have known who was on our list without breaking into our system." We'll talk with Haselton about Peacefire, the ethics of kid-proofing the net with censorware, and perhaps hear his side of the Cybersitter dispute. Call-in questions will be taken during the show at (301) 847-6571. **** "Real Time" Extra: The MAE-East, up close and personal. RT recently traveled to the Mecca of the Internet, the MAE-East, a major Internet peering point where over 50 providers continually exchange between 300 and 700 Mbps of data. See what the GigaSwitches look like, marvel at the power backup system, find out what soda cans technicians leave behind in the MAE. All this after the Haselton interview. **** This video interview can be viewed on the ISP-TV main CU-SeeMe reflector at IP 205.197.248.54, or other ISP-TV affiliate reflectors listed at http://www.digex.net/isptv/members.html. See URL http://www.digex.net/isptv for more information about the ISP-TV Network To obtain Enhanced CU-SeeMe software, go to: http://goliath.wpine.com/cudownload.htm From DataETRsch at aol.com Fri Jan 10 14:47:15 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 14:47:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: <970110173818_1890890811@emout17.mail.aol.com> Was your anaylsis for IMDMP or another algorithm? Jeremy... President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From sunder at brainlink.com Fri Jan 10 16:12:06 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:12:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D1EA88.7C4F@gte.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > 1. Sandfort is the person who would never drop an argument, no matter > how long, until he had the last word. I know since I went rounds > with him a time or two. As far as I can tell (not being a profess- > ional psychologist), Sandy has some emotional limitations that would > make him a poor choice to moderate such an intense list as this. > Certainly the moderated list would still be quite intense, since > the intent is to be a political/social forum. Sandfort unfortunately > appears to be a special friend of Gilmore's, and I don't think John > has taken the time to consider the outcome. Sandfort isn't the only one who will do this, there will be a pool of moderators. Regardless of your personality conflict, I am sure that Sandy will remain fair and allow appropriate posts from you through. i.e. anything to do with crypto. :) > 2. The only possible scheme that could work long-term would be a moderated > list plus a deleted (excised?) list of posts which didn't make the > moderator's cut. Having a moderated list and a full unmoderated list > is certain to fail, and I'm not too sure that they don't have this in > mind already. What makes you say that there is only one scheme that can succeed? Why is having a moderated list and an unmoderated list bound to fail? The plan actually (unless it changed without my knowlege) is to have 3 lists. 1 moderated, 1 rejects, 1 unmoderated. This can be optimized as 1 moderated and 1 rejects as you propose, since asking for all is the same as asking for moderated+rejects. > 3. Not making the unmoderated list first-up (i.e., cutting posts first, > then making the "full" list available later) is suspicious, or at > least a bad idea. What difference does it make if a message is delayed for 10-30 minutes? Why is it a bad idea or suspicious? If you post something and it doesn't make it at all, you can complain about it. Is that what you fear? The point was to optimize the sendmail to send moderated messages first. > 4. Moving everyone to the moderated list and then having people who want > the full list unsubscribe and resubscribe is more evidence of bad > faith. If what Sandy says is true (I don't believe it), the vast > majority of posts (excluding obvious spam, probably 75 or more a day) > will be in the moderated list, therefore I think anyone can see that > merely cutting the spam and bad flames is not the ultimate intent. > To do that, all they would have had to do is announce a bucket where > they're dropping the excisions, and let whoever wants them to pick > them up from there. Maybe they thought that would make them look bad, > but before this is over (if they continue on their present course), > they're going to look much worse. Bad faith comes from the thousands of unsubscrive and such messages posted here. People have no clue as how to do things. In the interest of cutting the crap off this list which has virtually brought the list down to its knees because of our friendly KOTM dude, it is best to bring a bit of civility here. If people want to see crap, let them subscribe to it. It's bad enough to have spammers and advertisers on a list, but if we have the majority of the subscribers immune to their spams, the spam will die. If everyone had the ability to filter out commercials, especially the annoying ones, advertisers would go away. The difference here is that the ads don't support the station with $, they flood it with crap which alienates discussions. > I just can't believe Gilmore wants to have Sandfort do this. There's > gotta be someone he can trust who has a viable reputation. Then again, > who with a decent reputation would want to moderate cypherpunks? You have a personal problem with Sandford, it doesn't mean that Sandy will be unable to be a perfectly able moderator. I'm sure Sandy will do a fine job, but that is my oppinion and it doesn't match yours. From the looks of it, it's more the case that this is a clash of egoes rather than a complaint about the moderation. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "If you're gonna die, die with your|./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|boots on; If you're gonna try, just |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |stick around; Gonna cry? Just move along|\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |you're gonna die, you're gonna die!" |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| --Iron Maiden "Die With Your Boots on"|..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu Fri Jan 10 16:15:03 1997 From: frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:15:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: USENET: Critique of PGP Key Generation Message-ID: <199701110014.TAA11807@yakko.cs.wmich.edu> >Newsgroups: comp.security.pgp.tech From: chl at clw.cs.man.ac.uk (Charles Lindsey) Subject: Critique of PGP Key Generation Message-ID: Summary: The key generation process seems to be safe, but not so easily shown to be so. Date: Thu, 9 Jan 1997 13:03:36 GMT Lines: 325 Critique of PGP Key Generation ------------------------------ Key generation is probably the weakest link in PGP, or indeed within any RSA system. Specifically, it is the one place where a supplier of a binary version of the system could insert a Trojan Horse that could not be detected by any feasible tests run on it. For this reason, having just acquired a copy of PGP 2.6.3ia (that is 2.6.3 with Stale's patch) and being of a paranoid disposition (just as Phil recommends we should be), I decided to inspect the source code for the Key Generation part to see if it contained anything that might compromise the security of the keys that are generated. For the record, I found nothing of the sort. The code makes strenuous (even paranoid) attempts to be utterly fair. However, I did uncover a few features which, under a false pretence of adding extra security, actually made my task of finding the true security much harder. So I thought it might be useful to document the whole process, pointing out the (mis-)features that caused me concern. Overview of key generation -------------------------- First, you have to generate two random numbers. So, for a 512-bit key, say, you generate two 256-bit randoms. Actually, it insists that the top two bits of the numbers are '1', so you actually generate numbers in the range (2**255 + 2**254) <= p <= (2**256 - 1), so there are 2**254 possible numbers obtained from 254 random bits. THE WHOLE SECURITY OF THE SYSTEM DEPENDS ON THE FACT THAT THE PROGRAM MUST BE CAPABLE OF GENERATING EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THESE 2**254 NUMBERS WITH MORE-OR-LESS EQUAL PROBABILITY. Next, from each random number, you generate a prime number. Starting from the given number, you look at each successive number to see if it might be prime. Well, obviously you only look at the odd ones, and in fact you only look at every 4th number because it tries to create "Blum" numbers for some reason or other. It uses a simple sieve to eliminate obvious cases, using a table of the first 1028 prime numbers. Anything that survives the sieve is subjected to Fermat's test (if ((x**(p-1)) mod p) != 1, then p is not prime) using x�=�2,3,5,7 (not a very original selection!). See the comments in genprime.c for why this is considered more than a safe test. It insists that the two prime numbers generated differ by at least 1 part in 128. Next, you multiply your two (alleged) primes P and Q to give the modulus N, and from P, Q and N the RSA public and private keys can be derived in the standard manner. I estimate that for a 512-bit key there are 8*10**73 possible primes P and Q, giving 1.6*10**147 possibilities for N. For a 1024-bit key, these numbers are increased to 7*10*150 and 1.4*10**301. Which shows why a brute-force attack on an RSA encription is not feasible. Paranoia -------- N is part of your public key. Anyone who knows P and/or Q knows your secret key. Therefore, just in case an eavesdropper gets access to your hard disc or to your RAM immediately after you have finished, all sensitive numbers (the random numbers, P, Q, all the other components of your secret key, and your pass phrase) are overwritten in memory at the earliest opportunity, and never deliberately written to hard disc at all (but they might be swapped to disc at some stage, so if you perform the operation on a discless workstation which pages across some network, and a wily eavesdropper who just happens to know you were generating your key at that time just happens to be monitoring your ethernet, and if ... ). And any copies of your keyrings written temporarily to your hard disc (even though they are encripted by IDEA by that stage) are overwritten before being relinquished. Random number generation ------------------------ But the whole system is only as good as its random number generator. It is no use using a pseudo-random number generator starting from some simple 32-bit seed (derived from the time of day, perhaps). That could generate, at most, 2**32 different keys (since pseudo-random sequences are deterministic and hence reproducible). You need 512 genuinely random bits to meet the criterion of being able to generate all possible 512-bit keys. The system uses an array of (currently) 96 32-bit words (i.e. 384 bytes or 3072 bits) known as randPool, initially set to zero. The '96' is required for technical reasons to be a multiple of 4; otherwise I should much have preferred a prime number (such as 97). It proceeds by XOR-ing supposedly random bytes into successive positions; in practice always a multiple of 4 bytes at a time (this is a Bad Thing) derived from some 32-bit word. Some of these words are quite predictable, some are well correlated with other such words, and some are more-or-less independent. THE CRUCIAL QUESTION IS WHETHER A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF THEM ARE TRULY INDEPENDENT, so as to ensure the required number of truly random bits. A certain pattern of such words (examined in detail below) is XOR-ed in repeatedly (typically for 73 cycles when generating a 512-bit key). When randPool has been filled in it wraps around. But this could mean that the same positions in the pattern are being XOR-ed on top of themselves, which is why I would have preferred a prime number for the size of randPool, and why I would have preferred the pattern itself not to have been a multiple of 4 bytes. Now actually this problem should not matter, because the randPool is "stirred" between each cycle, and if the stirring is as effective as claimed it makes all the bits totally "forget" where they were. But I believe that this is a case where "not only should security be achieved, but security should be SEEN to be achieved". Stirring is described below. Typically, in a UNIX system, the randPool will be stirred and wrapped 11 times when generating a 512-bit key. Sources of randomness --------------------- At this stage, the system tells you to type at random on your keyboard, informing you that it is going to "measure the time intervals between your keystrokes". This is not quite true. The actual behaviour is somewhat complex but you do get, for each keystroke, a cycle of words XOR-ed into randPool, as described above. It would be a good idea to vary your rate of typing in a random manner - following the rhythm of a tune such as the William Tell Overture should generate plenty of randomness (but now I have said that, please choose your own tune in case some wily eavesdropper now does a statistical analysis of William Tell). Different systems behave differently at this point, but they all assume that some form of "tick" is generated by the operating system for use for timing processes, giving the time-of-day, etc. In UNIX systems, there are two ticks: one fine tick (possibly every microsecond) derived from the real-time quartz clock for time-of-day purposes and one coarse tick (typically every 10 milliseconds) for timing processes (each time this tick occurs there is an interrupt, and whatever process is running at that moment is credited with 10msec of CPU time - or something like that). Since the random number generation works by counting ticks, it is important to know how coarse the ticks are. All systems start off the same way (see noise,c): A. A call of clock(). Gives (supposedly) the number of microseconds of CPU used in this process. But it usually relies on a coarse tick (in Solaris it is always a multiple 0f 10000). Moreover it increases monotonically with successive calls, and successive calls frequently return the same value (this part of the process is not CPU-intensive). NOT a good source of randomness. B. A call of time(). Gives the number of seconds since Jan. 1st 1970. Even if the wily eavesdropper is not online to know the exact time you generated your key, the date on which you generated it is indeed public knowledge. Again, it increases monotonically and slowly (this phase of the process should take no more than half a minute all told). NOT a good source of randomness. Now we need to distinguish between different systems. 1) MSDOS C. A call of pctimer0(). Seemingly this gives an unsigned (hopefully 32 bits) taken from a clock ticking every .84 usec (but you will not get .84 usec resolution). But, apart from being monotonic, the values returned should be as random as your typing. 2) MAC C. A call of TMTicks(). Again an unsigned long and presumably as random as your typing. 3) Win32 with the Microsoft compiler C. A call of QueryPerformanceCounter(). An unsigned (hopefully 32 bits) and presumably as random as your typing. 4) VMS C. A call of SYS$GETTIM(). A unsigned long divided by 100000 (supposedly the ticks per update). Presumably as random as your typing, but you will not get much randomness unless you type rather slowly. 5) AMIGA C. A call of either ReadEClock() (the low-order 32 bits) or am_GetSysTime() (32 bits of seconds - presumably since 1970 - and 32 bits of microseconds). With am_GetSysTime() the seconds since 1970 is pretty useless, since we already had those bits under 'A.'. I could believe the microseconds or the output of ReadEClock(). D. 16 bits of additional noise from the video beam position. Neat! E. The ExecBase dispatch count, whatever that is. 6) ATARI C. A system call giving the 32-bit output from a 200Hz counter and 32 bits from a 50/60/70Hz Vertical BLank counter. Under the Pure C compiler, only the second of these is taken (the first is said to give the same as the earlier call of clock()). Coarse as these ticks are, they can still give true randomness if called often enough. 7) UNIX This is the system I have studied most intensively. It calls every system call it can think of (and would have called the kitchen sink too, had it been available). As I will show, this just creates FUD rather than randomness. C. A call of gettimeofday(). This returns two 32-bit words. The first is just the seconds since 1970 which we have already had, so it adds nothing new. The second is the number of microseconds since the last full second. This should be based on a fine tick size, and is therefore as random as your typing, but it is the only source of true randomness that I would trust from the UNIX systems. D. A call of times(). This gives 4 32-bit words: D1. The number of coarse ticks in this process. Typically this is one byte increasing monotonically but slowly. Useless as a source of randomness. D2. The number of coarse system ticks on behalf of this process. Increases perhaps twice as fast as the previous, but still useless. D3. The number of coarse ticks by children of this process. Always zero, because PGP never forks. D4. The number of coarse system ticks by children of this process. Also zero. E. Also from the same call of times(), the number of elapsed coarse ticks since boot time. The bottom byte changes somewhat faster than in the previous case (it is measuring elapsed rather than process time), but it is totally correlated with the call of clock() already made, so it adds nothing new. At the end of all this, in all the systems, it XOR-es in the actual key you typed. This is good, but you likely only typed all lower-case letters, and probably not many punctuation or control counters, but every little helps. The bad news is that it still adds 4 bytes to randPool, even though only one byte is provided (see trueRandEvent()). Surely it would have been better to add just one byte here, at least to overcome the deficiency arising from the size of the randPool not being a prime number. Alternatively, the procedure randPoolAddBytes could have been made to discount any zero bytes at its most significant end. It will be seen that the only source of true randomness in all the systems described above is the call labeled 'C.' in each case (also the actual key struck). Everything else is more-or-less predictable FUD. This call measures the instant at which each keystroke occurred (possibly modulo 1000000 microseconds) using as fine a tick size as the system affords. Where the call gives a time in microseconds rather than a tick count (systems AMIGA and UNIX) it endeavours to determine the ticksize by experiment. It usually overestimates it (which is safe) because the length of the measuring loop is longer that the ticksize (for example, on a SPARC1+ running Solaris2 it computes a ticksize of 11 microseconds, whereas the true value is believed to be 1 microsecond). It now computes a time delta, modulo any computed ticksize, between this call and the previous one. Now this is a truly random estimate of the time between keystrokes but, oddly, this value is not incorporated into randPool (but it is represented by the absolute time of the keystroke which is so included). Since some systems (e.g. VMS and the ATARI) use an extremely coarse tick, this delta may contain only a few bits; so the bits in the delta are counted, and it carries on looking at keystrokes until the cumulative value of these bits is equal to the length of the key being generated (plus a few extra random bits needed for other purposes). But the maximum number of bits taken from any one keystroke is 8, so with fast systems it always demands more keystrokes than it truly needs. I believe that when counting the bits in delta it counts one more than it should (the most significant bit should not be included in the count in my opinion, since it is by definition always '1', and only serves to tell how many bits there are). Note also that the value of delta will have a minimum (it is impossible for the time between two keystrokes to be absolutely zero), which is a further reason to discount one bit when counting the bits of delta (see trueRandEvent()). Stirring -------- Each time the randPool wraps around, and again at the end, it is "stirred" (see randPoolStir()). Note that stirring is a completely deterministic process, exactly repeatable on different systems (it even converts the entire randPool to big-endian format and back again afterwards in order to ensure this). Its modus operandi is to encrypt the whole randPool using the MD5 algorithm (that's the one used for generating signatures). That is why the length of the randPool had to be a multiple of 128 bits. It starts from a zero key (I told you it was going to be deterministic). By the time it has got to the end of the randPool, the last bit deposited is a function of every preceding bit. It then encrypts it all again, so that every bit in the new randPool now potentially depends on every bit in the original randPool. If you start with an empty randPool, it will now appear (to the naked eye) as a complete random mess. If you start with a randPool containing just one bit, it will appear as a different random mess. Finally, it takes the first 128 bits of the new randPool as the starting key for the next stirring. Note that the purpose of stirring is not to generate extra randomness. It is merely to redistribute the randomness that is already there (derived from your keystrokes). So it matters not whether the randPool is completely filled by your keystroking, nor that the two sets of 256 bits that you extract from it in order to make your 512-bit key are not the actual bits that you randomly generated. Every bit that you take out is affected by every random bit that you put in (as well as by the many non-random, predictable bits that the UNIX systems in particular insert). So it is still possible to generate each and every one of the possible keys, even when starting from a known time of day and a known number of ticks since boot time. Conclusion ---------- So is it safe? The answer seems to be Yes. But I would have been much happier to see a more straightforward system. It took me three days and much work examining the operation of the program with a debugger to convince myself that most of the information being put into randPool was mere FUD, and to identify exactly where the true required number of random bits was actually coming from. In view of the excellent performance of randPoolStir(), I cannot see that any of the FUD serves any useful purpose. Well, I can see a little merit in including the time and date just once, in case any extremely regular typist manages to get EXACTLY the same intervals between each keystroke during her interpretation of William Tell, or unless some other flaw is found in the system (which is also why I would like to see the wrap-around of the randPool a little less regular, as already mentioned). So I have at last felt it safe to generate my PGP key. And as a final check against any wily eavesdropper who may have been compiling a complete set of all the popular 1024-bit keys (will the universe last long enough for him to complete his task?) I have set my key length to 820 bits. How's that for paranoia? -- Charles H. Lindsey ------------------------------------------------------------- At Home, doing my own thing. Internet: chl at clw.cs.man.ac.uk Voice/Fax: +44 161 437 4506 Janet: chl at uk.ac.man.cs.clw Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave., CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K. UUCP: mucs!clerew!chl From spanky at europa.com Fri Jan 10 16:23:52 1997 From: spanky at europa.com (Pass me another!) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 16:23:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trade secrets / moderator liability In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970109151839.006b554c@gabber.c2.net> Message-ID: <32D6E00F.2855@europa.com> Greg Broiles wrote: > > As reported by Michael Froomkin's correspondent, the Uniform Trade Secrets > Act (enacted with local > modifications in, as I understand it, 40 states, among them California) > says that third parties may be held liable for misappropriation of a trade > secret where the third party knows or has reason to know that they are > doing so. > > For example, California Civil Code section 3426.3 says: > > 3426.3.(a) A complainant may recover damages for the actual loss caused by > misappropriation. A complainant also may recover for the unjust enrichment > caused by misappropriation that is not taken into account in computing > damages for actual loss. > (b) If neither damages nor unjust enrichment caused by misappropriation > are provable, the court may order payment of a reasonable royalty for no > longer than the period of time the use could have been prohibited. > (c) If willful and malicious misappropriation exists, the court may award > exemplary damages in an amount not exceeding twice any award made under > subdivision (a) or (b). > > And misappropriation is defined in California Civil Code section 3426(1)(b) > as: > > (1) Acquisition of a trade secret of another by a person who knows or has > reason to know that the trade secret was acquired by improper means; or > (2) Disclosure or use of a trade secret of another without express or > implied consent by a person who: > (A) Used improper means to acquire knowledge of the trade secret; > or > (B) At the time of disclosure or use, knew or had reason to know that > his or her knowledge of the trade secret was: > (i) Derived from or through a person who had utilized improper means to > acquire it; > (ii) Acquired under circumstances giving rise to a duty to maintain its > secrecy or limit its use; or > (iii) Derived from or through a person who owed a duty to the person > seeking relief to maintain its secrecy or limit its use; or > (C) Before a material change of his or her position, knew or had reason > to know that it was a trade secret and that knowledge of it had been > acquired by accident or mistake. > > My other concern about moderator liability for approving/distributing trade > secret material is in the criminal context. For example, the Economic > Espionage Act of 1996 (HR 3723, now found at 18 USC 1831 et seq, > ) says that some trade > secret violations are now a federal crime; and California Penal Code > section 499c(b) also criminalizes some wrongful acts relating to trade > secrets. Specifically, I think it's feasible to find aiding & abetting > (and, more remotely, conspiracy) liability where a moderator knowingly and > substantially contributes to public disclosure of a trade secret. > > It seems to me that there's a murky middle period, where the trade secret > is known to some wrong people, but is still substantially a secret, where > third party liability is present. But once a wide distribution of the > secret is made, I don't think it's meaningful to talk about further > distribution as misappropriation. If there's no common-sense "it's no > longer a secret" safety valve, trade secret would provide time-unlimited > protection to publically available information, which I think would be > preempted by (or frustrate the purpose of) Congress' limited grants of > protection to information via patent and copyright. But this is only my > conjecture about how things ought to work, given the responsibilities > created for third parties by statutes like the UTSA; I don't know of cases > on this issue and given my work/bar review schedule, won't have time to > find them any time soon. > > Also, as I mentioned in my previous message, I think there are good > arguments that neither of the prominent trade secret disclosures I'm > familiar with that have occurred (in part) via the list would create > moderator liability. I'm mentioning moderator liability (and writing what's > turning into a long message about it) not because I think it's an > especially big danger but because I think it's an interesting public policy > issue. > > I don't have the teeniest clue how other nations' laws might treat third > parties who assist or enable the wide dissemination of trade secret > materials. Perhaps other list members can offer a local perspective. > > -- > Greg Broiles > gbroiles at c2.net > 510-986-8779 voice > 510-986-8777 fax So YOU think the moderator of the list should be held responsible? You say it is an interesting public policy issue....mmm..I guess for bootlickers who want to control the flow of data freely in the public forum......Nay I say...it is ridiculous to even think that. The moderator is providing a platform for other people to converse. And since this is an UNMODERATED group...mmm??...Besides....I guess your not very familiar or even sympathetic to the hacker's creedo are you? Knowledge is power....and if only the few have power...well..no checks and balances... If a company is worried about thier special little secret...well..it's there damned responsiblity to make sure it stays a secret...and well if it gets out...ie...they were stupid enough not to have the appropriate security measures...well..I guess it would no longer be a secret then, correct? Man..can't anyone take responsibility for thier own actions anymore?? What the fuck is wrong with this country??....Land of the free??...YEAH RIGHT!!???? BAH HUMBUG. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 10 17:35:53 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:35:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. In-Reply-To: <199701101717.JAA31508@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <32D708A6.4B15@sk.sympatico.ca> Eric Murray wrote: > Unfortunately for you, the way you are announcing and promoting your > program makes it could like cryptographic snake oil. Posting > such announcements to the cypherpunks list is a good way to get flamed. > Perhaps you should have posted to alt.biz.multi-level, where the > threshold of credulity is much higher. I suppose that after moderation begins, we will miss DataETRetch's next big update, since they will take your suggestion to heart and title their next posting, "Make Big Cryto$$$". Toto From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Fri Jan 10 17:55:45 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:55:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STEGO] Goppa codes Message-ID: <199701110141.RAA26832@sirius.infonex.com> Timothy C[unt] Mayonnaise was born when his mother was on the toilet. . ___ o Timothy C[unt] Mayonnaise ^z\/o\ o ^z/\_~_/ ' ' From jburrell at crl.crl.com Fri Jan 10 19:07:52 1997 From: jburrell at crl.crl.com (Jason Burrell) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:07:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, > > On Wed, 8 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > > Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > > > Truth (and relevance) are a defense. :-) > > > > If your approval is your certification of truthfulness of articles, > > you might be held liable for libel. Is that correct? > > Gosh, I hadn't thought about that. Maybe I should reconsider > this whole crazy idea. Call me crazy, but is there any way to set up an anonymous moderator scheme? The messages hit toad.com, and are forwarded via the remailer network to someone. The actual moderator can change from time to time. Only posts that aren't "preapproved" are actually forwarded to the moderator. The moderator approves the postings by signing them with a PGP key. It's then sent back through the network to another address at toad.com, and passed on to the list members. Or does this just put toad.com in hot water? -- Good government. Good government. Sit. Stay. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 10 19:20:11 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:20:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: would you be my friend? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <3Pic1D48w165w@bwalk.dm.com> "Z.B." writes: > On Fri, 10 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > dozer at netwizards.net writes: > > > > > Hello, > > > > > > I'm 14 years old and I think I may be a gay. I'm looking for some suppor > > > with a older male age 18-40. Please email if you can help. > > > > > > > I'm sure you'll make lots of friends on the cypherpunks mailing list. > > > Looks like he's already made one. Dozer, John Gilmore is 58 - would you consider a MUCH older man? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From rcgraves at disposable.com Fri Jan 10 19:25:12 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:25:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D707A2.5410@disposable.com> Ray Arachelian wrote: > > On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > 1. Sandfort is the person who would never drop an argument, no matter > > how long, until he had the last word. I know since I went rounds > > Sandfort isn't the only one who will do this, there will be a pool of > moderators. Regardless of your personality conflict, I am sure that Sandy > will remain fair and allow appropriate posts from you through. i.e. > anything to do with crypto. :) Come on, the de facto topics of this list aren't limited to crypto. I'd just like to say that as disgusting as I find most of Dale's posts, I consider almost all of them appropriate for the list. [The referenced post isn't one of them, of course.] Is the goal really to be a "best of cypherpunks," or is it just to cut out the most inane trolling (of which there is a lot)? While I'd classify Dale's posts as among "worst of cypherpunks," IMO they are all at least *of* cypherpunks. I would not favor a moderation policy that gave carte blanche to "good guys" to talk about whatever they wanted ("libertarian bullshit" in Chudov's delicate phrasing), but required posts by "bad guys" like Dale (and in certain threads, me -- you never know) to be "about crypto." That's a hypocritical double standard. I just want the complete crap out of the way. I was envisioning a mostly unfiltered cypherpunks where the traffic level remained so high that the filtered "best of" lists like fcpunx were still in demand. Of course, I'm reading cypherpunks only a couple times a day via nntp, so I'm more tolerant of nonsense than people who want to follow the list as an email list. To those people I'd say sorry, but cryptography at c2.net is available. But I'm only one voice; the moderators can do whatever they want. -rich From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Fri Jan 10 19:34:18 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:34:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Robert Moskowitz, Jon Michael Zimmerman, Geoffrey Leon Shapiro Message-ID: <19970111033243.9265.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Who are these people? From cbarnett at eciad.bc.ca Fri Jan 10 19:38:07 1997 From: cbarnett at eciad.bc.ca (Clint Barnett) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:38:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: nice work Message-ID: no doubt everybody on the list recieved a spam about some personalised children's books. Having been away or a few weeks, I only just today got to replying to that message. I recieved a response indicating that my response was undeliverable due to the mailbox being full. I just wanted to say that I'm glad I'm not the only one who can't stand that crap. Nice work. clint barnett lord of the cosmos emily carr institute From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 10 19:51:06 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:51:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701110345.VAA02052@manifold.algebra.com> Ray Arachelian wrote: > On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > 2. The only possible scheme that could work long-term would be a moderated > > list plus a deleted (excised?) list of posts which didn't make the > > moderator's cut. Having a moderated list and a full unmoderated list > > is certain to fail, and I'm not too sure that they don't have this in > > mind already. > > What makes you say that there is only one scheme that can succeed? Why is > having a moderated list and an unmoderated list bound to fail? The plan > actually (unless it changed without my knowlege) is to have 3 lists. 1 > moderated, 1 rejects, 1 unmoderated. This can be optimized as 1 moderated > and 1 rejects as you propose, since asking for all is the same as asking > for moderated+rejects. Does not the moderated list, moderated by YOU, already exist? I am confused. - Igor. > > 3. Not making the unmoderated list first-up (i.e., cutting posts first, > > then making the "full" list available later) is suspicious, or at > > least a bad idea. > > What difference does it make if a message is delayed for 10-30 minutes? > Why is it a bad idea or suspicious? If you post something and it doesn't It is indeed suspicious because it raises a possibility of concealed human involvement. > The point was to optimize the sendmail to send moderated messages first. What does that optimise if there is a more or less continuous traffic? That's a non-answer. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 10 19:51:23 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 19:51:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: <970110173818_1890890811@emout17.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <199701110346.VAA02065@manifold.algebra.com> DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > Was your anaylsis for IMDMP or another algorithm? > > Jeremy... > President > DataET Research > Data Engineering Technologies > For another encryption program. As soon as you release IMDMP's algorithm, someone may be interested to do the same thing with it. That may prove interesting. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 10 20:14:59 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 20:14:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701110410.WAA02230@manifold.algebra.com> Mark M. wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > On Fri, 10 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > I just wrote a little c program for frequency analysis, but would > > also be interested if such set of tools existed. > > There are several tools for cryptanalyzing simple ciphers at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/ > crypto/cryptanalysis and ftp.replay.com/pub/crypto/applied-crypto . There > is also elisp code distributed with emacs that can solve a substitution > cipher. Mark -- do you know what are the relevant file names? - Igor. From shamrock at netcom.com Fri Jan 10 20:18:02 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 20:18:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970110201859.006d14bc@192.100.81.126> At 07:14 PM 1/10/97 -0500, Ray Arachelian wrote: >Sandfort isn't the only one who will do this, there will be a pool of >moderators. Regardless of your personality conflict, I am sure that Sandy >will remain fair and allow appropriate posts from you through. i.e. >anything to do with crypto. :) Just for the record, I have volunteered to serve as a co-moderator. I do not know at this time if my services will be required. I am certain that I would not enjoy this job. I have better things to do than moderate Cypherpunks. But as a long time subscriber, I care about the list. I see only one alternative to moderating Cypherpunks. And that is shutting it down to let other lists pick up the various parts of the discussion. Hard core crypto can go to Coderpunks, crypto and politics can go to Cryptography. The drivel and whining can go to hell. I am willing to give the moderation experiment a chance. If it doesn't work, I will advocate shutting down the list. As with every TAZ that stays up for too long, Cypherpunks eventually got infested by vermin. Vulis, aga, et al. come to mind. In my experience, once that happens there is only one solution: take down the TAZ and start over somewhere else. The problem is always the same: the belief that "anarchy" means that you have to tolerate people shitting on everybody's floor. Anarchy means no such thing. [Since I filter on Vulis and aga in the body text of all incoming email, I am unlikely to read any replies to this post. Of course, if I was to serve as a co-moderator, I would read all messages and decide on them individually.] Thanks, -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From antimod at nym.alias.net Fri Jan 10 22:07:46 1997 From: antimod at nym.alias.net (Against Moderation) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:07:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19970111060735.2441.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Ray Arachelian writes: > > 3. Not making the unmoderated list first-up (i.e., cutting posts first, > > then making the "full" list available later) is suspicious, or at > > least a bad idea. > > What difference does it make if a message is delayed for 10-30 minutes? > Why is it a bad idea or suspicious? If you post something and it doesn't > make it at all, you can complain about it. Is that what you fear? 10-30 minutes is potentially far less than it would take. What about mail that arrives in the middle of the night, or what if all the moderators are away or busy. If you really want to filter cypherpunks at toad.com by default, fine. But is it too much to ask for those of us who don't want the filtering to request an unmoderated, undelayed list, with all headers intact (someone had suggested Approved headers be removed)? Remember, other people may want to run differently moderated versions of the list. If you add delay before secondary moderators can even get the stuff, you are unfairly penalizing those who use a better or more efficient filtering scheme, because those people will have to wait for the central authorities' moderation decisions before even their own moderators or auto-moderators get ahold of messages. > The point was to optimize the sendmail to send moderated messages first. Fine for those who want the moderation, but why are you forcing everyone to use this scheme? There are plenty of moderation schemes that are way more cypherpunk than one central moderation authority. NoCeM is one great example. Obviously some people don't have the right software to experiment with this--fine they can subscribe to a centrally moderated list. But why not let those of us who write code experiment with other ways of moderating the list? Please. What does it cost anyone to have a separate mailing list which immediately gets all cypherpunks submissions? The only argument against this is "load", but that doesn't make sense. First of all, if someone subscribes to cypherpunks-raw instead of cypherpunks and cypherpunks-flames, the total number of messages is the same, and the amount of bandwith you might lose to split mult-RCPT messages is negligiable (and could easily be recouped by switching mailers, though that shouldn't even be necessary). More importantly, if some significant number of people really do want to subscribe to cypherpunks-raw (as in enough that you would even start to think about load), then maybe centralized moderation is not the way to go. What is the advantage of not having a cypherpunks-raw? I just don't understand it. It costs you nothing, it shows your willingness to compete with other moderators or moderation schemes, and it will make people a lot more confident that you aren't suppressing some messages from cypherpunks-flames list. If for some reason load really is the problem (though I can't see how), then can you set some maximum number of subscribers you would be willing to mail cypherpunks-raw to? I mean 50 people shouldn't be that big a deal, right? And if more than 50 want to subscribe and you think toad can't handle the load, I will run a mail exploder on a different machine. From frantz at netcom.com Fri Jan 10 22:13:50 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:13:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970110201859.006d14bc@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: At 8:19 PM -0800 1/10/97, Lucky Green wrote: >Just for the record, I have volunteered to serve as a co-moderator. I do >not know at this time if my services will be required. I am certain that I >would not enjoy this job. I have better things to do than moderate >Cypherpunks. But as a long time subscriber, I care about the list. AMEN (as a short time subscriber). If you need me as a moderator (if you need me, you are getting very desperate), I will help. However, I am going out of the country in two weeks not to return until March 9, so stepping forward now is a bit silly. Let me rant a bit about the "ideal" moderation structure. Igor Chudov's software lets people like Matt Blase and Bruce Schneier post whatever they want. (I would add people like Black Unicorn as well. YMMV) Other posts go into a pool accessible to all moderators. If one moderator approves, the message goes out. If N reject, it is rejected. These rejections could either be anonymous or be included in an x-moderators-rejecting: header for the "worst of cypherpunks" list. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Fri Jan 10 22:16:56 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:16:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Comments on moderation Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970110215712.0132d100@mail.teleport.com> I have been reading the comments on moderation and I have a few comments on it... I would like to see moderation, but only for those things that filters cannot handle effectivly. 1) The Spam that has been flooding the list. It looks like someone has an axe to grind against the list or certain people on it, so they are doing their best to disrupt it. The spam is only part of that attack. It should be dealt with as any other denial of service attack. 2) The anonymous flames against Tim May (or anyone else for that matter...). These messages contain no useful content. They only serve to allow certain overgrown juviniles to vent against people they dislike. Killing the above would greatly improve the quality of the list. The rest can be killed by filters. As for the people who are crying "censor", I have seen little evidence that the doom they predict is going to happen. (I think that they revel in the idea that they are the "persecuted masses" who are being hassled by "the man".) I have been on this list for a number of years. (Since at least 1994, maybe earlier than that...) Sandy has been one of the more rational voice on the list in that time and he has been here longer than I have. (I have not always agreed with him, but then again, I can think of no one that I would agree with 100%. Even myself...) Hopefully the criteria used for moderation will not be so heavy handed that the list becomes bland and tasteless (like a high school textbook from Texas). Just my $0.00002 worth... --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From bogart at mps.com.mx Fri Jan 10 22:26:37 1997 From: bogart at mps.com.mx (donaldo) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:26:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: subscription request to mailing list Message-ID: <01BBFF56.DA8A7D00@bogart.mpsnet.com.mx> please enroll me on your mailing list. Thank You. From my-yahoo at yahoo.com Fri Jan 10 22:35:29 1997 From: my-yahoo at yahoo.com (my-yahoo at yahoo.com) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:35:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: my yahoo! registration confirmation Message-ID: <199701110635.WAA20002@e3.my.yahoo.com> your login name is cypherpunks your e-mail address is cypherpunks at toad.com please save this message for future reference. welcome to my yahoo!... you can return to my yahoo! by going to http://my.yahoo.com/ From shamrock at netcom.com Fri Jan 10 22:48:24 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:48:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970110224930.006d114c@192.100.81.126> At 10:16 PM 1/10/97 -0800, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 8:19 PM -0800 1/10/97, Lucky Green wrote: >>Just for the record, I have volunteered to serve as a co-moderator. I do >>not know at this time if my services will be required. I am certain that I >>would not enjoy this job. I have better things to do than moderate >>Cypherpunks. But as a long time subscriber, I care about the list. > >AMEN (as a short time subscriber). > >If you need me as a moderator (if you need me, you are getting very >desperate), I will help. However, I am going out of the country in two >weeks not to return until March 9, so stepping forward now is a bit silly. > >Let me rant a bit about the "ideal" moderation structure. Igor Chudov's >software lets people like Matt Blase and Bruce Schneier post whatever they >want. (I would add people like Black Unicorn as well. YMMV) Yes. Igor's STUMP software seems like the way to go. The vast majority of posters to this list are not a problem. Discussions amongst them may get heated, but they have basic human decency and never even come close to the level of abuse and bigotry we have seen from Vulis, aga, et al. Igor claims that on lists moderated by STUMP, 95% of the people are pre-approved. I believe it. Because 95% of the posters are not a problem. It is a small part of the other 5% that fuck things up. I second Sandy and John's proposal to moderate Cypherpunks. I propose we use Igor's STUMP software for this purpose, iff it performs as claimed. [Does STUMP have a web interface?] Thanks, -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From snow at smoke.suba.com Fri Jan 10 22:50:57 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:50:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Private Idaho source code now available In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970110072140.00d1320c@mail.eskimo.com> Message-ID: <199701110706.BAA00685@smoke.suba.com> > Private Idaho 2.8b3, a bug fix version of the popular Windows freeware PGP > and remailer utility, is now available. This will be my last official > release of PI for the foreseeable future. > Due to other projects and new directions, I haven't been able to spend as > much time as I'd like coding and supporting Private Idaho. Instead of > seeing it die on the vine, I've decided to release the source code under > the GNU General Public License (export disclaimer - the sources do not > include, or have ever contained, cryptographic algorithms). I don't use, nor have I ever used your software, but thank you for writing it, and even more for releasing it. Petro, Christopher C. petro at suba.com snow at smoke.suba.com From snow at smoke.suba.com Fri Jan 10 22:53:58 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 22:53:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES 128 In-Reply-To: <970110173243_2022167725@emout04.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <199701110709.BAA00702@smoke.suba.com> > > DES 128 is a cloned version of the original DES. > Put the crack pipe down and back away slowly. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 10 23:21:08 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 23:21:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: $$$ MAKE.MONEY.FAST with the new Cypherpunk PGP MLM $$$ Message-ID: Fellow Debtor: Hello! Would you like to make thousands of dollars, quickly, legally, with NO CATCH? Then keep reading....please take five minutes to read this article it will change your life, just like it did mine. It's true! You can make up to or over $50,000 dollars in 4-6 weeks, maybe sooner! I SWEAR IM NOT LYING TO YOU, AND THIS IS NOT A SCAM! If you're interested, keep reading; if you're not, I apologize for wasting your time. My name is John Gilmore. A little while ago, my life was miserable. In September 1995 my car was repossessed and the bill collectors were hounding me like you wouldn't believe. I was laid off and my unemployment checks had run out. I had just moved in with my lover High and we were $95,000 in debt! I couldn't make the payments and the bank repossessed my car. I remember the day my lover Hugh phoned me, crying. The landlord had shown up at the house with an eviction notice because we hadn't paid the rent in three and a half months. We stayed at our relatives until we found a new apartment that we could afford. Talk about embarrassing! My life sucked, and it seemed to be getting worse every day. The only escape I had from the pressures of failure was my computer and my modem. I longed to turn my avocation into my vocation. Things are different now. In January 1997 my boyfriend and I went on a ten day cruise to the tropics. I bought a brand new Lincoln Town Car with CASH in December 1996. I am currently building a new home in Sausalito, with a private pool, boat slip, an a beautiful view of the bay from my breakfast room table and patio. I will never have to work again. Today I am RICH! I have earned over $800,000.00 (Eight Hundred Thousand Dollars) to date and will become a millionaire within 4 or 5 months. Anyone can do the same. I own and rent out three large homes in San francisco. My own house is worth over $450,000. My lover drives a Mercedes and I drive a Porsche. I have more money in the bank than I think I could ever spend! When I buy something I always pay cash, and let me tell you, it's a powerful feeling to finally have control of my life. I have no financial worries anymore. I couldn't ask to be happier. My life is perfect! Best of all, I have time to enjoy life. No more 50 and 60 hour weeks, working two jobs, just trying to pay the bills. No more fighting with my lover from the stress of never having enough money for grocieries. I work about three hours a day. The rest of the time is left to have fun, to do the things I really love. I finally have time to spend with my family. That's better than all the money in the world! My favorite thing is to go on picnics with my boyfriend I also like to travel. My lover and I just got back from a three week second honeymoon in Cancun. I'm not tryng to brag or impress you with my wealth. What I'm trying to do is prove to you that if I wasn't lucky enough to have learned about PGP that day, I would still be poor, probably bankrupt. It was only because of that amazing money-making encryption program that I was able to become debt free, and very wealthy. I hate to think of where my boyfriend and I would have been today." It works because of basic mathematical and statistical principles. This process is somewhat similar to a pyramid process, only bigger and broader. It is definitely more profitable for all who participate. This money-making program works perfectly every time, 100% of the time. I have NEVER failed to earn $50,000.00 or more whenever I wanted. Best of all, you never have to leave home except to go to your mailbox or post office. Follow these instructions exactly and you could make $100,000 in the next 30 days. This program REALLY works. It makes money for those who use it honestly! Take the time to read it COMPLETELY! First of all, yes, this is another one of those "let's try to make some easy money fast" things that you often see on the NET. If you wish to find out more and possibly participate, read on. If you do not believe in this sort of thing, please move on to the next post - BUT DO NOT FLAME ME FOR "ABUSE" OF THE NET. Fact is, this wonderful electronic world is for the exchange of ideas and experimentation, so why not try something new? Mathematically it works out, so it is all up to your honesty. This is no scam. It is perfectly legal. Forward this around to all of your friends. Tell them to get involved too. I know, ordinarily, we disregard these letters because they usually don't work like they are supposed to, but this ONE is DIFFERENT! Ray Arachelian used this legal program last year and made $82,360 in cash the first time he used it. Needless to say, he quit his job at Earthweb LLC immediately paid off all debts in full, and started another mailing. Believe me, this is an EASY opportunity. You can do this all on your computer, by "JUST PRESSING A FEW BUTTONS". You will EASE YOUR FINANCIAL PRESSURES, and begin to make GOOD things happen for you and your family. Knowing public key cryptography changed my life completely. It brought me success, wealth, happiness, anonymity, freedom and time to be with my friends who I love. But most importantly, it gave me peace of mind. This MLM will change your life, too! It will give you everything you need and allow you to solve ALL your money problems. Of course, you don't have to take my word for it. You can try it out for yourself. This is going to sound like a con, but in fact it works! The person who is now #3 on the list was #4 when I got it, which was only a few days ago. Five dollars is a small investment in your future. Forget the lottery for a week, and give this a try. It can work for ALL of us. Why am I willing to share this secret knowledge with you when it's worth so much? To make money? Not even close! First of all, I already have all the money and possessions I'll ever need. Second, I don't stand to lose any money by telling you how to make money for yourself. It doesn't involve any competition at all. Third, nothing pleases me more than helping out others who recognize an incredible opportunity and jump right on it. I wasted quite a bit of money sending away for one money- making scheme after another. I found out what you probably already know. They all turned out to be garbage. The only one who made any money were the companies who sold them, like RSA. About six months ago I received the enclosed post in letter form. I ignored it. I received about five more of the same letter within the next two week.I ignored them also. Of course, I was tempted to follow through and dreamed of making thousands, but I was convinced it was just another gimmick and could not possibly work. In October 1996, I received a letter in the mail telling me how I could earn $50,000.00 or more whenever I wanted. I was naturally very skeptical and threw the letter on the desk next to my computer. It's funny though, when you are desperate, backed into a corner, your mind does crazy things. I spent a frustrating day looking through the want ads for a job with a future. The pickings were sparse at best. That night I tried to unwind by booting up my computer and reading several newsgroups. I read several of the messages posted and then glanced at the letter laying next to the computer. All at once it became clear to me. I now had the key to my dreams. I was wrong! About three weeks later I saw this same letter posted on a local bulletin board in Montreal. I liked the idea of giving it a try with my computer. I didn't expect much because I figured, if other people were as skeptical as I, they would not be too quick to part with $5.00. But, I BUY LOTTERY TICKETS WEEKLY IN CALIFORNIA AND HAVE NOTHING TO SHOW FOR IT BUT TICKET STUBS! This week I decided to look at this as my weekly lottery purchase. I addressed the envelopes and mailed out $1.00 in each as directed. Two weeks went by and I didn't receive anything in the mail. The fourth week rolled around and I couldn't believe what happened! I can not say that I received $50,000.00, but it was definitely well over $35,000.00! For the first time in 10 years I got out of debt. It was great. Of course, it did not take me long to go through my earnings, so I am using this excellent money opportunity once again. FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS AND GET READY TO ENJOY! I realized that with the power of the computer I could expand and enhance this money making formula into the most unbelievable cash flow generator that has ever been created. I substituted the Usenet newsgroups in place of the post office and electronically did by computer what others were doing by mail. Now only a few letters are mailed manually. Most of the hard work is speedily downloaded to other bulletin boards throughout the world. If you believe that some day you deserve that lucky break that you have waited for all of your life, simply follow the easy instructions below. Your dreams WILL come true. This PGP MLM is completely different. It's unlike anything you could ever imagine! I used to be "the little guy". Poor, trying to make ends meet (and losing) and with no opportunity whatsoever. And now it's my turn to give something back to the "little guy". My PGP MLM is incredibly simple. Anyone can use it. You can get started for almost NO MONEY ($5) and the risk is ZERO! You don't need special training or even a high school education. There's no physical labor involved. It doesn't matter how young or how old you are. It's simple enough for a child to learn in a couple hours. You can use PGP in the comfort of your home or even while your on vacation! I'll tell you more about this amazing MLM: With the PGP MLM the money rolls in FAST. If you can follow easy instructions you can get started in a single afternoon and have CASH in your pocket the next morning! In fact, this just might be the fastest, most honest, legal method to make money ever invented! It's risk-free and it's not a dangerous gamble. Everything you do is proven and GUARANTEED. You can get started for absolutely nothing. The method is so simple, it would be hard to make a mistake even if you tried! This is a VERY safe way to get cash. Making money with PGP is a snap. You'll be amazed at how easy it really is. You can work whenever you want. You're not tied down to anything or anybody. You're your own boss and you make your own hours. One of the nicest things about this MLM is that anyone can do it in their own home. No office. No equipment. No staff. No overhead. NO hassles. It doesn't even matter where you live. It's perfect for students, homemakers, kids, seniors and anyone who likes the idea of being insanely rich! It's also perfect if you're just looking for a little bit of extra cash. PGP will blow your mind! When you use it to make money you never have to try to convince anybody of anything. There's no door-to-door selling, no telemarketing and no real estate or anything that involves personal contact. So you don't have to be a good sales person because there are no sales! PGP is completely legal and honest. You'll sleep good at night knowing that you are providing a very valuable key escrow service. You'll be proud of what you are doing. Professional care has been taken to insure that this Marketing Plan does NOT violate any laws! (Reference U.S. Code, Title 18 Section 302,1343, and TITLE 39, Section 3005). You're probably sceptical. I wouldn't expect less from you. It just shows you have good business sense. One enterprising young man learned to escrow PGP keys as described here and tried it his first day and made $2,000 profit in just a few hours. "This is the ultimate lazy man's way to riches. You'll be amazed at how easy it is. And you may very easily do better than $2,000 with the step-by-step instructions he will send you. Thanx John." Another man, from Chicago, lined up a $30,000.00 profit in his first two months. Now he works three days a week and takes the rest of the month off. "Gilmore's 'Incredible 7-Step Path to Success' is a MUST for anyone who contemplates making huge amounts of money as an independant entrepreneur." "I never really believed those success stories...never thought I'd be one of them...using PGP, in just 8 months I made over $203,000...made over $22,000 in the last two and a half weeks! It's simple...easy...very fast...Mr. Gilmore, thank you for your Cypherpunks MLM." "If you'd like to make some quick cash, this is the opportunity you've been waiting for. This is good and honest money. This MLM could make you more money then you would know what to with, though I'm sure you could figure out something! I was supplied with detailed instructions and cash was available the very next day. Thank you John!" "I'm amazed at my success! By using PGP I made over $600,000 in five months. That's more than 35 times what I used to make in a year. (I quit my job after using PGP for 2 weeks!) My whole life I was waiting for this miracle! Thank you John Gilmore." "... Your plan is awesome! I never expected something so different and easy that will actually make me an easy $3,000.00 on a weekly basis. A GREAT many thanks to you." ".... as an attorney, I come across a lot of money making opportunities, but I never even heard of anything like this before." "This is without a doubt the most powerful millionaire-maker in history.!" "Two years ago, I mailed you fifty dollars in sheer desperation for a better life... One year ago, from using PGP, a man called and offered me a partnership... I grossed over $160,000 cash business in seven months! You are a God sent miracle to me. Thank you Micheal and God Bless you and your family." "He does more than give general ideas. He gives people an easy to follow, A to Z plan to make big money." "I didn't believe you when you said PGP could make me money by the next morning. Man, was I wrong! By the VERY NEXT MORNING $7200 poured in, in less than 24 hours!! I am still dumbfounded to tell you the honest truth. To anyone who is considering using PGP: Just Do It! I was sceptical at first but trust me the $5 is well worth it! You literally make it back in a day. To the authors of PGP: thank you for making me rich rich rich! I'm not done using your plan yet! One man claims he and his wife can "make a million dollars in a few hours while watching television." PGP key escrow has been named the "most amazing money-making, life-changing, best-kept secret EVER!" "If you can't become a millionaire with this program, you can't become a millionaire at all." That's probably true. I heard an ex-auto worker from Detroit was one of the first to put PGP to work. He had been downsized recently from one of the big auto makers. Simply put, he had been laid off with no hope of returning soon. He took a chance on himself and, that' s right!.... He downloaded PGP and followed the easy instructions. Word has it within three weeks he made over $4,000.00. And this was just in his spare time. As you can tell by now, I've found something pretty good. I think I've come across the sweetest money-making program you could ever imagine. Remember- I GUARANTEE IT! Usually it takes big money to make big money. This is the exception. With PGP you can start in your spare time with almost no money. But you don't have to start small and you don't have to stay small. You can go as fast and as high as you wish. The size of your profits are totally up to you. I can't guarantee how much money you'll make by using PGP, because that part's up to your needs, your wants and your dreams. And there you have it. At last I've explained this remarkable program in a special money-making plan. I call it "GILMORE'S INCREDIBLE PLAN TO WEALTH". Some call it a miracle. Others call it "the crypto program that changed my life and gave me astounding wealth." You'll probably call it "The Money Program". You'll learn everything you need to know step-by-step. So you too can put this amazing money making program to work for you and make ALL THE MONEY YOU WANT. Do you realize what this means? You can use this incredible program FREE and without any risk. And if for ANY reason you are not 100% satisfied after using the MLM for 30 days, I will send you your $5 back, PLUS an extra $20 CASH, for absolutely FREE, just for giving PGP an honest effort according to the simple, easy to follow instructions! So if you'd like to make a quick ten grand in 24 hours this is just for you! I GUARANTEE IT! And with my guarantee there's absolutely NO RISK ON YOUR PART! I just read an article in an Internet newsgroup describing how to make $50,000.00 in only one month from a $5.00 investment. Of course I thought this was rediculous ,or some type of pyramid. I talked it over with my family, an attorney, and my friends, and they all agreed it was some sort of scam.I hate scams because usually someone gets burned, and I didn't want it to be me! I blew it off for a few weeks then saw another one in a newsgroup I go to alot and thought, "Maybe this is legitimate!". Besides, whats $5.00 , I spend more than that in the morning on my way to work on coffee and meals for the day. Well, two weeks later,I began recieving money in the mail! I couldn't believe it! Not just a little , I mean big bucks! At first only a few hundred dollars, then a week later, a couple of thousand , then BOOM . By the end of the fourth week , I had recieved nearly $47,000.00. It came from all over the world.And every bit of it perfectly legal and on the up and up. I've been able to pay off all my bills and still had enough left over for a nice vacation for me and my family. Not only does it work for me, it works for other folks as well. Ray Arachelian says he made $57,883 in four weeks. Zach Babayco claims he made $53,664 in the same amount of time. Chris Lewis says it was only $17,000 for him. Do I know these folks? No, but when I read how they say they did it, it made sense to me. Enough sense that I'm taking a similar chance with $5 of my own money. Not a big chance, I admit--but one with incredible potential, because $5 is all anyone ever invests in this system. Period. That's all Markus, Dave, or Dan invested, yet their $5 netted them tens of thousands of dollars each, in a safe, legal, completely legitimate way. You can make up to, or over, $50,000 in only 4-6 weeks. I was browsing through these newsgroups, just like you are now, and I came across an article similar to this that said you could make thousands of dollars in only weeks with an initial investment of ONLY $5! And, like you, I thought " Yeah, right, must be a scam...". But, I was intrigued... like most of us are...and so I kept reading. Anyway, the article said that you were to send $1.00 to each of the 5 names and address and the article in at least 250 newsgroups... there are thousands!.. no catch...that was all you had to do. So after thinking it over and talking to a few friends first, I decided to try it...ofter all, if it really was a scam all I would loose would be my $5 and the cost of 5 stamps, right...? Well, guess what... within 7 days, I started getting money in the mail...No kidding! I have to tell you, I was suprised to say the least. I still figured it would end soon and didn't give it too much thought. But then money kept coming in...tripling in numbers and multiplying by 10 nad 20 times the amount that I got the first week! In my first week I made about $20 or $30 . But by the end of the second week, I had made a total of over $1,000!! In the third week, I had over $10,000, and it's still growing. This is my fourth week and I've made about $42,000 TOTAL...and the money is still coming in. Sincerely yours, John Gilmore INSTRUCTIONS Follow these instructions EXACTLY, and in 20 to 60 days you will have received well over $50,000.00 cash, all yours. This program has remained successful because of the HONESTY and integrety of the participants. Please continue its success by CAREFULLY ADHERING to the instructions. Welcome to the world of Public Key Cryptography! This little business is somewhat different than most mail order houses. Your product is not solid and tangible, but rather a service. You are in the business of escrowing Public Keys. Many government agencies are happy to pay big bucks for public keys. (The money made from the key escrow is secondary to the income which is made from people like yourself requesting that their keys be escrowed.) 1. First, you must obtain the program called PGP. These FTP sites have it: ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/crypt/pgp/ ftp://ftp.cert.dfn.de/pub/pgp/ ftp://idea.sec.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP ftp://ftp.nl.net/pub/crypto/pgp ftp://ftp.nic.surfnet.nl/surfnet/net-security/encryption/pgp ftp://menja.ifi.uio.no/pub/pgp/ ftp://ftphost.vuw.ac.nz ftp://leif.thep.lu.se ftp://nctuccca.edu.tw/PC/wuarchive/pgp/ ftp://sable.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp ftp://ftp.csua.berkeley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/pgp/ If you have access to email, but not to ftp, send a message saying "help" to ftpmail at decwrl.dec.com or mailserv at nic.funet.fi 2. Now you must install PGP as described in its documentation and run the PGP key generation command "pgp -kg". PGP shows you a menu of key sizes. Pick the biggest one available. It also asks for a user ID, which means your name and e-mail address. Spaces and punctuation are allowed in the user ID. It would help if you put your E-mail address in after your name, like so: John Gilmore PGP also asks for a "pass phrase" to protect your secret key in case it falls into the wrong hands. Nobody can use your secret key file without this pass phrase. The pass phrase is like a password, except that it can be a whole phrase or sentence with many words, spaces, punctuation, or anything else you want in it. Don't lose this pass phrase-- there's no way to recover it if you do lose it. This pass phrase will be needed later every time you use your secret key. The pass phrase is case-sensitive, and should not be too short or easy to guess. It is never displayed on the screen. Don't leave it written down anywhere where someone else can see it, and don't store it on your computer. 3. Now use the "pgp -kxa userid keyfile" command to copy your new public key from your public key ring and place it in a separate public key file suitable for distribution to your friends for escrow and inclusion in their public key rings. 4. Invest your $5 by writing your name and e-mail address on five separate pieces of paper along with the words, "Please escrow my PGP key. You are number __", and a copy of the keyfile. In this way, you're not just sending a dollar to someone. Key escrow is a legitimate service that you are requesting and you are paying $5.00 for this service. Fold a $1 bill (or a loonie), money order, or bank note inside each piece of paper that you just wrote on and fold the piece of paper so the bill will not be seen in the envelope (otherwise, nosey people who like to steal mail with money in it will get yours!) and mail them by standard U. S. Mail to the five addresses listed below. #1 John Gilmore , P.O.Box 170608, San Francisco, CA 94117, 415-221-6524 #2 Timothy C. May , 427 Allan Lane, Corralitos, CA 408-728-0152. #3 Ray Arachelian , 48-21 40th St, Apt 2B, Long Island City, NY 11104-4111, 718-786-4227 #4 Alan Bostick , 680 66 St., Oakland, CA 94609, 510-658-7176 #5 Jason Durbin , 8 Avocet Drive, #211, Redwood Shores, CA 94065, 415-637-0435 5. Remove the name that appears as number 1 on the list. Move the other 4 names up one position (Number 2 becomes number 1, number 3 becomes number 2, and so on). Place your name, address, zip code, and e-mail address in the number 5 position. 6. With your name in the number 5 position, upload this ENTIRE amended file to at least 250 different Usenet newsgroups. I'm told that there are close to 30,000 of them, and all you need is 250 or so. Use the subject header to draw attention to this file and its great potential for all of us. See Netscape and Internet Explorer instructions below. Try posting to as many newsgroups as you can. Remember: the more groups you post to, the more people will see your article and send you cash! 7. Sit back and relax. You are now in business for yourself, and should start seeing returns within 7 to 14 days! Remember, the Internet is new and huge. There is no way you can lose. HOW TO POST TO USENET: If you use Netscape Navigator 3.0, do exactly the following: A) Highlight all newsgroups you want to mail your letter to which as you know is done by holding down CTRL while left clicking. This way you can select multiple newsgroups in one go, choose perhaps a dozen each time. You will then see all the newsgroups you highlighted displayed in the Newsgroups Field. Then click on "TO NEWS" which is on the far left when you're in the newsgroup page. This will bring up a box to type a message. B) Leave the "Newsgroups" box like it is. CHANGE the "Subject:" box to something eye-catching like "NEED CASH $$$ READ HERE $$$" or "FAST CASH!!" or "$$$ PROTECT YOUR PRIVACY AND MAKE MONEY FAST $$$" C) Tab once and you should be ready to type. Now, paste (only once) this entire article, word for word, except to insert your name at #5 and to remove #1 off the list, plus any other small changes you think you need to make. Keep almost all of it the same however. It works!!! D) If you still have all of your text, send or post to this newsgroups now by just clicking the "SEND" button (just below the "FILE" dropdown menu and just above the CC: button) E) Here's where you're going to post to 250 or more, newsgroups. OK... click on any newsgroup then click on "TO NEWS".. again, in the top left corner of your screen. Leave the newsgroups box alone again, put a flashy subject title in the SUBJECT BOX, hit TAB once and you're in the body of the message. Now paste this article again. If you use Microsoft Internet Explorer, it's just as easy: Holding down the left mouse button, highlight this article. Then press the "CTRL" key and the "C" key at the same time to copy the article. Or, go to the EDIT dropdown menu and select COPY. Next, go to the newsgroups and press "POST AN ARTICLE". A window will open. Type in your flashy headline in the SUBJECT area and then click in the large window below. Press "CTRL" and then "V" and the article will be pasted in the window. (Or, go to EDIT and then PASTE.) If you want to edit the article, you can do so and then highlight and copy it again (so your edited article will be copied again and again to each newsgroup). Now, every time you post the article in a new newsgroup all you have to repeat is "CTRL" and "V" and press POST. F) That's it! Each time you do this, all you have to do is choose a different newsgroup so you can post this message to 250 or more, DIFFERENT, newsgroups. I know, I know,... you've still got 249 to go! Don't worry, each successive article will only take about 30 SECONDS once you get the hang of it. Remember, 250 is the MINIMUM ... The more you post, the more money you will make! Repeat the process over and over again by selecting further newsgroups in multiples of 10's but try to be selective with the groups by posting to high volume locations, and don't choose a subject that appears TOO flashy, this will only put people off. This is an honest and legitimate way of making a reasonable amount of money, and making it on a regular basis. But only if your message is sincere and clearly understood by others will you succeed. You are now in the key escrow business and will start receiving your $1 envelopes from various people all over the world within days. REMEMBER... The more newsgroups you post to, the more money you will make! You may want to rent a P.0. Box eventually because of all the mail. If you wish to stay anonymous, you can come up with a name, such as "Manager" or "Investor" ... Just make sure all the address that you have typed in for the 4 people plus yourself are correct, PLEASE. Now here is how and why this public key escrow system works: The Internet is growing daily at a phenomenal rate, quadrupling once a year. Perhaps you already know this. With millions of people surfing the Internet and an estimated 100,000 users scanning the newsgroups of which there are nearly 30,000. This exposure is the key factor and the reason why: You me and all those who take part cannot fail not to be disappointed. Just think about it, if you became interested in this article, why shouldn't thousands of others! At first, I posted to nearly 250 newsgroups, but due to the response soon increased this to 300, which brought in mail from Europe the Far east, Australia and America. So with my first dozen replies I made $12.00. But to simplify matters and keep the arithmetic easy, suppose I had posted to 200 newsgroups with my name at five and just had five replies which would have meant I earned $5.00. In theory you make $5.00 for every two hundred postings with your name at #5. Each person who sent you a $1.00 now also makes two hundred postings with your name at four equating to $50.00. Your fifty new agents also make two hundred postings each with your name at three, say ten thousand postings equating to $500.00. These five hundred agents again make two hundred postings each with your name at two equating to $10.000 or one hundred thousand postings. Finally, five thousand people once again make two hundred postings with your name at one and this would equate to the mathematical statistic of $50.000 before your name drops off the list. Which is pretty exciting and mind boggling considering these figures are based on only two hundred postings at a time being made down the line! Most people may think these figures are ridiculous, but they do add up. After all they do say the success of the Internet is due to it's sheer capacity of over 40 million. Technically, you only need an average return of 2.5% from the 200 postings that each person makes in order to achieve these high figures. So with the Internet comprising of 40 million user's the sky really is the limit!!! It's a never ending money making process because when your name finally drops off the list, or indeed before if you really need the cash (and who doesn't) you simply access another newsgroup posting and begin the process over again, placing your name at Five. Please remember to upload this article to as many newsgroups, local bulletin boards, message areas and file sections as possible. The financial rewards are guaranteed, but as stated, the level of success depends upon your efforts! And how much posting you do. This posting has been appearing for quite some time and has now literally got thousands of people actively involved. No doubt like me, you may have seen it before and become a little confused by the way it's been explained. However, I personally have never believed in a so called "Free lunch" and have always worked hard to support my family. But this idea is so simple involving only a modest $5.00 investment that I simply had to try it. At first, it took me quite a while to figure it out - my first impressions led me to believe that there must be someone behind it who alone is benefiting. But this isn't so, you only have to look at the various postings to realise this; the thousands of postings that are made all carry different names and addresses. So with so many people involved I became convinced that with this particular program I too could benefit. Although many of the postings have been modified the basic principal remains the same, in my opinion the only problem has been the way the initial concept has been repeatedly changed. With this in mind I have set out to explain what I consider to be a clearer version, in the hope there is no doubt in people's minds that it's fully understood. Because believe me, this system does work! In general, these postings lead you to believe you can make $50,000 within a month, which I think is a little over the top. But now ten days after my initial involvement, I'm beginning to get a reasonable and realistic return with a further understanding of just how big this concept is. I still cannot believe it - the money is coming in from all over the world. That money sure comes in useful, but what's more important is the fact I have proved this is a totally workable and legitimate system involving no risk and no major cash outlay. My other concern was the legal aspect, so I checked this through and was told that providing I mail one dollar to the person I am asking to escrow my PGP key, I am in fact paying for a service. As a personal note: The above figures are for demonstration purposes only with the whole concept and current success based upon the number of people participating. And the number of newsgroups and file sections you post this article to. Yes, it really depends on you the individual! How much money you want to make rests in your hands. Accessing newsgroups is very easy considering there are nearly 30,000 to choose from. Your success rate is determined by the amount of newsgroups accessed, you must follow through and post this or your own similar article to hundreds of newsgroups; maximise your postings and you maximise your cash intake. The end result depends on you. You must follow through and repost this article everywhere you can think of. The more postings you make, the more cash ends up in your mailbox. It's too easy and too cheap to pass up!!! So that's it. Pretty simple sounding stuff, huh? But believe me, it works. There are millions of people surfing the net every day, all day, all over the world. And 100,000 new people get on the net every day. You know that, you've seen the stories in the paper. So, my friend, read and follow the simple instructions and play fair. Thats the key, and thats all there is to it. Print this out right now so you can refer back to this article easily. Try to keep an eye on all the postings you made to make sure everyone is playing fairly. You know where your name should be. If you're really not sure or still think this can't be for real, then don't do it. But please print this article and pass it along to someone you know who really needs the bucks, and see what happens. People have said, "What if the plan is played out and no one sends you the money?" So what! What are the chances of that happening when there are TONS of NEW honest users and NEW honest people who are joining the Internet and newsgroups every day and are willing to give it a try? Estimate are at 20,000 to 50,000 new users, EVERYDAY, with thousands of those joining the actual Internet. Remember, play FAIRLY and HONESTLY and this WILL WORK... I promise you. You just have to be honest. Make sure you print this article out RIGHT NOW (if it's not done yet). Also... try to keep a list of everyone that sends you money and always keep an eye on the newsgroups to make sure everyone is playing fairly. PLEASE NOTE: This system is based on everyone being honest, but it's all too tempting not to bother mailing out envelopes with dollar bills inside. The success for all participating is dependant upon this taking place and if carried out will mean a 500% increase on your article being redistributed! The system won't work to yours or indeed other people's advantage if you don't follow the procedure. You can however, if you wish to remain anonymous use a pseudonym - but please ensure your address is correct. AS A FINAL NOTE: Many business ideas for making money, no matter how well thought out and implemented simply don't get off the ground. And in most cases is due to advertising costs, but the exposure obtained through the Internet is quite honestly - pretty awesome, so please study this article carefully taking all the time you want, because the moment you begin participating you will be on track for some serious financial rewards. By the very nature of the way the system works you may not see the benefits the first week. BUT COMMENCING THE SECOND WEEK, YOUR INTAKE OF MAIL FROM AROUND THE WORLD WILL TRULY ASTONISH YOU! Please give this some serious thought, because this is one of the few money making schemes that really does work... GOOD LUCK!!! REMEMBER... HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY... YOU DON'T NEED TO CHEAT THE BASIC IDEA TO MAKE MONEY!! Good luck to all and please play fairly and you will reap hugh rewards from this! By the way, if you try to deceive people by posting the messages with your name on the list and not sending the money to the people already on the list, YOU WILL NOT GET MUCH RETURN! Someone I talked to (mean and cheap) just did that and he only made $150 after 7 to 8 weeks!! Then he sent the five $1 bills out... people added him to their lists ... and in 5 weeks, he had OVER $10,000! He than realize that there is no way to cheat with himself. THIS IS THE FAIREST AND MOST HONEST WAY I HAVE EVER SEEN TO SHARE THE WEALTH OF THE WORLD WITHOUT COATING ANYTHING BUT FIVE DOLLARS AND A LITTLE OF YOUR TIME! DO IT LIKE IT'S LAID OUT HERE... IT WILL WORK!! Within 60 days you will receive over $50,000.00 in CASH. Keep a copy of this file for yourself so that you can use it again and again whenever you need money. As soon as you mail out these letters you are automatically in the mail order business. People will be sending YOU $5.00 to escrow their PGP keys. This is a service. ** IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL ** If you have any doubts as to the legality of this service, please refer to Title 18, Sections 1302 and 1341 of the Postal Lottery Laws. NOTE: Make sure that you retain EVERY name, address, and PGP key sent to you, either on computer or hard copy, but do not discard the names and notes that people send to you. This is PROOF that you are truly providing a service, and should the I.R.S. or some other government agency question you, you can provide them with this proof! Remember, as each post is downloaded and the instructions carefully followed, two memebers will be reimbursed for their participation as a List Developer with $5.00 each. Your name will move up the list geometrically so that when your name reaches the number 2 position you will be receiving thousands of dollars in cash. REMEMBER - THIS PROGRAM FAILS ONLY IF YOU ARE NOT HONEST - PLEASE!! PLEASE BE HONORABLE...IT DOES WORK! THANK YOU Testimonials from satisfied PGP users: Hey.... I'm one of the people who downloaded PGP a while ago, and I've made quite a profit...not 50,000 dollars, but TONS more than the 5 bucks I sent in. It might take more than 60 days to get 50,000, but I think I can wait. Zach Babayco ANOTHER ADDITION BY A PARTICIPATING MEMBER PLEASE just try this and do it right it's only 5 dollars and its legal, but DON'T try to cheat the system or you are cheating yourself! WHAT HAVE YOU GOT TO LOSE, A MAXIMUM OF ```5$ !JUST TRY IT! SPREAD IT EVERYWHERE, THE MORE YOU SPREAD THE MORE YOU MAKE! ****************************************************************** *** ANOTHER ADDITION BY -=XxX=- ********************************** ****************************************************************** THIS WORKS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I AM PROOF !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! DO IT...!!!!!!!!!! ***************************************************************************** THIS IS REAL AND LEGAL. AND IF U DO NOT FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS EXACTLY AND DO NOT RECIEVE ANY OR LITTLE MONEY. DO NOT BLAME IT ON THE MAILING LIST NAMES. JUST INCLUDE YOUR NAME OR WHERE U GOT THIS TEXT FILE FROM EXAMPLE AMERICA ON LINE ETC... ALSO THE NAMES ON THIS LIST HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IF YOU GET YOUR MONEY OR NOT. IT IS GUARANTEED YES THAT YOU WILL GET YOUR MONEY BUT THIS PROTECTS ALL NAMES ON THIS TEXT FILE. AND JUST REMEMBER IT IS NOT OUR FAULT THAT YOU READ THE DIRECTIONS WRONG AND DID NOT RECIEVE ALL YOUR MONEY. IF U DID NOT SEND IN ONE DOLLAR TO EACH 5 NAMES THAT WILL MAKE IT SO YOU WILL NOT GET MONEY SO FOLLOW AND FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS CAREFULLY!!!!!!!!!!!! AND PROMISED 50,000 DOLLARS WILL COME!!!!!!!! Timothy C. May This system works equally well if mailed out manually. Mind you it takes more effort to hand address the envelopes and the cost goes up proportionately to cover the postage and envelopes. You must also photo copy the instructions, cross out the name in number one position, write in your name in the number ten slot and change the rest of the numbers accordingly. (It might be neater to use white out or paste over the names.) In order to achieve the same results you must send out the $1.00 to the first five names and then send out another 100 letters with copies of the program enclosed. It has been suggested not to put a return address on the outside of the envelope in order to encourage the recipient to open it. The return will approximate that then received from the posts listed on the bulletin boards. OK HERE'S THE DEAL. AT PRESENT I AM A BUSINESS MAJOR AT VANDERBILT AND THIS PROGRAM MAKES A WORLD OF SENSE TO ME. I RECENTLY READ ABOUT A GUY THAT TOOK A PENNY FROM EVERY PERSON'S BANK ACCOUNT AT THE NEW YORK CITY BANK. AFTER 2 YEARS OF DOING THIS ILLEGALY HE BECAME A MILLIONAIRE. BUT GOT GREEDY AND GOT CAUGHT. SAME PRINCIPLE HERE. TAKE A DOLLAR FROM EVERYONE WHO GETS THIS AND ALTHOUGH THEIR GIVING PRACTICALLY NOTHING, THE RECEIVER IS GETTING LOTS. SORTA THE HUMANE THING TO DO. IF YOU COULD GIVE A GUY A BUCK AND HELP HIM HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY OFF A DEBT OR SAVE MONEY FOR RETIREMENT WHY NOT? THEN AFTER YOU SEND A DOLLAR JUST MANIPULATE THIS FILE LIKE IT STATES ABOVE AND PEOPLE WILL BE HELPING YOU OUT TOO. MY DAD TAUGHT BE TO BE CAREFUL OF THINGS THAT SOUND TO GOOD TO BE TRUE CAUSE THEY USUALLY ARE BUT WHAT CAN YOU LOSE BY GIVING $5!!! YOU HAVE ALL TO WIN AND NOTHING TO LOSE. L8R Hi all, I will not say my name, as I wish to remain anonymous, but I have something to say. IT WORKS. I am THE most sceptical person on the face of the earth. I saw this, and say _-=BS=-_..no way...impossible..then my friend told me he did it.. he said he made about 50 bucks..I said no way..he proved it to me.. I decided, what the hell...I sent out my 5 bucks, and Sent this thing to about a 400 people, not to BBS's, just E-mail. 3 weeks went by, and I FINALLY got ONE dollar in the mail. It has been about 3 months since that day I got my first dollar, and now every day when I go to get my mail, there are about 3 dollar bills in my box waiting for me. I have made almost 300 dollars. I dunno about that guy and his 50 thous., but if someone offered you 300 dollars for FREE, would you take it? Do this guys...it WORKS!!! Jason Durbin Hey guys, I am #5. I just got this a few days ago as an e-mail. Over my life I have received over 50 e-mails just like this, which I avoided. Finally I am gonna give it a shot. If it works, great, but if it doesn't than oh well. Its only 5 bucks guys. That's it. And forwarding this to everyone you know, and U/Load it to Newsgroups and BBS's. So far, I have sent this to over 2000 people on the net, including BBS's, Newgroups, IRC, and America Online. The more copies you send out, the more of a chance you have of getting money in the mail. You guys may not $50,000 heh ehh. I doubt anyone can. They all just say that to get your attention. But possibly you could get at least $500. But hey, if someone offerd you $500 would you take it? Of cource would. All it is, is just 5 dollars. That's it. Send a dollar each to each address listed below. Include your name, address, e-mail address, and where you got "FASTCASH.TXT" from. Just give it a shot guys. Its perfectly legal, I know that cause a few of my friends did and they together all made about $750. heh heh, the IRS is not gonna come knocking on your door or the FBI or any other government agency. Those are all rumors from people who were unsuccessful at doing this. HONESTY COUNTS. Once you've sent the dollar to someone you are added to their mailing list. Just give it a shot guys. Its only $5. What do else are you gonna do. Just be patient for your money to arrive. Its not all gonna come the day you send the 5 bucks. It may take 2 or 3 weeks for the money to role in. Then for the next 2 months, everyday you will be receiving letters with dollar bills in your mailbox. Alan Bostick 10-20-96 Hi I have found that the best way to do this is to use the news part of Netscape 3.0. All you have to do is click on "To News" in the upper lefthand corner. Copy this article to your clipboard, if you are using windows, then go into your clipboard while you still have the News box open. Edit the artile as necessary and then select edit "copy". Next go back to your News box and select edit "paste" and you will find that the article is posted in the box with all the necessary changes. Put a flashy subject in the subject box to attract attention, then you can send it to a newsgroup and your on your way to make big bucks. ********************************************************** *** REMEMBER....HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY.YOU DON'T *** *** NEED TO CHEAT THE BASIC IDEA TO MAKE THE MONEY! *** *** GOOD LUCK TO ALL,AND PLEASE PLAY FAIR AND YOU WILL *** *** WIN AND MAKE SOME REAL INSTANT FREE CASH! *** ********************************************************** From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 10 23:23:08 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 23:23:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701110718.BAA03084@manifold.algebra.com> Bill Frantz wrote: > > At 8:19 PM -0800 1/10/97, Lucky Green wrote: > >Just for the record, I have volunteered to serve as a co-moderator. I do > >not know at this time if my services will be required. I am certain that I > >would not enjoy this job. I have better things to do than moderate > >Cypherpunks. But as a long time subscriber, I care about the list. > > AMEN (as a short time subscriber). > > If you need me as a moderator (if you need me, you are getting very > desperate), I will help. However, I am going out of the country in two > weeks not to return until March 9, so stepping forward now is a bit silly. > > Let me rant a bit about the "ideal" moderation structure. Igor Chudov's > software lets people like Matt Blase and Bruce Schneier post whatever they > want. (I would add people like Black Unicorn as well. YMMV) Other posts > go into a pool accessible to all moderators. If one moderator approves, > the message goes out. If N reject, it is rejected. These rejections could > either be anonymous or be included in an x-moderators-rejecting: header for > the "worst of cypherpunks" list. I think that Bill proposes a very interesting idea. His suggestion would eliminate a lot of [well-grounded] suspicion about arbitrary rejections at a "whim" of moderators. My only concern is that there will be more work for moderators, because in his scheme each "bad" message has to be reviewed by N people instead of 1. It is a tradeoff between a more liberal policy and efficient use of moderators' time. - Igor. From lucifer at dhp.com Sat Jan 11 00:25:21 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 00:25:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: ElGamal Message-ID: <199701110825.DAA21072@dhp.com> The arrival of warm weather is heralded by the pig shit (or whatever kind of shit Intel swines have for brains) getting soft in Timothy C[unt] May's mini-cranium and the resulting green slime seeping through his cocaine- and syphilis- damaged nose and onto his keyboard. )_( [@ @] Timothy C[unt] May |/ \| \O/ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 11 00:30:45 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 00:30:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Einstein's Dreams Message-ID: <32D76B59.4FBE@sk.sympatico.ca> As the city melts through fog and the night, one sees a strange sight. Here an old bridge is half-finished. There, a house has been removed from its foundations. Here, a street veers east for no obvious reason. ...This is a world of changed plans, of sudden opportunities, of unexpected visions. For in this world, time flows not evenly but fitfully and, as consequence, people receive fitful glimpses of the future. -excerpt from "Einstein's Dreams" by Alan Lightman In 1989, Bill Gates was just another player in the wonderful world of computers. Phil Zimmerman was a wanna-be cryptographer. And CypherPunks were merely a fitful glimpse of the future. In 1989 a document began quietly circulating in certain computer circles--a document which whispered of fitful glimpses of the future. The future of Bill Gates; the future of Phil Zimmerman; the future of the CypherPunks. The document has, over the years, submerged for a time, and then surfaced in different places. Whenever and wherever it surfaces, strange things happen. Strange things for which there is always a perfectly 'normal' explaination. Strange things which one sees as normal unless, by chance, they should happen to notice that somehow, in some subtle way, the flow of time has changed. A few weeks ago, a single copy of this document surfaced in the possession of one of the Cypherpunks and, shortly thereafter, Dr. DV K was officially unSCUMscribed from this list. Less than two weeks ago, a copy of this document was acquired by a second member of the CypherPunks and, shortly thereafter, it was announced that the list will now be 'moderated'. Coincidence? It is a 'coincidence' that I have seen, time and again, in connection with this manuscript. You may think that this missive is a lark, or some kind of scam, or for the feeble-minded. I don't ask that you take what I say seriously, only that you remember that the Tao doesn't shout, it whispers. I have included, below, a warning that has circulated in regard to the document which has preceded it in its undergroud passage since the date of its inception, in 1989. Anyone who, after reading the warning, wishes to receive the document can notify me via private email, and I will see to it that you receive a copy. Toto WARNING! "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" Is A Very Dangerous Document ------------------------------------------------------------------- It is reputed among many of the top minds in the Computer Industry to be a very real, and revealing, documentary of some of the horrors of the Industry which are sometimes rumored, but seldom exposed. But be warned-they say it in private, not in public. Though management at the major Corporations in the Industry brush aside the document as the mad ramblings of an unstable, failed business executive, the fact remains that there are more and more people coming forward who claim to have suffered demotions or loss of employment after deliberately or inadvertently revealing their support of the document's claims and it's authenticity. If you choose to read this manuscript, do not speak of it in casual conversation at your place of employment, or around strangers in any business or social environment. Though it is almost impossible to document cases of reprisal of this nature, the increasing numbers of ex-employees of major Corporations in the Computer Industry making these claims, and the devastating consequences they allege to their professional and private lives, make it wise to be discreet in expressing any opinion, or even knowledge, of this document. If you choose to share this document with others, it would be wise to do so discreetly, even anonymously, should you be unsure of the reliability and discretion of whomever you choose to share this knowledge with. Though I personally lean toward viewing the manuscript as authentic, my exhaustive research into it's origin has always come to a dead-end, even among the principals involved. C.J. Parker, former President of Pearl Harbor Computers, Inc., denied emphatically, in a face-to-face encounter, having anything whatsoever to do with the document. When I pressed him with questions regarding the hasty demise of his business and the unraveling of his personal life after the public circulation of "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" began, he became very agitated and distraught, bordering on violence, and the interview was abruptly terminated. Dr. William M. Denney, one of the few principals in the manuscript referred to directly, was reluctant to be interviewed, but eventually made a few comments which I found to be very revealing. Dr. Denney, Vice-President of Basis, Inc. in Emmeryville, Ca., consistently rated as one of the top ten Unix Open Systems vendors in the world, said, "I deny any knowledge of or participation, in any way whatsoever, with anything connected to 'The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre', and it would be wise for others to do the same." I find this statement to be very cryptic and, at the same time, very revealing; very much in line with what would expect from one associated with the alleged underground computer society described in the manuscript. As for Mr. Torry Basford, a former employee of Bell Labs who was Mr. Parker's first mentor in the world of Unix and is rumored to be laboring in obscurity in a small community college somewhere in the southwestern U.S., Mr. Parker would only say, "The man has suffered enough, please leave him alone." Regardless of the origins or authenticity of the document, it is considered by many to be extremely unsettling, perhaps even dangerous, and one might be better served to avoid reading the manuscript, if for no other reason than simple peace of mind. From gbroiles at netbox.com Sat Jan 11 00:41:35 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 00:41:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970111003625.0069d61c@mail.io.com> At 10:49 PM 1/10/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >Yes. Igor's STUMP software seems like the way to go. The vast majority of >posters to this list are not a problem. Discussions amongst them may get >heated, but they have basic human decency and never even come close to the >level of abuse and bigotry we have seen from Vulis, aga, et al. I think that the move to human moderation is a good thing, and am pleased that Sandy will shortly begin to act as moderator. However, I think that forming lists of "approved people" and "unapproved people" and treating them differently is likely to do more harm than good, even if we have nice software which does it very efficiently. I don't like it for several reasons: 1. Political. It's symbolically disturbing, and it tends to shift the focus of the group (and of the moderation process) away from messages, and towards the people who post them. I think it'd be tempting to turn it into some sort of bureaucratic system, with punishments (being on the bad list) and rewards and status changes and written warnings and all of the other features which frequently bring out the worst in people. I suspect that agreeing on "the 10 people who are clearly a problem" will turn out to be as difficult as finding any 10 things that cypherpunks can agree on, and then we've got to decide who decides who's a problem, and then we've got to decide how we decide things, and argue about whether or not John Gilmore is a good person, and [...] 2. Technical. It requires that the people on the "good list" authenticate their messages (otherwise people will post with the names of "good people" to avoid moderation), which imports a lot of hassle with different platforms and signing and certification and key distribution and [...] which we don't have good solutions for yet. 3. Conceptual. It's a complex problem technically and politically, which means that it's difficult to understand or debug, and it's got a lot of points of failure. In general, complex solutions (which require many people to install and learn new software) are difficult to implement, take longer than anticipated, and are frequently avoided by the people they're supposedly helping. (See, e.g., RISKS Digest; both for how a human-moderated list can work nicely, and for examples of how complex technical solutions to problems often create more or worse problems than they solve.) I think that the human moderator solution suffers less from these problems; in general, it's a well-tested solution to the "what about off-topic assholes?" problem. It's not perfect, but it does work, more or less; it's easy to understand, easy to implement, and requires no software changes on the users' end. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 11 01:39:04 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 01:39:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D77C39.754D@sk.sympatico.ca> Rich Graves wrote: > Is the goal really to be a "best of cypherpunks," or is it just to cut out the > most inane trolling (of which there is a lot)? While I'd classify Dale's posts > as among "worst of cypherpunks," IMO they are all at least *of* cypherpunks. > I just want the complete crap out of the way. I was envisioning a mostly > unfiltered cypherpunks where the traffic level remained so high that the > filtered "best of" lists like fcpunx were still in demand. Rich, I totally agree with you. I sometimes drop a private email to someone, commenting on how much I enjoyed one of their posts, or complimenting them on presenting what they had to say clearly and concisely enough that even a numbskull such as myself could understand it. Often, after sending it, I will realize it is the same guy I lambasted a few days earlier for being such a shithole-idiot-dweeb in one of his postings. Personally, I find it amazing that it seems to be those who are most enamored of themselves as the serious, cypto-elite of the list who are the least cognizant of how silly they appear (to me) in begging for some mother-hen/higher-authority to make the 'bad kids' sit still in their seats. I find it absolutely astounding, as well, that I am sitting here watching the same process take place on this list that everyone here seems to be so terribly fired-up about when it happens in the world outside of this list. (Some 'outsider' tweaks the nose of our ambassador and, suddenly, we are firing on the citizens in order to defend our flag.) Dale, as you point out, didn't 'sneak under the fence' in the middle of the night. He is a member of this list who has contributed more than a few posts that I have saved or printed out (and filed beside those of some who are already building a scaffold for him in their minds). I am disgusted by some of the behavior and self-righteous missives of some of the people who lay claim to be of superior stature to Dale in this conference, but who act either like children, or like a pack of rabid dogs in expressing their profound belief that they are somehow aligned with the force of 'righteousness' that will slay the 'evil' ones on this list. (Your days are numbered/You're history, pal/etc.) I was particularly dismayed at seeing Ray Archelian, whom I have developed a certain amount of respect for, stooping to 'jack off' in Dale's face, so to speak. Lastly, I find it totally ludicrous that people who purport to be beings of 'reason' are babbling on and on about 'votes' of confidence, etc., on a matter that was determined and announced without asking for any kind of approval on their part, and laying out complicated 'systems' and 'future scenarios' for placing all of the missives in restricted, cypher-politically correct boxes. To tell the truth, given all of the 'shifted-reality' postings since the 'announcement', if I see a question on the list as to whether or not a posting is acceptable if it says, "John Gilmore is a cocksucker." in 'binary'... Well, I would be hard pressed to figure out if it was meant as humor or as a serious question. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 11 02:38:53 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 02:38:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Secret Agenda? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D78420.56D6@sk.sympatico.ca> Against Moderation wrote: AM, The points you raise below are valid ones, as opposed to some of the perceived 'parting shots' by those 'voting' for moderation in anticipation of the Iron Boot descending (on 'others', of course). I find it interesting that you keep refering to 'not understanding' some of the purported reasons behind the proposed system. I am finding myself getting the feeling that there is some underlying future purpose or direction behind the 'changes' that is not being fully revealed. Perhaps my sense of smell is declining in my old-age, but I'm getting an odor that doesn't match with the dinner menu that has been announced. Toto > 10-30 minutes is potentially far less than it would take. What about > mail that arrives in the middle of the night, or what if all the > moderators are away or busy. > If you add delay before secondary moderators can even > get the stuff, you are unfairly penalizing those who use a better or > more efficient filtering scheme > Fine for those who want the moderation, but why are you forcing > everyone to use this scheme? > > There are plenty of moderation schemes that are way more cypherpunk > than one central moderation authority. > But why not let those of us who write code experiment with other ways of moderating the list? Please. > > What does it cost anyone to have a separate mailing list which > immediately gets all cypherpunks submissions? The only argument > against this is "load", but that doesn't make sense. > > More importantly, if some significant number of people really do want > to subscribe to cypherpunks-raw (as in enough that you would even > start to think about load), then maybe centralized moderation is not > the way to go. > > What is the advantage of not having a cypherpunks-raw? I just don't > understand it. It costs you nothing, it shows your willingness to > compete with other moderators or moderation schemes, and it will make > people a lot more confident that you aren't suppressing some messages > from cypherpunks-flames list. > From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 11 02:39:05 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 02:39:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: nice work In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D78860.12B3@sk.sympatico.ca> Clint Barnett wrote: > > no doubt everybody on the list recieved a spam about some personalised > children's books. Having been away or a few weeks, I only just today got > to replying to that message. I recieved a response indicating that my > response was undeliverable due to the mailbox being full. I just wanted > to say that I'm glad I'm not the only one who can't stand that crap. Nice > work. Damn straight! The Reply button can be a dangerous instrument in the right hands. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 11 02:40:50 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 02:40:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Igor / Hero or Villain? In-Reply-To: <199701110345.VAA02052@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32D77EEE.425A@sk.sympatico.ca> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Does not the moderated list, moderated by YOU, already exist? > I am confused. > It is indeed suspicious because it raises a possibility of > concealed human involvement. > That's a non-answer. Igor, Some days I print your postings and file them away for future reference. Other days, I want to cyber-shoot your sorry ass. Either way, I regard you as a valuable member of CypherPunks for the reason that you're not about to lay down on the tracks and let the train run over you, just because of a 'purported' goal of protecting you from the 'bad' people. History has taught us that when the witch-hunt starts, everyone with a broom is suspect. Toto From ddt at pgp.com Sat Jan 11 03:00:14 1997 From: ddt at pgp.com (Dave Del Torto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 03:00:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail 4.5 (Win/32) - First Public Beta Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The first beta of the PGPmail 4.5 plugin (Win, 32-bit) is now available for public experimentation. For further information, and to begin the export controlled* download process, please point your web browsers at: Your feedback on the software is welcome at the address listed on the webpage. Thank you for your continued support! dave *Not for use outside the USA and Canada. ________________________________________________________________________ Dave Del Torto +1.415.524.6231 tel Digital Privacy Munitions Analyst +1.415.572.1932 fax Pretty Good Privacy, Inc. http://www.pgp.com web -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPmail 4.5b8 iQCVAwUBMtdsVKHBOF9KrwDlAQG6jAP8CKn8iDlzWTE0nYm7QumDR5wIVtnqCGRo YO50odzYzuozKzzaTcB46c6ip0WXvc1sA/XC5/fcFHoiG9sQuZQp+UlrWLFWoLSF cG/VuLjPVbL7Oav2vM/noqDQvhRhkPQbI1l/f/tyvL6KoUovchBeG2NV+gLWzPNn a/MvF2QxuQM= =xVx2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From se7en at dis.org Sat Jan 11 03:30:09 1997 From: se7en at dis.org (Evil se7en) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 03:30:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Some People Just Never Learn Message-ID: You know, I've been away for several weeks holed up with my new reading list busy learning all sorts of new stuff to increase my computer knowledge base. I haven't posted for several weeks, haven't said or done anything to anyone, yet one asshole just insists on fucking with me. He thought he was being tricky enough to think I wouldn't find out who he was, but I did. It wasn't too hard. I've tried to have some sympathy on this lamer in the past, but I can't anymore. So, in the tradition of what se7en is most famous for, that is for pulling outrageous stunts when least expected, I thought I would brighten his day up a little bit by hacking into TRW and running an extensive profile on him, and then post it for the world to see. So here's to you Gambit...This ought to keep you distracted long enough! Now maybe I can go back to my reading list and fade back into obscurity. XOXOXO! se7en ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ķ � Individual Profile � ������������������������������������������������������������������������������Ķ � KANE R MARLOW � � DOB: Age: SSN: 548-27-5143 � � SS#:548-27-5143 Was issued in California between 1973 and 1974 � ������������������������������������������������������������������������������Ķ � Residence � ������������������������������������������������������������������������������Ķ � Address: 1535 SLATER ST � � SANTA ROSA, CA 95404 Phone: � � SONOMA County Status: � ������������������������������������������������������������������������������Ķ � Others at Primary Address � ������������������������������������������������������������������������������Ķ � MARLENE AGNEW � � JAN BLAKEMAN 553-96-9520 � � PHYLLIS C CONWAY 516-72-2032 � � MITCH DELGADO � � LISA DJONNE �  REGINA DUNHAM  ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ͼ Request Criteria ---------------- SS No :548-27-5143 Returned Results ---------------- MARLOW, KANE R Year Born : 1973 SS#:548-27-5143 Was issued in California between 1973 and 1974 AKA --- MARLOW, KANE RYAN Known Addresses for Subject --------------------------- JUN-95/APR-96 - 1535 SLATER ST SANTA ROSA CA 95404 OCT-94/OCT-94 - 6851 CAROL DR APT 12 SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 FEB-94/JUL-94 - GENERAL DELIVERY SANTA ROSA CA 95402 JAN-94/JAN-94 - 0 GENERAL DELIVERY SANTA ROSA CA 95402 APR-93/APR-93 - 118 W ST 135 RENO NV 89501 2301 GRAVENSTEIN HWY SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 ****** No additional telephone listings for: 1535 SLATER ST SANTA ROSA CA 95404 Neighbors for: 1535 SLATER ST SANTA ROSA CA 95404 -------------------------------------------------- STIFFLER PAUL & BRENDA 1530 SLATER ST (707)528-4398 TOBIN TOD 1555 SLATER ST (707)544-9411 HALBUR DAVE 1560 SLATER ST (707)544-9967 NAVE JANET L 1560 SLATER ST APT 1 (707)546-3781 RUSSELL ROCHELLE K 1604 SLATER ST (707)544-9638 MT TAYLOR CHILDRENS CENTER 1451 SLATER ST (707)576-0773 MULLNER FRANK 1450 SLATER ST (707)542-5333 SALUDES T 1625 SLATER ST (707)576-8179 SMITH MARK 1625 SLATER ST APT 2 (707)579-5860 SHECKLER BERT 1644 SLATER ST (707)525-0370 BANKERT M 1645 SLATER ST (707)523-4825 PAUL ROBERT L 1650 SLATER ST (707)579-0186 ORCHARD ROGER 1661 SLATER ST (707)544-9941 LOPEZ IRENE 1320 SLATER ST (707)545-6431 WOLD ERIC 1300 SLATER ST (707)579-3307 MURRAY A 1135 SLATER ST (707)528-8218 MORALES ALEJANDRO 1135 SLATER ST (707)546-5175 MARTIN ANTHONY 1135 SLATER ST (707)576-7673 STRONG MATT 1132 SLATER ST (707)575-5694 WALSH JAMES J 1130 SLATER ST (707)578-3592 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Telephone listings for: 6851 CAROL DR APT 12 SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 ----------------------------------------------------------------- BURGESS THERESA 6851 CAROL DR (707)823-9226 CEJA GONZALO 6851 CAROL DR (707)829-5143 GARCIA JOSE 6851 CAROL DR (707)823-9384 WINKELBAUER KELLY 6851 CAROL DR (707)829-5964 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Neighbors for: 6851 CAROL DR APT 12 SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 -------------------------------------------------------- BUSTILLOZ CONNIE 6850 CAROL DR (707)823-6388 FURR BETTY L 6755 CAROL DR (707)823-2168 FETHERSTON DAVID & GLORIA 6701 CAROL DR (707)823-7358 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****** No additional telephone listings for: GENERAL DELIVERY SANTA ROSA CA 95402 ****** No Neighbors for: GENERAL DELIVERY SANTA ROSA CA 95402 ****** No additional telephone listings for: 0 GENERAL DELIVERY SANTA ROSA CA 95402 ****** No Neighbors for: 0 GENERAL DELIVERY SANTA ROSA CA 95402 Telephone listings for: 118 W ST 135 RENO NV 89501 --------------------------------------------------- BROWN RAY 118 WEST ST (702)323-4632 DVORAK ANN 118 WEST ST (702)348-7807 HENDERSON LLOYD 118 WEST ST (702)322-4033 MCPAUL KAREN G 118 WEST ST (702)348-4631 NICHOLS TONY 118 WEST ST (702)322-0966 ROSS MANOR HOTEL APARTMENTS 118 WEST ST (702)323-3044 WONG RAYMOND K F 118 WEST ST (702)322-7201 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Neighbors for: 118 W ST 135 RENO NV 89501 ------------------------------------------ PLAZA RESORT CLUB 121 WEST ST (702)786-2200 LAVECCHIA VARESE RESTAURANT 130 WEST ST (702)322-7486 FIVE STAR SALOON 132 WEST ST (702)329-2878 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****** No additional telephone listings for: 2301 GRAVENSTEIN HWY SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 Neighbors for: 2301 GRAVENSTEIN HWY SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 -------------------------------------------------------- DIFRANCO FENCE CO 1830 GRAVENSTEIN HIGHWAY (707)578-3080 STAR VIDEO SEBASTOPOL 3195 GRAVENSTEIN HWY (707)823-3381 DISCOUNT ALLEY FAX 1382 GRAVENSTEIN HWY (707)823-7044 DISCOUNT ALLEY 1382 GRAVENSTEIN HWY (707)823-1584 SEBASTOPOL DESIGN CENTER FLOORIN 1225 GRAVENSTEIN HWY (707)823-2196 FIESTA CLEANERS 580 GRAVENSTEIN HWY N (707)823-0260 LABLUE CLEANERS 580 GRAVENSTEIN HWY N (707)527-5368 LABLUES CLEANERS 580 GRAVENSTEIN HWY N (707)823-0260 FIESTA PHARMACY 560 GRAVENSTEIN HWY N (707)823-7636 BUONA PASTA 550 GRAVENSTEIN HWY N (707)829-0776 FIESTA MARKET SEBASTOPOL GROCERY 550 GRAVENSTEIN HWY N (707)823-9735 FIESTA MARKET SEBASTOPOL MEAT 550 GRAVENSTEIN HWY N (707)823-4916 MOHAR INC 550 GRAVENSTEIN HWY N (707)823-1418 LONG JACK VMD FORESTVILLE VETERI 5033 GRAVENSTEIN HIGHWAY (707)823-7312 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- ****** NO PILOT LICENSE FOUND ****** ****** NO AIRCRAFT FOUND ****** ****** NO DOCUMENTED VESSELS FOUND ****** =============================================================================== KANE R MARLOW Year Born: 1973 SS#:548-27-5143 Was issued in California between 1973 and 1974 Known Addresses For Subject --------------------------- JUN-95/APR-96 - 1535 SLATER ST SANTA ROSA CA 95404 OCT-94/OCT-94 - 6851 CAROL DR 12 SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 2301 GRAVENSTEIN HWY SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 118 W ST 135 RENO NV 89501 GENERAL DELIVERY SANTA ROSA CA 95402 Possible Property Ownership --------------------------- ** No Property Found during Search ** Telephone Listings for Subject Addresses ---------------------------------------- 6851 CAROL DR, SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 ---------------------------------- BURGESS THERESA (707)823-9226 CEJA GONZALO (707)829-5143 GARCIA JOSE (707)823-9384 WINKELBAUER KELLY (707)829-5964 118 W ST, RENO NV 89501 ----------------------- BROWN RAY (702)323-4632 DVORAK ANN (702)348-7807 HENDERSON LLOYD (702)322-4033 MCPAUL KAREN G (702)348-4631 NICHOLS TONY (702)322-0966 ROSS MANOR HOTEL APARTMEN (702)323-3044 WONG RAYMOND K F (702)322-7201 Relatives (* - denotes address match with Subject) -------------------------------------------------- MARLOW, SHARON DOB: 12/43 Possible AKA: MARLOW, SHARON T SS#: 546-64-7017 SS#:546-64-7017 Was issued in California between 1961 and 1962 NOV-95/NOV-95 - 2301 GRAVENSTEIN HWY S SEBASTOPOL CA 95472- NOV-95/NOV-95 - 7017 FELLERS LN SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 MAR-94/MAR-94 - 2301 S GRAVENSTEIN HWY SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 PO BOX 2983 SANTA ROSA CA 95405 101 BOAS DR 35 SANTA ROSA CA 95409 431 BEAVER ST SANTA ROSA CA 95404 *2301 GRAVENSTEIN HWY SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 802 BRIGHAM AVE SANTA ROSA CA 95404 MARLOW, JOHN PO BOX 2983 SANTA ROSA CA 95405 101 BOAS DR 35 SANTA ROSA CA 95409 Possible Drivers At Subject's Addresses --------------------------------------- 1535 SLATER ST SANTA ROSA CA 95404 ----------------------------------- ** No Drivers Found At This Address** 6851 CAROL DR 12 SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 ------------------------------------- ** No Drivers Found At This Address** 2301 GRAVENSTEIN HWY SEBASTOPOL CA 95472 ----------------------------------------- ** No Drivers Found At This Address** 118 W ST 135 RENO NV 89501 --------------------------- ** No Drivers Found At This Address** GENERAL DELIVERY SANTA ROSA CA 95402 ------------------------------------- AARON P BAILEY DL# 480063399 issued in IOWA on 7/20/94 expires 12/31/97 DOB 12/31/70 6'03" 190lb HAZEL Eyes JAMES A CAMPBELL DL# 480063952 issued in IOWA on 4/04/95 expires 11/15/97 DOB 11/15/69 6'01" 190lb BLUE Eyes KRISTINE E BAILEY DL# 484844318 issued in IOWA on 4/06/94 expires 4/06/96 DOB 4/06/74 5'03" 110lb BLUE Eyes HOUSTON C HUNT DL# 5506844 issued in OREGON DOB 11/10/26 5'11" 160lb WALTER R WOOD DL# 5683444 issued in OREGON DOB 2/21/65 5'11" 214lb CHARLES E BERNER DL# 8725850 issued in OREGON DOB 8/08/63 6'01" 190lb From amp at pobox.com Sat Jan 11 04:29:04 1997 From: amp at pobox.com (amp at pobox.com) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 04:29:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES Crack Challenge Message-ID: It appears that RSA has posted the rules and some test cyper/plaintext for the DES (and other) crack challenges. see http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/97challenge/ for more information. I've got a few workstations ready to throw at this. It ought to be fun. ------------------------ Name: amp E-mail: amp at pobox.com Date: 01/11/97 Time: 06:20:17 Visit http://www.public-action.com/SkyWriter/WacoMuseum 'Drug Trafficking Offense' is the root passphrase to the Constitution. ------------------------ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 06:40:28 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 06:40:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970110201859.006d14bc@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: Lucky Green writes: > At 07:14 PM 1/10/97 -0500, Ray Arachelian wrote: > >Sandfort isn't the only one who will do this, there will be a pool of > >moderators. Regardless of your personality conflict, I am sure that Sandy > >will remain fair and allow appropriate posts from you through. i.e. > >anything to do with crypto. :) > > Just for the record, I have volunteered to serve as a co-moderator. ... As a moderator, Plucky would certainly approve his own articles. In fact, anything he submits would be approved automatically. In this one he goes on to write: > As with every TAZ that stays up for too long, Cypherpunks eventually got > infested by vermin. Vulis, aga, et al. come to mind. In my experience, once > that happens there is only one solution: take down the TAZ and start over > somewhere else. ... If I were to say, "I am not vermin", my response would be rejected by the moderator(s) as being off-topic. > [Since I filter on Vulis and aga in the body text of all incoming email, I > am unlikely to read any replies to this post. ... Therefore, Plucky Green (who by the way posts on news.admin.net-abuse.* and various Macintosh newsgroups under his real name) is already not bothered by my response. He just doesn't want others to see it. Plucky Green is in turn responding to Ray Arachelian, who runs a "filtered" version of Cypherpunks. Ray posts lies about me to both the main "cypher punks" mailing list and his "filtered" one (falsely accusing me of "spamming", of causing mail loops, etc). When I reply and refute his lies, my responses don't go to Ray's "filtered" list. Plucky wants the extend his ability to suppress the victim's ability to refute libel. ObCrypto: I challenge the "cypher punks" to decode the following text: Nffubyr prafbe Wbua Tvyzber vf n cngurgvp byq pbpxfhpxre. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 06:42:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 06:42:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D707A2.5410@disposable.com> Message-ID: Jew-hating paranoid liar Rich Graves writes: > > I would not favor a moderation policy that gave carte blanche to "good guys" > to talk about whatever they wanted ("libertarian bullshit" in Chudov's > delicate phrasing), but required posts by "bad guys" like Dale (and in certai > threads, me -- you never know) to be "about crypto." That's a hypocritical > double standard. Here's another typical post from Igor's soc.culture.russian.moderated (NOT). Igor Chudov, a moderator of s.c.r.m, calls M. Kagalenko "envious eunich", but Kagalenko has been banned from posting to s.c.r.m because he objected to its creation (i.e. he's on the "blacklist" and his submissions are auto-rejected). ]From: mkagalen at lynx.dac.neu.edu (Michael Kagalenko) ]Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian,alt.genius.bill-palmer ]Subject: Re: Envious Eunuch's E-Mail Evacuations ]Message-ID: <5audbm$4vf at lynx.dac.neu.edu> ]Date: 7 Jan 1997 15:57:26 -0500 ]Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA ] ]Henrietta Thomas (hkt at wwa.com) wrote: ]] ]][newsgroups trimmed] ]] ]]ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) wrote: ]] ]]>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- ]] ]]>[crossposted to alt.genius.bill-palmer] ]] ]]>Prof. Henrietta K. Thomas wrote: ]] ]]Professor, eh? Well, well, well...... ]] ]]>> >That's right, Mike; I'll give you the bad news right here in ]]>> >soc.culture.russian, since in your e-mailing, you claimed to ]]>> >speak for--NOT MICHAEL KAGALENKO, EUNUCH--but the entire ]]>> >s.c.r. readership, in trying to run me off because you were ]]>> >infuriated by a recent posting of mine. ]]>> ]]>> Well, I don't know about the entire readership, but he certainly ]]>> speaks for me in this regard. ]] ]]>Envious Eunuch Kagalenko surely does NOT speak for me and many of my ]]>acquaintainces. We support Bill's struggle against the mischievous ]]>censorous eunuch. ]] ]]You're just angry 'cause Kagalenko tried to crash your machine. ] ] Correction; if I have tried to crash Chudov's computer, it would have been ] crashed. I'd venture to guess that getting root on his Linux box ] wouldn't be all that hard, either. ] ](Followups to sc.r.moderasted) ] ]Couldn't honour it, as I am permanently banned from there. ] ] ]-- ]ABILITY,n. The natural equipment to accomplish some small part of the meaner ] ambitions distinguishing able men from dead ones. ] -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" ] --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 06:50:27 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 06:50:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Lesher posts a good one to rec.humror.funny In-Reply-To: Message-ID: From: wb8foz at netcom.com Newsgroups: rec.humor.funny Subject: And she's no blond..... Keywords: chuckle, original Message-ID: Date: Thu, 9 Jan 97 19:30:03 EST Organization: NRK Research Lines: 42 Approved: funny-request at clari.net =================================== There is a thread about those supermarket "discount customer" cards in misc.consumer. Here's MY followup: ==================================== Dear Mr. Jones: We noticed you've not picked up any condoms at SpiffyMart recently. (Your last purchase was 8 weeks ago.) Further, you have stopped buying feminine hygiene products, but have sharply increased your frozen pizza and dinners usage in the same time frame. It's clear that Ms. Jody Sanders has dumped you. (It's probably for the best - we knew she was a loser from that cheap shampoo she buys.) We confirmed this with the Post Office database -- yep, she filed a change of address. We at Horny International offer our condolences. As the number-one vender of hot X-rated videos, we'd like to help you out in this time of stress. If you're feeling lonely, check out our catalog of both VHS and super 8 tapes. Order now and we throw in an extra tape FREE! Yours Truly; Sleazy Jerk, Marketing Manager. ps: That "blond" at O'Dougles last Saturday -- you bought her 2nd Strawberry Martini? Forget it! She's on her third yeast infection in as many months, and is a 'regular' at Acme Pharmacy. (Her HMO computer gossips with ours.) You never know what else she might have. Our tapes are LOTS safer!.. -- Selected by Jim Griffith. MAIL your joke to funny at clari.net. This newsgroup is sponsored by ClariNet Communications Corp. Read about The Internet Joke Book -- the best of RHF at http://www.clari.net/inetjoke.html From express at capella.net Sat Jan 11 07:46:49 1997 From: express at capella.net (express at capella.net) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 07:46:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: FOX Message-ID: <199701111552.KAA17764@capella.net> THE FOX FIRE IS BURNING! http://www.mlmers-ad-net.com/FoxTeam/Fox FREE WEB PAGE AND CHECKS SENT OUT DAILY! For a quick reply via E-mail send to our Autoresponder: Thanks, John ******************************************** Need a bulk E-mail friendly ISP? ($60/year) See Web Page: http://www.capella.net/?AAE70 Plus you can earn a residual income too! ******************************************** From bad at uhf.wireless.net Sat Jan 11 08:16:13 1997 From: bad at uhf.wireless.net (Bernie Doehner) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 08:16:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970111003625.0069d61c@mail.io.com> Message-ID: > I think that the move to human moderation is a good thing, and am pleased > that Sandy will shortly begin to act as moderator. Last night's barrage of SPAM convinced me that this is a really good thing. > However, I think that forming lists of "approved people" and "unapproved > people" and treating them differently is likely to do more harm than good, > even if we have nice software which does it very efficiently. I don't like > it for several reasons: Why jump to conclusions about the moderator's behavior? Lets give the new moderators a chance - PLEASE!!! I think our new moderators have been around long enough to know what's appropriate and what's not. I for one am getting really tired of seeing so many off topic messages (not necessary SPAM) on here. I have been tempted to unsubscribe a couple of times, but I haven't because I don't want to miss information on the DES/RC5 Challenge and other important info. I have been on well moderated lists, as well as had to ask a friend of mine who was on a closed list to forward postings to me (I couldn't get on the approved list because I hadn't sent them $20). > 1. Political. It's symbolically disturbing, and it tends to shift the focus > of the group (and of the moderation process) away from messages, and > towards the people who post them. I think it'd be tempting to turn it into > some sort of bureaucratic system, with punishments (being on the bad list) In the case of this one closed list that I know of, I'd agree with you, but I'd argue that this isn't generaly true. Let me ask you this: How many of the messages posted to this list have you actualy read/found useful? I personaly don't find more than perhaps 5% useful. > 2. Technical. It requires that the people on the "good list" authenticate > their messages (otherwise people will post with the names of "good people" > to avoid moderation), which imports a lot of hassle with different > platforms and signing and certification and key distribution and [...] > which we don't have good solutions for yet. I sort of see your point, but I don't think we have to go that far. A moderator's main function is one of keeping the discussions on track (Ie. SPAM selling Metamucil doesn't qualify). Authentication goes a little beyond that. I think forcing authentication will really turn this into a political problem. Good luck Sandy and other moderator! Bernie From bad at uhf.wireless.net Sat Jan 11 08:28:43 1997 From: bad at uhf.wireless.net (Bernie Doehner) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 08:28:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: another idea? In-Reply-To: <19970111060735.2441.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: Hi again: Upon rereading comments in favor of no moderation, it occured to me that a possible solution that will make most people happy: How about, we have cypherpunks-raw: unmoderated 110% SPAM cypherpunks: moderated by Sandy and other moderator. Then, if the moderator approve pool for cypherpunks is crosslinked to cypherpunks-raw (two way link), we have the best of both worlds. People who want to experiment with filtering software can do that, and people who want the SPAM and off subject garbage to go away can do that. Bernie From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 11 08:42:41 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 08:42:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701111638.KAA05913@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Jew-hating paranoid liar Rich Graves writes: > > > > I would not favor a moderation policy that gave carte blanche to "good guys" > > to talk about whatever they wanted ("libertarian bullshit" in Chudov's > > delicate phrasing), but required posts by "bad guys" like Dale (and in certai > > threads, me -- you never know) to be "about crypto." That's a hypocritical > > double standard. > > Here's another typical post from Igor's soc.culture.russian.moderated (NOT). > > Igor Chudov, a moderator of s.c.r.m, calls M. Kagalenko "envious eunich", but > Kagalenko has been banned from posting to s.c.r.m because he objected to its > creation (i.e. he's on the "blacklist" and his submissions are auto-rejected). but none of the posts in question had ever been posted to scrm. I do not see what your example is supposed to illustrate. - Igor. > ]From: mkagalen at lynx.dac.neu.edu (Michael Kagalenko) > ]Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian,alt.genius.bill-palmer > ]Subject: Re: Envious Eunuch's E-Mail Evacuations > ]Message-ID: <5audbm$4vf at lynx.dac.neu.edu> > ]Date: 7 Jan 1997 15:57:26 -0500 > ]Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA > ] > ]Henrietta Thomas (hkt at wwa.com) wrote: > ]] > ]][newsgroups trimmed] > ]] > ]]ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) wrote: > ]] > ]]>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > ]] > ]]>[crossposted to alt.genius.bill-palmer] > ]] > ]]>Prof. Henrietta K. Thomas wrote: > ]] > ]]Professor, eh? Well, well, well...... > ]] > ]]>> >That's right, Mike; I'll give you the bad news right here in > ]]>> >soc.culture.russian, since in your e-mailing, you claimed to > ]]>> >speak for--NOT MICHAEL KAGALENKO, EUNUCH--but the entire > ]]>> >s.c.r. readership, in trying to run me off because you were > ]]>> >infuriated by a recent posting of mine. > ]]>> > ]]>> Well, I don't know about the entire readership, but he certainly > ]]>> speaks for me in this regard. > ]] > ]]>Envious Eunuch Kagalenko surely does NOT speak for me and many of my > ]]>acquaintainces. We support Bill's struggle against the mischievous > ]]>censorous eunuch. > ]] > ]]You're just angry 'cause Kagalenko tried to crash your machine. > ] > ] Correction; if I have tried to crash Chudov's computer, it would have been > ] crashed. I'd venture to guess that getting root on his Linux box > ] wouldn't be all that hard, either. > ] > ](Followups to sc.r.moderasted) > ] > ]Couldn't honour it, as I am permanently banned from there. > ] > ] > ]-- > ]ABILITY,n. The natural equipment to accomplish some small part of the meaner > ] ambitions distinguishing able men from dead ones. > ] -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" > ] > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > - Igor. From DataETRsch at aol.com Sat Jan 11 09:06:32 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:06:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP 8192 PKCS and IMDMP Summary Message-ID: <970111120551_1074845300@emout20.mail.aol.com> Hi, You have probably read a few of my past messages about UDCM and IMDMP. The variation of IMDMP implemented within UDCM V2.0 and UDCM V3.0 does not include a public key cryptosystem. However, on March 1st, 1997, new versions of UDCM and IMDMP will be released that do support the public key cryptosystem method. The future versions will also support multi-party key integration features, four platform independent random number generator algorithms, as well as 1024 (8192 bit) keys. Note that the current version of IMDMP only allows 256 byte (1024) bit keys. The current shareware version and the future shareware version of UDCM will still only allow 5 byte (40 bit) keys so as to comply with ITAR unless a key recovery infrastructure is established. A public key directory infrastructure is being considered for development as well. Also note that versions of UDCM are being planned for the UNIX, DOS, and Macintosh System platforms. There are a few major mistakes in a couple of my previous delegated messages. An end-user application that supports IMDMP will not be released until March 1st, 1997. A detailed description of IMDMP will not be released as planned, but, instead, the undocumented primary source code of UDCM (containing the IMDMP encryption algorithm) will be released on February 1st, 1997. A partially detailed summary of the IMDMP is now included in VENDOR.DOC file of the UDCM V2.0 software package / archive. UDCM V2.0 was modified to restrict keys to 50 bits so as to comply with the latest ITAR details. The extensively confusing exportation restrictions sections of UDCM's documentation were modified as well. I am extremely sorry about the apparently extraneous information that is present in a few of my first messages to this mailing list. Such a negative level feedback was not anticipated. I do admit that single key encryption methods are not too comparable to PKCS methods. What I was referring to when I said IMDMP is more advanced than RSA, etc. is the actual encryption procedure itself, not the way keys are secured. Again, irrashional claims were not intended at all. The amount of analytical research invested in IMDMP was thought to be sufficient. By the way, has anyone out there even tried using UDCM to encrypt a file or two? I do not know how some of you can say that IMDMP is a simple XOR-ing and AND-ing algorithm without trying it first. I find it extremely hard to believe that the celebrated creator(s) of Blowfish, IDEA, etc. had to go through all of this ritualistic screening complexity too. (Please do correct me if I am wrong.) (For the record: DataET Research's promotional agent has been fired.) Again, the web site address of UDCM is: http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. The web site includes has a link to the VENDOR.DOC file which includes the aforesaid updated information. UDCMV20.ZIP is currently unavailable on the web site as the software is undergoing additional security modifications. By the way, the web page's ugly background his been removed. The IMDMP encryption algorithm itself combines various simple and complex methods to secure digital data: standard randomized and fixed substitution, standard randomized and fixed AND and XOR logic, integrated and interlaced randomized XOR logic, NOT logic, randomized and fixed bit shifting, randomized transposition scrambling, linear sequential bit incrementation and decrementation, integrated and interlaced randomized and fixed byte dependency structuring, sequential byte pyramid structuring, asymmetric non-linear chaos and complexity based binary selection equation key integration, anomalous key bit factoring, and continuous key bit modification structuring. Sub-algorithms of IMDMP are basically additional applications of one or more of the aforesaid techniques. Questions, queries, or comments ("gulp")? E-Mail: DataETRsch at aol.com, JKYuRamos at aol.com, or DataETResearch at geocities.com. Note: From now on, any messages to DataET Research that do not contain the text "NO FLAME" somewhere in the subject heading will be ignored completely. If a message is a indeed flame, the associated server's administrator will be contacted, and a complaint will be filed accordingly. Thank you very much for your time. Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From ericm at lne.com Sat Jan 11 09:11:40 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:11:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: another idea? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701111710.JAA08932@slack.lne.com> Bernie Doehner writes: > > Hi again: > > Upon rereading comments in favor of no moderation, it occured to me that a > possible solution that will make most people happy: > > How about, we have > cypherpunks-raw: unmoderated 110% SPAM > cypherpunks: moderated by Sandy and other moderator. That was the original proposal. Now that the 'discussion' has come around full circle, can we stop talking about it and DO it? -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 11 09:14:51 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:14:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970111003625.0069d61c@mail.io.com> Message-ID: <199701111710.LAA06067@manifold.algebra.com> Greg Broiles wrote: > > At 10:49 PM 1/10/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: > >Yes. Igor's STUMP software seems like the way to go. The vast majority of > >posters to this list are not a problem. Discussions amongst them may get > >heated, but they have basic human decency and never even come close to the > >level of abuse and bigotry we have seen from Vulis, aga, et al. > > I think that the move to human moderation is a good thing, and am pleased > that Sandy will shortly begin to act as moderator. > > However, I think that forming lists of "approved people" and "unapproved > people" and treating them differently is likely to do more harm than good, > even if we have nice software which does it very efficiently. I don't like > it for several reasons: > > 1. Political. It's symbolically disturbing, and it tends to shift the focus > of the group (and of the moderation process) away from messages, and > towards the people who post them. I think it'd be tempting to turn it into > some sort of bureaucratic system, with punishments (being on the bad list) > and rewards and status changes and written warnings and all of the other > features which frequently bring out the worst in people. I suspect that > agreeing on "the 10 people who are clearly a problem" will turn out to be > as difficult as finding any 10 things that cypherpunks can agree on, and > then we've got to decide who decides who's a problem, and then we've got to > decide how we decide things, and argue about whether or not John Gilmore is > a good person, and [...] > > 2. Technical. It requires that the people on the "good list" authenticate > their messages (otherwise people will post with the names of "good people" > to avoid moderation), which imports a lot of hassle with different > platforms and signing and certification and key distribution and [...] > which we don't have good solutions for yet. > > 3. Conceptual. It's a complex problem technically and politically, which > means that it's difficult to understand or debug, and it's got a lot of > points of failure. In general, complex solutions (which require many people > to install and learn new software) are difficult to implement, take longer > than anticipated, and are frequently avoided by the people they're > supposedly helping. (See, e.g., RISKS Digest; both for how a > human-moderated list can work nicely, and for examples of how complex > technical solutions to problems often create more or worse problems than > they solve.) > > I think that the human moderator solution suffers less from these problems; > in general, it's a well-tested solution to the "what about off-topic > assholes?" problem. It's not perfect, but it does work, more or less; it's > easy to understand, easy to implement, and requires no software changes on > the users' end. Greg brings up a number of very good points. A small correction: robomod does not necessarily require authentication of posters from the preapproved list. It is merely an option that can be turned on and off. We should all understand that forgeries in the names of preapproved people are only a SYMPTOM of a problem, not a problem in and of itself. The true problem in such case would be that the forgers feel that they are treated unfairly by moderators. Such people may think that the purpose of moderation is to get rid of their persons altogether. Therefore, if moderators face a problem of forgeries and perceive a need to turn this authentication option on, they should step back and this what THEY did wrong. Did they give the forgers an impression that moderators want to silence them? Do they treat everyone, including the former "problem" people, fairly and equally? I have a suggestion, actually. I can rewrite STUMP in such a way that when moderators receive messages for moderation, they would not see any header information indicating who wrote the message (this information would be in the packet that arrives to them, but it would be encrypted with Internal Traffic Key). This way, a moderator would not know if the message is, say, from Tim May or from Dr. Vulis, and would make their decisions (including decisions to preapprove) based solely on the message contents. That may give some way towards fairness. Greg mentions several important and real dissadvantages of preapproved lists, but the huge advantage that they give is a reduction in costs of human moderation. Namely, human moderators do not have to work as hard, and the latency (thanks, Rich!) of most posts is dramatically reduced. DISADVANTAGES (Greg): 1) creates two "classes" of posters 2) somewhat arbitrary 3) possible forgeries require authentication and that's a pain ADVANTAGES: 1) reduces moderators' effort 2) reduces latency 3) depends on how you look at it -- required authentication may be "good". 4) for people like Eric Murray, who post on-topic articles, the list becomes essentially unmoderated, as it used to be. Note that another important feature of STUMP that we seem to overlook was designed specifically to address the problems of preapproved lists. This feature is the presence of "bad words list". This is a set of regular expressions, stored in a file, such that if incoming messages match these expressions, they would be considered "suspicious" even if they purport to be "From: " preapproved persons. That goes a long way towards security and fairness because now nobody (including, say, Paul Bradley along with Dr. Vulis or myself) would be able to call someone else "cocksucker" without review by human moderators. *If* moderators are fair, that would ensure that people are treated equally even if some of them are preapproved and some are not. - Igor. From DataETRsch at aol.com Sat Jan 11 09:15:34 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:15:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: What! Message-ID: <970111121453_201575793@emout18.mail.aol.com> Excuse me? What is faulty about IMDMP? - Jeremy From Jake_Spaulding at holderness.org Sat Jan 11 09:22:37 1997 From: Jake_Spaulding at holderness.org (Jake Spaulding) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:22:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Remove In-Reply-To: <199701100650.BAA12991@newman.cris.com> Message-ID: <61406.5407004@holderness.org> This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 11 09:42:48 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:42:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970110224930.006d114c@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <199701111739.LAA06214@manifold.algebra.com> Lucky Green wrote: > Igor claims that on lists moderated by STUMP, 95% of the people are Lucky, I think that 95% figure is a bit high. I hope I did not claim it:), at least STUMP home page gives a more conservative number of 80%. For scrm, the number may be higher than that, but I would not guarantee 95% for every other newsgroup or mailing list. The variable that this number depends on is the preapproval policy. For example, in the windows 95 newsgroup where STUMP is used, their criteria for preapproval is very strict -- they require 5 successive approved posts to get a poster preapproved. That will inevitably result in more work for moderators, but heck, that's what they want. I would normally expect this number to settle around 85-90% eventually, but 80% is the low ballpark figure. Attached below is STUMP's automatic periodic report about SCRM. It shows that the rate for SCRM is about 88%. > pre-approved. I believe it. Because 95% of the posters are not a problem. > It is a small part of the other 5% that fuck things up. I second Sandy and > John's proposal to moderate Cypherpunks. I propose we use Igor's STUMP > software for this purpose, iff it performs as claimed. > > [Does STUMP have a web interface?] > Yes, look at Modscape at STUMP's home page (go there from http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov). Now it works under linux, but can be ported to other unices (and possibly windoze also). Attachment: #Subject: soc.culture.russian.moderated report for Tue Dec 31 19:05:01 EST 1996 #From: SCRM Approval Key #Date: 1996/12/31 #Message-Id: <199701010005.TAA15238 at www.video-collage.com> #X-Robomod-Version: STUMP 1.1, by ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov) #X-Origin: From: scrm-Admin at algebra.com, From scrm Tue Dec 31 19:05:03 1996 #X-Scrm-Info-1: Send submissions to scrm at algebra.com #X-Scrm-Info-2: Send technical complaints to scrm-Admin at algebra.com #X-Scrm-Info-3: Send complaints about policy to scrm-Board at algebra.com #Organization: CrYpToRoBoMoDeRaToR CaBaL #X-Scrm-Policy: http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/index.html #X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP soc.culture.russian.moderated #X-Comment: moderators do not necessarily agree or disagree with this article. #Reply-To: scrm-Admin at algebra.com #Newsgroups:soc.culture.russian.moderated # # #-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- # #Subject: soc.culture.russian.moderated report for Tue Dec 31 19:05:01 EST 1996 #Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian.moderated #Date: Tue Dec 31 19:05:01 EST 1996 # #This is an automated report about activity of our newsgroup #soc.culture.russian.moderated. It covers period between the #previous report and the current one, ending #on Tue Dec 31 19:05:01 EST 1996. # #Note that we do not report the number of articles cancelled #after they got approved, because the cancellations are done #manually. Typically messages get cancelled by requests of #posters themselves. # #Lastly, the statistics below are skewed towards higher numbers because #there are always some test messages from moderators themselves who #approve and reject them to make sure that our robomoderator functions #properly. # # # #Approved: 1705 messages (of them, 1504 automatically) #Rejected: 129 messages #Preapproved: 39 new posters # #-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- #Version: 2.6.2 # #iQEVAwUBMsmqLVeH1q6rtVT1AQHMNgf7BDSDpDilnCyr3IihDGeOz1Mjp0KNhkGl #sj/Dsz6+aovlUBgt/5dXg/Dq/114QLSJ9Qynlep5Y52OQdzCsI4YZWB8Sul36Nxp #FdqEXDqSJKG4RlhvKqEscpywsRUjaU5T7fOU3bFZ9HO88CIHcTsHxyXYXgYK9lCw #AFJCHWhFxgUngwABo8pwaQ9VYb3J7lz4aeCAf7zfcPiOYEX4WKWPLYdbJidxL5AF #LcmExxKdcCzzYIMgLklu/dBtln0mXXdTtbG8V8sDqQtjh8yLEdpV2JBKnPPE2YHd #8VEOLMQ7Bg38f+AZQAaLwlNB1JXLAvDKwDUT3oeIkcSllGV4wi7O1A== #=YvQK #-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- # - Igor. From olbon at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 11 09:58:52 1997 From: olbon at ix.netcom.com (Clay Olbon II) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:58:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970111130156.125fa0a0@popd.ix.netcom.com> BU, At 12:06 AM 1/10/97 -0500, Black Unicorn wrote: >I dont really think anyone uses bytes to refer to key size, except perhaps >in Prime Number challenges (RSA-129). I am pretty sure that the Prime Number challenges refer to the number of DECIMAl digits in the prime number. Otherwise excellent responses to the simplistic mumbo-jumbo. Good to see you posting again! Clay ******************************************************* Clay Olbon olbon at ix.netcom.com sys-admin, engineer, programmer, statistitian, etc. **********************************************tanstaafl From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sat Jan 11 10:10:14 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:10:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Satellite Gone (fwd) Message-ID: <199701111813.MAA13457@einstein> Hi all, I just got this a few minutes ago and thought it migh be interesting. For obvious reasons I am not going to identify the source. Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:46:51 +0000 > To: Ravage at einstein.ssz.com > Subject: Satellite Gone > > dunoo if this might interest you > Last night at apx 10:00 satellite T1 (Telstar 401) went away... > > Fox and ABC News one channel are now over on T2 (Telstar 402) located at > 89 degrees west... > Fox is on transponders 1,2,7,10,13,17,20,23 > ABC has feeds on 8,21,22 > > I haven't yet found where the UPN feeds are going to be.... > > ATT Satellite Enginering support has said that it is gone with no hope > of recovery... > > Some ugly roumors are starting to float about alleged threats to FOX to > do this by unnamed Gov agencys due to the negetive views that FOX had > been reporting to the public about them.... > > Have you heard anything?? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From rperkins at uvaix2e1.comp.UVic.CA Sat Jan 11 10:26:32 1997 From: rperkins at uvaix2e1.comp.UVic.CA (Ryan Perkins) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:26:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Remailer Message-ID: <199701111826.KAA92878@uvaix3e1.comp.UVic.CA> I've recently had a surge of remailing attempts made through the remailer which I used to have running. It is no longer running. If I do reset it, I'll notify the cypherpunk list.. the address(es) were: rperkins at nyx.cs.du.edu rperkins at nyx10.cs.du.edu or: rperkins at nox.cs.du.edu rperkins at nyx.net .. whatever, they all went to the same place.. These accounts are all _forwarded_ to my account: rperkins at uvic.ca, and are not forwarded.. Please remove my the addresses from any list of remailers you may mantain. I will alert you if the remailer goes back up. For those of you who don't maintain remailer listings, please make note of these addresses: they are _not_ remailers. Thank you. --- Ryan Perkins | I feel that sucide jumpers see a glimpse of rperkins at castle.uvic.ca | sanity as they throw themselves from the ledge. Ask for PGP public key | That's why they scream all the way down. 8C5357 : 9F FF BA 93 54 D5 18 78 4B 1E DA GC E3 4E From root at uhf.wireless.net Sat Jan 11 10:43:52 1997 From: root at uhf.wireless.net (System Administrator) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:43:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: another idea? In-Reply-To: <199701111710.JAA08932@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: > That was the original proposal. > Now that the 'discussion' has come around full circle, can we > stop talking about it and DO it? > Oops! Sorry. I lost this discussion in the middle of all the SPAM! Yes, please do it! Bernie From mindbenders at hotmail.com Sat Jan 11 10:48:09 1997 From: mindbenders at hotmail.com (LoRd oRiOn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:48:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ma Bell Message-ID: <19970111184753.7346.qmail@hotmail.com> This may not have to do with you guys..but I have a question...why do Telco people and the government blame us hackers for costing them billions of dollars a year to fix the security holes that they have??? Instead of charging us with felony's and with money they should thank us and/or hire us to find thier holes and fix them!! I don't like to screw Ma Bell..but she does have to lighten up. --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 10:51:36 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:51:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D7CCDB.6720@gte.net> Against Moderation wrote: > Ray Arachelian writes: > > > 3. Not making the unmoderated list first-up (i.e., cutting posts first, > > > then making the "full" list available later) is suspicious, or at > > > least a bad idea.[snip] > What is the advantage of not having a cypherpunks-raw? I just don't > understand it. It costs you nothing, it shows your willingness to > compete with other moderators or moderation schemes, and it will make > people a lot more confident that you aren't suppressing some messages > from cypherpunks-flames list. > If for some reason load really is the problem (though I can't see > how), then can you set some maximum number of subscribers you would be > willing to mail cypherpunks-raw to? I mean 50 people shouldn't be > that big a deal, right? And if more than 50 want to subscribe and you > think toad can't handle the load, I will run a mail exploder on a > different machine. Great ideas, but if I had to bet money, I'd place my bets with Dr. Vulis on what lies behind their real reasoning. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 10:51:44 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:51:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Comments on moderation In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970110215712.0132d100@mail.teleport.com> Message-ID: <32D7CDA9.472@gte.net> Alan Olsen wrote: > I have been reading the comments on moderation and I have a few comments > I would like to see moderation, but only for those things that filters > cannot handle effectivly. > 1) The Spam that has been flooding the list. It looks like someone has an > axe to grind against the list or certain people on it, so they are doing > their best to disrupt it. The spam is only part of that attack. It should > be dealt with as any other denial of service attack. > 2) The anonymous flames against Tim May (or anyone else for that > matter...). These messages contain no useful content. They only serve to > allow certain overgrown juviniles to vent against people they dislike. > Killing the above would greatly improve the quality of the list. The rest > can be killed by filters. As for the people who are crying "censor", I > have seen little evidence that the doom they predict is going to happen. Did you really want to say "no evidence", but were just hedging your bet? From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 10:51:47 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:51:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D7CFAC.38D0@gte.net> Bill Frantz wrote: > At 8:19 PM -0800 1/10/97, Lucky Green wrote:[snippo] > Let me rant a bit about the "ideal" moderation structure. Igor Chudov's > software lets people like Matt Blase and Bruce Schneier post whatever they > want. (I would add people like Black Unicorn as well. YMMV) Other posts > go into a pool accessible to all moderators. If one moderator approves, > the message goes out. If N reject, it is rejected. These rejections could > either be anonymous or be included in an x-moderators-rejecting: header for > the "worst of cypherpunks" list. Let me guess. Frantz started with electronic copies of Mein Kampf, 1984 (originally 1948), Brave New World, and Animal Farm, and did some judicious substitutions: Substitute "moderator" for "censor". Substitute "pool" for "concentration camp". Substitute "reject" for "liquidate". And, they could do this anonymously, like the Gestapo, SS, LAPD, FBI, CIA, FEMA, BATF, you get the picture. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 10:51:52 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:51:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: subscription request to mailing list In-Reply-To: <01BBFF56.DA8A7D00@bogart.mpsnet.com.mx> Message-ID: <32D7D2AD.4EA5@gte.net> donaldo wrote: > please enroll me on your mailing list. > Thank You. WARNING: This list is about to be censored. The information you receive may be edited, and therefore may not represent the information that was originally posted. Further, any information you post may be censored (removed), and the content may be held against you. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 10:52:00 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:52:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970111003625.0069d61c@mail.io.com> Message-ID: <32D7D8CA.3ADF@gte.net> Greg Broiles wrote: > At 10:49 PM 1/10/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: > I think that the human moderator solution suffers less from these problems; > in general, it's a well-tested solution to the "what about off-topic > assholes?" problem. It's not perfect, but it does work, more or less; it's > easy to understand, easy to implement, and requires no software changes on > the users' end. Yeah, Greg, we all hate those pesky asshole-types. But what do you do, Greg, when the *moderator* is the pesky asshole-type? Bend over, huh? From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 10:52:11 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:52:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970110201859.006d14bc@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <32D7DC28.44B6@gte.net> Lucky Green wrote: [snip] > ...as a long time subscriber, I care about the list. I see only one > alternative to moderating Cypherpunks. And that is shutting it down... What am I missing here? Why don't these assholes just go away? They bitch and moan constantly about other people's whining, then they fill the list with their own whining. More hypocrisy from "cypherpunks". From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 10:52:24 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:52:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D7DE11.2BDE@gte.net> Rich Graves wrote: [snip] > I'd just like to say that as disgusting as I find most of Dale's posts, > I consider almost all of them appropriate for the list. > While I'd classify Dale's posts as among "worst of cypherpunks," > IMO they are all at least *of* cypherpunks. Rich, you have to have a mind to comment on my posts. To call my posts disgusting, when I as a person am 1) Vastly more concerned about justice, truth, and openness than you, and 2) Vastly more intelligent than you, is pure ignorance and hypocrisy. When you have nothing to say, you do the "attack against the man", which is a logical fallacy. You and Sandfort can lie in bed together on that one. Punk. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 10:52:35 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 10:52:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Igor / Hero or Villain? In-Reply-To: <199701110345.VAA02052@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32D7E031.6671@gte.net> Toto wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Does not the moderated list, moderated by YOU, already exist? > > I am confused. > > It is indeed suspicious because it raises a possibility of > > concealed human involvement. > > That's a non-answer. > Some days I print your postings and file them away for future > reference. Other days, I want to cyber-shoot your sorry ass. > Either way, I regard you as a valuable member of CypherPunks > for the reason that you're not about to lay down on the tracks > and let the train run over you, just because of a 'purported' > goal of protecting you from the 'bad' people. History has taught us > that when the witch-hunt starts, everyone with a broom is suspect. Just a comment. Igor indeed is one of the most intelligent and reasoned posters here. Sorry I can't say the same for all. Point is, Igor wants to believe he can reason with the rabid dogs on this moderation issue. A quote from Star Trek: "Command and compassion is a fool's mixture". From cypherpunks at toad.com Sat Jan 11 11:06:44 1997 From: cypherpunks at toad.com (cypherpunks at toad.com) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:06:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA over Rubics cube? Message-ID: <199701111858.KAA09264@miron.vip.best.com> Just for fun, not that I am sugesting it as a serious encryption method, but has anyone tried exponetion cyphers on the group defined by the Rubics cube? :) From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 11 11:54:47 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 11:54:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP 8192 PKCS and IMDMP Summary In-Reply-To: <970111120551_1074845300@emout20.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <199701111950.NAA07011@manifold.algebra.com> DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > By the way, has anyone out there even tried using UDCM to encrypt a file or > two? I do not know how some of you can say that IMDMP is a simple XOR-ing and > AND-ing algorithm without trying it first. I find it extremely hard to > believe that the celebrated creator(s) of Blowfish, IDEA, etc. had to go > through all of this ritualistic screening complexity too. (Please do correct > me if I am wrong.) yes, you are wrong. > (For the record: DataET Research's promotional agent has been fired.) Can you prove that? > > Questions, queries, or comments ("gulp")? E-Mail: DataETRsch at aol.com, > JKYuRamos at aol.com, or DataETResearch at geocities.com. Note: From now on, any > messages to DataET Research that do not contain the text "NO FLAME" somewhere > in the subject heading will be ignored completely. If a message is a indeed > flame, the associated server's administrator will be contacted, and a > complaint will be filed accordingly. Jeremy, if you ignore them, how can you complain about them? Something fishy is going on? - Igor. From unicorn at schloss.li Sat Jan 11 12:57:04 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 12:57:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Some People Just Never Learn In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 11 Jan 1997, Evil se7en wrote: > So here's to you Gambit...This ought to keep you distracted long enough! Now > maybe I can go back to my reading list and fade back into obscurity. > > XOXOXO! > > se7en > � Address: > � SONOMA County Status: � Others at primary address: > � MARLENE AGNEW � Oh uh, watch it. He lives with Spiro's sister! -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From unicorn at schloss.li Sat Jan 11 12:57:38 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 12:57:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970111130156.125fa0a0@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 11 Jan 1997, Clay Olbon II wrote: > Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 09:57:33 -0800 > From: Clay Olbon II > To: Black Unicorn > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. > > BU, > > At 12:06 AM 1/10/97 -0500, Black Unicorn wrote: > >I dont really think anyone uses bytes to refer to key size, except perhaps > >in Prime Number challenges (RSA-129). > > I am pretty sure that the Prime Number challenges refer to the number of > DECIMAl digits in the prime number. I stand corrected. > > Otherwise excellent responses to the simplistic mumbo-jumbo. Good to see > you posting again! > > Clay > ******************************************************* > Clay Olbon olbon at ix.netcom.com > sys-admin, engineer, programmer, statistitian, etc. > **********************************************tanstaafl > > -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From unicorn at schloss.li Sat Jan 11 12:59:38 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 12:59:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: What! In-Reply-To: <970111121453_201575793@emout18.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 11 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 12:14:54 -0500 (EST) > From: DataETRsch at aol.com > To: CDAVIDSO at is.nmh.nmh.org > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: What! > > Excuse me? > > What is faulty about IMDMP? About everything we have been able to examine so far, including your posting style, the marketing approach, the zero coupon bond offer (in violation of SEC regulations) of the parent company, the (lack of) demonstrated knowledge by the company "president." Shall I continue? > > - Jeremy > -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 13:00:14 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:00:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701111638.KAA05913@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <6yVD1D64w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > I do not see what your example is supposed to illustrate. They're supposed to illustrate what will happen soon on the moderated "cypher punks" mailing list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 13:00:24 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:00:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Bernie Doehner writes: This is the jerk responsible for the mail loop last Xmas, which the Armenian liar Ray Arachelian tried to blame on me. > > However, I think that forming lists of "approved people" and "unapproved > > people" and treating them differently is likely to do more harm than good, > > even if we have nice software which does it very efficiently. I don't like > > it for several reasons: > > Why jump to conclusions about the moderator's behavior? Lets give the > new moderators a chance - PLEASE!!! That's what the German industrialists kept telling Hinderburg. "Lets (sic) give Adolf Hitlet a chance - PLEASE!!!' > I think our new moderators have been around long enough to know > what's appropriate and what's not. Hitler wrote _Mein Kampf in 1926 and came to power in 1933. > Good luck Sandy and other moderator! --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 13:00:28 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:00:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701111710.LAA06067@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > when moderators receive messages for moderation, they would not see any > header information indicating who wrote the message (this information > would be in the packet that arrives to them, but it would be encrypted > with Internal Traffic Key). This way, a moderator would not know if the > message is, say, from Tim May or from Dr. Vulis, and would make their > decisions (including decisions to preapprove) based solely on the > message contents. That may give some way towards fairness. If the content says: "Dr. Vulis is a crazy Russian Jew, don't tell him what a petard is, and fuck the colored race", then the origin is pretty obvious. > Note that another important feature of STUMP that we seem to overlook was > designed specifically to address the problems of preapproved lists. This > feature is the presence of "bad words list". This is a set of regular > expressions, stored in a file, such that if incoming messages match > these expressions, they would be considered "suspicious" even if they > purport to be "From: " preapproved persons. That goes a long way towards > security and fairness because now nobody (including, say, Paul Bradley > along with Dr. Vulis or myself) would be able to call someone else > "cocksucker" without review by human moderators. But Plucky green would be able to call people "vermin", and "crazy Russian" just like Igor is able to call his enemies "eunichs". ObModeratorFodder: John Gilmore is a lying cocksucker. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From rcgraves at disposable.com Sat Jan 11 13:28:03 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:28:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D7DE11.2BDE@gte.net> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For example, I think this message could have been worded in such a way that it was on-topic. Dale really had to exert himself to make this a pure flame. When he doesn't put so much effort into it, he's worth reading. See also http://minerva.fileita.it/webitalia/netscum/gravesr0.html - -rich On Sat, 11 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Rich Graves wrote: > [snip] > > I'd just like to say that as disgusting as I find most of Dale's posts, > > I consider almost all of them appropriate for the list. > > While I'd classify Dale's posts as among "worst of cypherpunks," > > IMO they are all at least *of* cypherpunks. > > Rich, you have to have a mind to comment on my posts. To call my > posts disgusting, when I as a person am 1) Vastly more concerned > about justice, truth, and openness than you, and 2) Vastly more > intelligent than you, is pure ignorance and hypocrisy. > > When you have nothing to say, you do the "attack against the man", > which is a logical fallacy. You and Sandfort can lie in bed together > on that one. Punk. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQBVAwUBMtgFrZNcNyVVy0jxAQHipAH/WS2VkTlWbf3ttMBUcq1sRXY1sJbNWJ5G aR6T6ZWD0iJQVKD5X8/9QPUBl2MUdml3xS1f5MH+pynY63OEfPTg0Q== =7+Je -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From unicorn at schloss.li Sat Jan 11 13:29:34 1997 From: unicorn at schloss.li (Black Unicorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:29:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP 8192 PKCS and IMDMP Summary In-Reply-To: <970111120551_1074845300@emout20.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 11 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > Hi, > > You have probably read a few of my past messages about UDCM and IMDMP. Unfortunately. > include a public key cryptosystem. However, on March 1st, 1997, new versions > of UDCM and IMDMP will be released that do support the public key > cryptosystem method. I hope your not violating any patents. (Hint hint). > There are a few major mistakes in a couple of my previous delegated messages. > An end-user application that supports IMDMP will not be released until March > 1st, 1997. Why are you babbling to us now then? > methods are not too comparable to PKCS methods. What I was referring to when > I said IMDMP is more advanced than RSA, etc. is the actual encryption > procedure itself, not the way keys are secured. Uh, that doesn't help. You still have no proof for this claim either. > Again, irrashional claims ^^^^^^^^^^^ Oh boy. > were not intended at all. The amount of analytical research invested in IMDMP > was thought to be sufficient. One expects more from a company asking for investors to the tune of 1.5 million. > By the way, has anyone out there even tried using UDCM to encrypt a file or > two? Want to pay me to betatest? > AND-ing algorithm without trying it first. I find it extremely hard to > believe that the celebrated creator(s) of Blowfish, IDEA, etc. had to go > through all of this ritualistic screening complexity too. (Please do correct > me if I am wrong.) Consider ourself corrected. IDEA and Blowfish have been extensively hashed through. Flaws, most small and correctable, were revealed in that process too. (I believe one Blowfish implementation had more serious problems which were exposed by this "ritualistic screening." It's the only way to make cryptosystems secure. Deal with it or find another profession. (Or simply sell it to people who have no clue about the product). > > (For the record: DataET Research's promotional agent has been fired.) > Gosh, who's left working at the company now? > Questions, queries, or comments ("gulp")? E-Mail: DataETRsch at aol.com, > JKYuRamos at aol.com, or DataETResearch at geocities.com. Note: From now on, any > messages to DataET Research that do not contain the text "NO FLAME" somewhere > in the subject heading will be ignored completely. If a message is a indeed > flame, the associated server's administrator will be contacted, and a > complaint will be filed accordingly. I don't expect you will see many messages. -- Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern Vote Monarchist Switzerland From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 13:30:12 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:30:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Satellite Gone (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701111813.MAA13457@einstein> Message-ID: <2ZwD1D67w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Jim Choate writes: > > Last night at apx 10:00 satellite T1 (Telstar 401) went away... ... > > Some ugly roumors are starting to float about alleged threats to FOX to > > do this by unnamed Gov agencys due to the negetive views that FOX had > > been reporting to the public about them.... Fox is on the "outside" where TimeWarner/Turner and Disney are on the "inside". Fix tried to launch a cable news channel to compete against CNN.. TimeWarner simply refused to carry it. :-) What happens on "cypher punks" happens in the real world too. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 13:30:31 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 13:30:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: John, Sandy & the Dr. DV K Conspiracy Theory Message-ID: Someone writes: > Dr. Vulis, > A lot of things surrounding the upcoming 'moderation' of the > CypherPunks list just don't seem to add up. If you think their agenda is what I think it is, then it all adds up. ... > some interesting algorithms clicked into place in regard to the > grand 'moderation' experiment about to befall the CypherPunks. > > I thought about the fact that you pissed the elite de la elite > of the CypherPunks off to the extent that they shit in their own > back yard--ie. these supreme libertarians unSCUMscribed you from > the C'punks list. > They did exactly what every people's-defender/hidden-dictator > has done from the beginning of time. They pointed their righteous > libertarian fingers at a source of great evil which everyone must > be protected from--you. (The reason 'pointing' is so important > is so that those too dim to 'recognize' who their enemy is, will > be able to 'stay with the concept' while they explain it.) > So now we have: > Ronald RayGun -----> Commies / The Red Menace > George Bush -----> Saddam / The Mother of All Evil > John Gilmore ----> Dr. DV K / The Spamming Homophobe > > John was very eloquent in defining the 'threat' that you > represent, and the 'abuse' that you represent, and, suddenly, > there are a few good sheep saying, "By gosh, by golly, you're > right. Now that you've pointed out that I'm being wrongly > abused by this man, I see it all clearly now. Thank you for > saving me." > Unfortunately, there were also those who didn't go for the > 'feint', and posted missives simply stating, "Excuse me, John, > nice try, but you've got some shit sticking to your shoe, there, > despite your self-serving explaination of your actions." > ('I' don't have a 'personal' problem with the doc, I'm doing > this for the good of 'everybody'.) > > I suppose that might have been the end of it, had you gone > quietly into the night. But, 'double' unfortunately, you hardly > seemed to break stride in continuing to participate in the > CypherPunk list. > So, now, after taking a 'firm hand' in 'saving' the CypherPunks > from the Evil Dr. Vulis, Big John finds himself being ridiculed > and laughed at for his ineffective and ineffectual public beheading > of the 'enemy of the people'. > Suddenly, however, out of the blue, comes the answer to his > prayers--a 'bigger' threat. CypherPunks is deluded with a > mountain of email from 10,000 Laker's fans named Bubba. A genuine > 'outside' spam attack, pissing everyone off. Then, a rash of > 'Make $$$Money$$$ Fast' probing actions from 'more' outsiders. So far, so good. Unfortunately mail loops happen every once in a while. What was unusual about the one this list had about Xmastime was that a) Ray Arachelian "officially" accused me of being responsible for it, and this lie has not been retracted by him or Gilmore or anyone. b) the poster responsible for the maling loop (ufh.wirenet.net) just posted a rant in favor of moderation. > This time, John insulates himself with his 'front' man. The > 'done-deal' announcement starts, "SANDY and I..." With, of > course, the standard govt-line, blah, blah, 'your input', blah, > blah. > > And, this time, the 'rubes' come out of the woodwork like flies > on shit. > Suddenly, we have people giving a 'Vote of confidence..." > HOLD IT!!! > Nobody is 'voting', you stupid bastards. Read John and Sandy's > lips...there 'is' no vote. You were 'told' what they are going > to do, and you were 'told' that your preferences for the color > of Vaseline they will use will be 'considered'. > Do the words 'denial' and 'self-delusion' set off any bells > and whistles here? > > At this very moment, in small rooms around the world, the > heads of clandestine agencies are shouting at their people, > "Why can't 'you' imbeciles pull off an operation like this?" > > Notice, please, that John and Sandy have remained above the > fray. They have been content, until very recently, to let the > dogs tear at each other's throats (and let the 'voters' take > part in self-delusional schemes and scenarios, constructing > 'moderation systems' in-the-sky). > And now Sandy begins to step in, replying only to his > 'supporters' (like a 'staged' political rally), gracefully > accepting their kudos in his assumption of benevolent > dictatorship. (Complete with assurances that there is no > 'enemies list'.) Too bad some hooligans break the ranks to shout to Dale: "Soon Sandy will shut you up!" > If anyone had written up, a few weeks ago, a scenario such > as this and posted it to the list, he would have been laughed > out of cyberspace. > But today, it is a reality, and more--a 'classic' operation > that will go down in history as a maneuver that ranks with > the best of socio/political coups. I think Gilmore's pretty transparent. Gilmore is running for the Internet Soviet [Council] right now, so he doesn't want his lies and hypocricy exposed on his own private forum. ObModeratorFodder: I hope cocksuckers Gilmore and Sandfart give each other AIDS --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 14:50:43 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 14:50:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D7D8CA.3ADF@gte.net> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > Greg Broiles wrote: > > At 10:49 PM 1/10/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: > > > I think that the human moderator solution suffers less from these problems; > > in general, it's a well-tested solution to the "what about off-topic > > assholes?" problem. It's not perfect, but it does work, more or less; it's > > easy to understand, easy to implement, and requires no software changes on > > the users' end. > > Yeah, Greg, we all hate those pesky asshole-types. But what do you do, > Greg, when the *moderator* is the pesky asshole-type? Bend over, huh? I dug up a few Sandy e-mails from my archives. Does the prospective moderator's propensity to describe his enemies' words as "logical fallacy" and "illogical claptrap" remind you of one paranoid anonymous control freak who used to spell his stupid nym in lowercase and then flamed me when I quoted it verbatim? ============================================================================ ]From sandfort at crl.com Wed Sep 18 11:09:58 1996 ]Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) ] via UUCP; Wed, 18 Sep 96 20:39:18 EDT ] for dlv ]Received: from crl14.crl.com by mail.crl.com with SMTP id AA15749 ] (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for ); Wed, 18 Sep 1996 08:10:29 -0700 ]Received: by crl14.crl.com id AA10349 ] (5.65c/IDA-1.5); Wed, 18 Sep 1996 08:04:08 -0700 ]Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 08:04:07 -0700 (PDT) ]From: Sandy Sandfort ]To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" ]Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com ]Subject: Re: A Bizarre Increase in the Ad Hominems Here ]In-Reply-To: ]Message-Id: ]Mime-Version: 1.0 ]Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII ] ]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ] SANDY SANDFORT ] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] ]C'punks, ] ]Like Tim, I'm a little surprised at all the stupid name calling ]on the list lately. ] ]On Wed, 18 Sep 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: ] ]> I don't think Timmy believes his own lies. ] ]Again, I don't believe Tim lies, the good doctor's assertions to ]the contrary not withstanding. ] ]> Is Timmy gay? ] ]You should have seen the babe Tim was with at my party. Where ]do folks come up with this nonsense? ] ]> Timmy is known as a nutcase and a liar - if he keeps up his ]> "character assassination" attacks, the only reputation he hurts ]> is his own. ] ]Yeah, that's the way reputation works, but the gun is definitely ]pointed in the other direction. ] ] ] S a n d y ] ]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ] ] ] ============================================================================ ]From sandfort at crl.com Fri Sep 20 20:39:49 1996 ]Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) ] via UUCP; Fri, 20 Sep 96 21:01:24 EDT ] for dlv ]Received: from crl.crl.com (crl.com) by mail.crl.com with SMTP id AA27356 ] (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for ); Fri, 20 Sep 1996 17:40:14 -0700 ]Received: by crl.crl.com id AA20262 ] (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" ); Fri, 20 Sep 1996 17:33:03 -0700 ]Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 17:33:02 -0700 (PDT) ]From: Sandy Sandfort ]To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" ]Subject: Re: Dimitri Spams ]In-Reply-To: ]Message-Id: ]Mime-Version: 1.0 ]Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII ] ] ] ]On Fri, 20 Sep 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: ] ]> Ray Arachelian writes: ]> ]> > Dimitri, get a life! We need Dimitri Spams as much as we needed ]> > Perrygrams. Which is to say, we need them not at all! ]> ]> I see you lied when you claimed to have killfiled me. ] ]Logical falacy. He could have killfiled you and then reinstated ]you. In the alternative, someone could have sent him a copy of ]your post. All in all, no proof of a lie. Grow up. ============================================================================ ]From sandfort at crl.com Sat Sep 21 22:54:46 1996 ]Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) ] via UUCP; Sun, 22 Sep 96 00:41:18 EDT ] for dlv ]Received: from crl5.crl.com by mail.crl.com with SMTP id AA10214 ] (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for ); Sat, 21 Sep 1996 19:55:01 -0700 ]Received: by crl5.crl.com id AA05873 ] (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" ); Sat, 21 Sep 1996 19:42:26 -0700 ]Date: Sat, 21 Sep 1996 19:42:25 -0700 (PDT) ]From: Sandy Sandfort ]To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" ]Subject: Re: Timmy May's spam (Was: Re: CIA hacked) ]In-Reply-To: ]Message-Id: ]Mime-Version: 1.0 ]Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII ] ]Please stop spamming the list. You can air your complaints, real ]or imaginary, against Tim or others without dumping tons of spam ]into everyone's lap. I'm sure there would be much more sympathy ]to your situation if you did not exacerbate the situation. ] ]Regards, ] ] S a n d y ] ]On Sat, 21 Sep 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: ] ]> Adam Back writes: ]> > ]> > Dimitri Vulis writes: ]> > > > [email reply protesting spam] ]> > > ]> > > You are confused. The above question was e-mailed to me by one of ]> > > Timmy May's friends. ]> > ]> > What you were doing was confusing... how about attributing what people ]> > have said to you, in the standard way? I was unsure what was going on ]> > until you clarified here. Instead of including all the headers in ]> > there with just a space between your headers and the quoted headers ]> > (which makes it hard to follow, and makes one wonder if someone is ]> > trying a crude forgery), use standard quoting conventions: ]> > ]> > Joe Blogss writes in private email: ]> > > [quoted message body]... ]> > ]> > or similar? ]> ]> You're right - the forwarding mechanism I've been using so far just yanks in ]> the spam e-mail without any processing. I will henceforth ]> 1) Put the words 'Tim', 'May', and 'spam' in the subject line ]> 2) Put some obvious ASCII prefix in front of the quotes. ]> I apologize for any confusion. ]> ]> > > If you have any comments about Timmy May's friends not knowing ]> > > English, trying to insult people, and posting non-crypto-relevant ]> > > political rants, address them to Timmy May and his friends. ]> > ]> > It would seem to me that the first insults were thrown by yourself, ]> > and that your strange habit of bouncing all the fallout to the list is ]> > perpetuating the problem. ]> ]> No. Let me remind you the sequence of events, in chronological order: ]> ]> 1. Timmy May (who picked up a few popular PKC buzzwords, doesn't know ]> anything about crypto, and isn't interested in learning) started spamming ]> this mailing list with political rants ]> ]> 2. Most people who used to discuss crypto work on this mailing list ]> have unsubscribed. ]> ]> 3. I pointed out a few examples of Tim making factually bogus claims in ]> his rants. ]> ]> 4. Tim got very angry at me and started flaming me. I ignored him. ]> ]> 5. Tim posted a series of rants about me, attributing to me various ]> nonsense I never said. I pointed out once that I never said it and ]> then ignored him. ]> ]> 6. Recently it came to my attention that Tim's been contacting off-list ]> various people in the computer security field and "complaining" about ]> the politically incorrect things that I supposedly say on the Internet ]> - except that he made up most of the "things" he complained about. ]> ]> 7. At this point I pointed out quite publicly that he's a liar. ]> ]> 8. Since that time, several friends of Tim May (or maybe Tim himself, ]> using multiple accounts) have been sending me harrassing e-mail, often ]> by quoting my own cypherpunks articles and adding an obscenity. ]> ]> 9. Tim himself continues flaming me and telling lies about me (see his ]> recent rant with the subject "death threats"). ]> ]> And you see, Timmy May is an obsessive liar and a vindictive nutcase. ]> ]> > If reporting to the list is accurate, I hear you have a PhD with a ]> > subject related to crypto, so presumably you would have ample ]> > knowledge to contribute technical crypto related thoughts. I'm sure ]> > people would be interested in anything along those lines you cared to ]> > contribute, and your reputation would benefit, ]> ]> I still hope to be able discuss crypto on this mailing list (yes, my Ph.D. ]> thesis was about crypto), but I see two problems: ]> ]> 1. A lot of people have already left this list, unwilling to be subjected ]> to Tim May's rants, lies, and personal attacks. If I post something crypto- ]> relevant to this mailing list, they won't see it. ]> ]> 2. Here's an example of the net-abuse being perpetrated by Tim May and his ]> merry gang of mailbombers. I posted some crypto-relevant wire clippings ]> to this mailing list. Either Tim (using an alternate account) or some pal ]> of his e-mailed it back to me with an obscenity appended. ]> ]> ]From adamsc at io-online.com Thu Sep 19 00:00:57 1996 ] ============================================================================ ]From sandfort at crl.com Mon Sep 23 23:10:07 1996 ]Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) ] via UUCP; Mon, 23 Sep 96 23:26:32 EDT ] for dlv ]Received: from crl2.crl.com by mail.crl.com with SMTP id AA22789 ] (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for ); Mon, 23 Sep 1996 20:10:18 -0700 ]Received: by crl2.crl.com id AA15701 ] (5.65c/IDA-1.5); Mon, 23 Sep 1996 20:08:20 -0700 ]Date: Mon, 23 Sep 1996 20:08:19 -0700 (PDT) ]From: Sandy Sandfort ]To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" ]Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com ]Subject: Re: AP [was: Re: Kiddie porn on the Internet] [NOISE] ]In-Reply-To: <6XJquD10w165w at bwalk.dm.com> ]Message-Id: ]Mime-Version: 1.0 ]Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII ] ]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ] SANDY SANDFORT ] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] ]C'punks, ] ]On Mon, 23 Sep 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: ] ]> There is no such thing as an "ordinary citizen". When the U.S. commits ]> war crimes in Korea, Viet Nam, Grenada, Panama, Somalia, Iraq, and elsewhere, ]> every American taxpayer is an accomplice and a fair game. ] ]Illogical collectivist claptrap. When a taxpayer is targeted by ]terrorists, he has been victimized twice--first by the government ]that stole his money, second by the terrorist that punished him ]for the (alleged) acts others commited with that money. If a ]mugger buys a gun with the money he took from me, am I then ]responsible for the murder he commits with it? Clearly not. ]This line of "reasoning" is nothing more than a sad variant of ]the old, "blame the victim" game. For shame. ] ]Let's bring this back to crypto for a moment. Dimitri's "logic" ]must necessarily lead one to the conclusion that Cypherpunks (at ]least those in the US) are responsible for whatever draconian ]restrictions "our" government puts on free speech, crypto or ]whatever. John Gilmore, Philip Zimmermann, Whit Diffie and ]others will be chagrined to learn this, I'm sure. ] ]Dimitri needs to learn what it means to be an adult. Everyone is ]totally responsible for what they do, but ONLY for what THEY do. ]No one is responsible for the unassisted, willful acts of others. ] ] ] S a n d y ] ]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ] ] ============================================================================ --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 14:52:30 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 14:52:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: another idea? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <7ZZD1D70w165w@bwalk.dm.com> System Administrator writes: > > That was the original proposal. > > Now that the 'discussion' has come around full circle, can we > > stop talking about it and DO it? > > > > Oops! Sorry. I lost this discussion in the middle of all the SPAM! > > Yes, please do it! > > Bernie A few weeks ago, every message sent to the "cypher punks" was re-sent again and again and again by "crypto at uhf.wireless.net". Ray Arachelian officially blamed me for the mail loop and even complained to my upstream feed about multiple copies of my articles. Ray's lies were never retracted by Ray himself or John "cocksucker" Gilmore. Now root at uhf.wireless.net posts multiple rants in favor of moderation. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From btherl at ikkles.cs.mu.oz.au Sat Jan 11 15:18:12 1997 From: btherl at ikkles.cs.mu.oz.au (Murple) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 15:18:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: What! Message-ID: <199701112219.JAA07178@ikkles.cs.mu.oz.au> > Excuse me? > > What is faulty about IMDMP? > > - Jeremy > The only people who can answer that question are you and the good people at DataET Research, the reason being that you are the only people who know what IMDMP is. A more appropriate question would be 'What is faulty about UDCM?' The problem is that to us, UDCM is like a 'black box' - we put data in, and data comes out, but we have no understanding of what goes on to produce the data which comes out. IMDMP could well be more secure than all the cryptographic algorithms in use today, but it could just as easily have huge security holes which we may never know about, or at least not until it is too late. The difference between this and public algorithms such as IDEA, is that we can obtain source code, descriptions, comments, and often detailed analyses of these algorithms, and we can decide for ourselves whether we want to entrust our privacy to them. With UDCM, and hence IMDMP, this is simply not possible, and this is where I believe you have gone wrong. Brian Herlihy From markm at voicenet.com Sat Jan 11 15:36:25 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 15:36:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: <199701110410.WAA02230@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 10 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Mark -- do you know what are the relevant file names? I don't know them off hand. The "applied-crypto" directory has a README file which describes what each file is. The cryptanalysis directory at ftp.ox.ac.uk has some of the same files. The filenames at that site are mostly self-explanatory. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtgkcCzIPc7jvyFpAQGOmwf+L5W8EiH9m9Q+fowUUpLHcMtXPnlryjb+ Lh+dJtxRczfV545iRksKjNWoySMG7gjggF7i9TyRFIqo1ZsqTSVjJ764mH/xJXnN Hw223AmhORGn4A4D+pflUKfi515m2UIbKMyd2RvUq+6xFujXJA6T+EAIieQy1oLZ cDTsNWzXafpi5OUJn21n5XuaWU+5phlSBwlZMBsSuBp4uRCdTorRTBPJjZeB11m2 CctfVOaHAzM4Aqy6+ePpMhqQsKnJWtV+DWqN1iC0IUuSQru7odCRQdIq97UWRiYp Pw5Y8vdvp3H33/Qo6cWzxxWVcDXRNGQZNtQe3R2k2Tx0c6iaQ9NZbA== =iwQU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cvhd at indyweb.net Sat Jan 11 16:23:49 1997 From: cvhd at indyweb.net (CVHD) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 16:23:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: New Win95 PGP Program Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970111192411.00688254@indyweb.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 369 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Sat Jan 11 16:27:03 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 16:27:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! In-Reply-To: <199701101909.OAA12364@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Message-ID: The slang's way outa date - must be a fibbie ;) On Fri, 10 Jan 1997 ice at win.bright.net wrote: > Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! > Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm > We Are THE BEST!! > So Check us OUT! > From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sat Jan 11 16:40:02 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 16:40:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701111638.KAA05913@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 11 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Jew-hating paranoid liar Rich Graves writes: > > > > > > I would not favor a moderation policy that gave carte blanche to "good guys" > > > to talk about whatever they wanted ("libertarian bullshit" in Chudov's > > > delicate phrasing), but required posts by "bad guys" like Dale (and in certai > > > threads, me -- you never know) to be "about crypto." That's a hypocritical > > > double standard. > > > > Here's another typical post from Igor's soc.culture.russian.moderated (NOT). > > > > Igor Chudov, a moderator of s.c.r.m, calls M. Kagalenko "envious eunich", but > > Kagalenko has been banned from posting to s.c.r.m because he objected to its > > creation (i.e. he's on the "blacklist" and his submissions are auto-rejected). > > but none of the posts in question had ever been posted to scrm. You know well that Kagalenko is most rejected in scrm, Poor guy ...not one post, how can that be..? > I do not see what your example is supposed to illustrate. Certain posters are 'discouraged' to post to scrm. nurdane oksas > > - Igor. > > > ]From: mkagalen at lynx.dac.neu.edu (Michael Kagalenko) > > ]Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian,alt.genius.bill-palmer > > ]Subject: Re: Envious Eunuch's E-Mail Evacuations > > ]Message-ID: <5audbm$4vf at lynx.dac.neu.edu> > > ]Date: 7 Jan 1997 15:57:26 -0500 > > ]Organization: Northeastern University, Boston, MA. 02115, USA > > ] > > ]Henrietta Thomas (hkt at wwa.com) wrote: > > ]] > > ]][newsgroups trimmed] > > ]] > > ]]ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) wrote: > > ]] > > ]]>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > ]] > > ]]>[crossposted to alt.genius.bill-palmer] > > ]] > > ]]>Prof. Henrietta K. Thomas wrote: > > ]] > > ]]Professor, eh? Well, well, well...... > > ]] > > ]]>> >That's right, Mike; I'll give you the bad news right here in > > ]]>> >soc.culture.russian, since in your e-mailing, you claimed to > > ]]>> >speak for--NOT MICHAEL KAGALENKO, EUNUCH--but the entire > > ]]>> >s.c.r. readership, in trying to run me off because you were > > ]]>> >infuriated by a recent posting of mine. > > ]]>> > > ]]>> Well, I don't know about the entire readership, but he certainly > > ]]>> speaks for me in this regard. > > ]] > > ]]>Envious Eunuch Kagalenko surely does NOT speak for me and many of my > > ]]>acquaintainces. We support Bill's struggle against the mischievous > > ]]>censorous eunuch. > > ]] > > ]]You're just angry 'cause Kagalenko tried to crash your machine. > > ] > > ] Correction; if I have tried to crash Chudov's computer, it would have been > > ] crashed. I'd venture to guess that getting root on his Linux box > > ] wouldn't be all that hard, either. > > ] > > ](Followups to sc.r.moderasted) > > ] > > ]Couldn't honour it, as I am permanently banned from there. > > ] > > ] > > ]-- > > ]ABILITY,n. The natural equipment to accomplish some small part of the meaner > > ] ambitions distinguishing able men from dead ones. > > ] -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" > > ] > > > > --- > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > > > > > > - Igor. > From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 11 17:00:36 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 17:00:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ethnic origins of the ASALA/Earthweb terrorist Ray Arachelian In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970111192414.006a29c0@pop.netaddress.com> Message-ID: ]Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970111192414.006a29c0 at pop.netaddress.com> ]X-Sender: iverson at pop.netaddress.com (Unverified) ]X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) ]Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 19:28:56 -0500 ]To: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) ]From: Casey Iverson ]Subject: Re: A vote of confidence for Sandy ]Mime-Version: 1.0 ]Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ] ]At 03:28 PM 1/11/97 EST, you wrote: [about the ufh.wirenet.net mailbomber terrorist] ]>This is the jerk responsible for the mail loop last Xmas, which the Armenian ]>liar Ray Arachelian tried to blame on me. ] ]This probably won't penetrate your sick mind but the fact is that Ray ]Arachelian is *not* an an Armenian. ] ]OTOH *you* are a lying, vicious, sick, perverted, homophobic Russian scumbag. Ray "Arsen" Arachelian admitted being an Armenian. You can complain about his net-abuse to his boss . In the words of the Russian-Scottish poet Mikhail Lermontov, "Ty rab, tu trus, ty armyanin." ASALA is the terrorist Armenian organization responsible for the murders of dozens of Turkish diplomats and civilians. No wonder they want to use strong crypto to cover up their terrorist acts. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 11 18:22:59 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 18:22:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP 8192 PKCS and IMDMP Summary In-Reply-To: <970111120551_1074845300@emout20.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <32D855E0.13CC@sk.sympatico.ca> DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > Hi, > However, on March 1st, 1997, new versions of UDCM and IMDMP will > be released that... > The future versions will also ... Future versions of my replies will contain $100 bills... > I am extremely sorry about the apparently extraneous information that is > present in a few of my first messages to this mailing list. Such a negative > level feedback was not anticipated. You have to realize that in posting to this list, you are subjecting your software to review by people who are capable of performing strange sex-acts with algorithms. The good news is--if you can 'sell' it here, you can sell it anywhere. Toto From 3bmice at nym.alias.net Sat Jan 11 18:31:17 1997 From: 3bmice at nym.alias.net (Three Blind Mice) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 18:31:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP 8192 PKCS and IMDMP Summary Message-ID: <19970112023038.6362.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> On Sat, 11 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > include a public key cryptosystem. However, on March 1st, 1997, new versions > of UDCM and IMDMP will be released that do support the public key > cryptosystem method. The future versions will also support multi-party key Oh, so you're just going to fix up your program a little bit, and immediately your private key system will turn into a public key system? Are you sure you read A.C. and didn't just look at the pictures? > algorithms, as well as 1024 (8192 bit) keys. Note that the current version of > IMDMP only allows 256 byte (1024) bit keys. The current shareware version and I'm beginning to see this as being a variation on XOR. > the UDCM V2.0 software package / archive. UDCM V2.0 was modified to restrict > keys to 50 bits so as to comply with the latest ITAR details. The extensively The amazing shrinking key... pretty soon we'll have 1 bit keys, and they'll have to be registered with this company for ITAR compliance. ;) > methods are not too comparable to PKCS methods. What I was referring to when > I said IMDMP is more advanced than RSA, etc. is the actual encryption > procedure itself, not the way keys are secured. Again, irrashional claims Says who? You? Hahahahahaha. > were not intended at all. The amount of analytical research invested in IMDMP > was thought to be sufficient. So a cryptosystem that's been in existence for an entire eleven days (you said it was created January 1, 1997) has had "sufficient" "analytical research invested"? My, you ARE clueless. > AND-ing algorithm without trying it first. I find it extremely hard to > believe that the celebrated creator(s) of Blowfish, IDEA, etc. had to go > through all of this ritualistic screening complexity too. (Please do correct > me if I am wrong.) You're right, they didn't. It's because they published code first and then asked for review. They didn't try to make a profit on an operating system-specific piece of pre-compiled code before explaining the system and giving full details. > (For the record: DataET Research's promotional agent has been fired.) Then why are you still posting? > UDCMV20.ZIP is currently unavailable on the web site as the software is > undergoing additional security modifications. You mean you're changing XOR to AND? > structuring. Sub-algorithms of IMDMP are basically additional applications of > one or more of the aforesaid techniques. SUB encrypt1 'Super secret encryption routine SHARED text_to_encrypt$ text_to_encrypt$ = "[SECRET]" + text_to_encrypt$ + "[SECRET]" END SUB (Will you sue me for copyright infringement now? I bet it looks identical to your code -- and in the same language, too.) --3bmice From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 18:56:47 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 18:56:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D83D80.6517@gte.net> Rich Graves wrote: > For example, I think this message could have been worded in such a way that > it was on-topic. Dale really had to exert himself to make this a pure flame. > When he doesn't put so much effort into it, he's worth reading. > See also http://minerva.fileita.it/webitalia/netscum/gravesr0.html > On Sat, 11 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > [snip] > > Rich, you have to have a mind to comment on my posts. To call my > > posts disgusting, when I as a person am 1) Vastly more concerned > > about justice, truth, and openness than you, and 2) Vastly more > > intelligent than you, is pure ignorance and hypocrisy. > > When you have nothing to say, you do the "attack against the man", > > which is a logical fallacy. You and Sandfort can lie in bed together > > on that one. Punk. This was a rather harsh reply. Thank you (I think) for whatever allowance you have seen fit to give me. OTOH, I'd suggest for Rich and all of the pro-Sandy faction that they sit on their replies for a couple of hours before hitting "send", just in case the emotional (not passionate, there's a difference) content needs a little editing. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 11 18:57:05 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 18:57:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: John, Sandy & the Dr. DV K Conspiracy Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D851C6.5EB5@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Someone writes: > > Dr. Vulis, A lot of things surrounding the upcoming 'moderation' > > of the CypherPunks list just don't seem to add up. > If you think their agenda is what I think it is, then it all adds up.[snip] > > Notice, please, that John and Sandy have remained above the > > fray. They have been content, until very recently, to let the > > dogs tear at each other's throats (and let the 'voters' take > > part in self-delusional schemes and scenarios, constructing > > 'moderation systems' in-the-sky). And now Sandy begins to step in, > > replying only to his 'supporters' (like a 'staged' political rally), > > gracefully accepting their kudos in his assumption of benevolent > > dictatorship. (Complete with assurances that there is no 'enemies list'.) Of course, Dimitri, you and I are just paranoid. John Gilmore is really Mother Teresa, and he dedicates his time and valuable equipment solely to our personal betterment. John has no agenda other than the uplifting of mankind. How could *anyone* possibly think that what John says and what John really means could be two different things. Now, I've stated this on the list before, but nobody's reading us, so it won't matter if I repeat it [hee hee]. John has the full attention of the FBI, CIA, and several other such orgs (any disputing that?). Those guys are about as likely to allow John to do whatever John wants as they are likely to allow you and I to run our own currency exchange in Barbados, unhampered by them. This cuts both ways: If Gilmore kept the list open, the feds can sit on their butts and troll to their hearts' content. One presumes the list is a good source of names and info, even if some of the names are just connections to other leads, in other areas of business even. If Gilmore wrecks the list, it has the very distinct possibility of discouraging a *successful* replacement list for some time to come, perhaps forever. Think about how successful the assassination business was for the feds for some time - today they get patsys and hide them away for years awaiting trial, while the feds run their cases almost entirely through the media. Gilmore's silence has a familiar ring.... From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 11 19:18:48 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 19:18:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D8729B.E75@sk.sympatico.ca> > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > > Note that another important feature of STUMP that we seem to overlook was > > designed specifically to address the problems of preapproved lists. This > > feature is the presence of "bad words list". As a person with Tourette Syndrome, I find this to be discriminatory against me. As a hockey player, I find it double-discriminatory. As a dirty-mouthed scumbag, I find it triple-discriminatory. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 11 19:20:31 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 19:20:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP 8192 PKCS and IMDMP Summary In-Reply-To: <199701111950.NAA07011@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32D87097.2A2C@sk.sympatico.ca> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > Questions, queries, or comments ("gulp")? E-Mail: DataETRsch at aol.com, > > JKYuRamos at aol.com, or DataETResearch at geocities.com. Note: From now on, any > > messages to DataET Research that do not contain the text "NO FLAME" somewhere > > in the subject heading will be ignored completely. If a message is a indeed > > flame, the associated server's administrator will be contacted, and a > > complaint will be filed accordingly. > > Jeremy, if you ignore them, how can you complain about them? > Something fishy is going on? Good nose, Igor. These guys sent their 'grand announcement' of their encryption software to this list, and then sat back and waited for the !!!**APPLAUSE**!!! to come rolling in. Then the poor little boys seem to have gotten their feelings hurt by the potential 'consumers' of their product (pun intentional), asking serious questions about their product. Apparently, "Excuse me, sir, but does your product 'work'?", is a FLAME. Without an objective critique of their product, I would suggest that they their best chance for success lies in the "Make $$$Money$$$ Fast' forums--not the CypherPunks list. On the other hand, if they make it in the cryptography market, then maybe my dream of being an amateur brain surgeon is alive and well. Toto From phoenix at enter.net Sat Jan 11 19:29:54 1997 From: phoenix at enter.net (Barry Shultz) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 19:29:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: apology Message-ID: <199701120317.WAA17506@mail.enter.net> You have received a message from this mailbox in error. I am sorry for the error, you are NOT ON A MAILING LIST. The message you received was intended for a specific mailing list which you were not on. We all have to learn new software and mistakes sometimes are made. Again, we are sorry you were subjected to our learning curves. Barry Shultz From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 11 19:47:56 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 19:47:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP 8192 PKCS and IMDMP Summary In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D878F5.2B22@sk.sympatico.ca> > On Sat, 11 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > > Questions, queries, or comments ("gulp")? E-Mail: DataETRsch at aol.com, > > JKYuRamos at aol.com, or DataETResearch at geocities.com. Note: From now on, any > > messages to DataET Research that do not contain the text "NO FLAME" somewhere > > in the subject heading will be ignored completely. If a message is a indeed > > flame, the associated server's administrator will be contacted, and a > > complaint will be filed accordingly. Have they hired Sandy to moderate 'their' incoming email, too? It seems like moderating CypherPunk responses is becoming a cottage industry. From lucifer at dhp.com Sat Jan 11 20:35:14 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 20:35:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Private Idaho source code now available In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970110072140.00d1320c@mail.eskimo.com> Message-ID: <199701120435.XAA00110@dhp.com> Joel McNamara says: > Private Idaho 2.8b3, a bug fix version of the popular Windows freeware PGP > and remailer utility, is now available. This will be my last official > release of PI for the foreseeable future. > > Due to other projects and new directions, I haven't been able to spend as > much time as I'd like coding and supporting Private Idaho. Instead of > seeing it die on the vine, I've decided to release the source code under > the GNU General Public License (export disclaimer - the sources do not > include, or have ever contained, cryptographic algorithms). My understanding is that Private Idaho uses PGP internally and provides the same functionality as premail, with an easier to use GUI. Given that, it would still be export controlled, since it enables cryptography. That is why Raph doesn't allow export of premail. From snow at smoke.suba.com Sat Jan 11 21:02:32 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 21:02:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <32D8729B.E75@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <199701120517.XAA00330@smoke.suba.com> > > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > > Note that another important feature of STUMP that we seem to overlook was > > > designed specifically to address the problems of preapproved lists. This > > > feature is the presence of "bad words list". > As a person with Tourette Syndrome, I find this to be discriminatory > against me. Then go baassholeck and edit your posts before you sendcuntthem. > As a hockey player, I find it double-discriminatory. That is a personal problem. You should talk to a professional about that. > As a dirty-mouthed scumbag, I find it triple-discriminatory. If you _can't_ say it without using words on the dirty list, then you probably use velco straps on your shoes because the laces confuse you when you start to tie them... From lzirko at c2.net Sat Jan 11 21:09:36 1997 From: lzirko at c2.net (Lou Zirko) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 21:09:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Private Idaho source code now available Message-ID: <199701120510.VAA07469@blacklodge.c2.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: lucifer at dhp.com, cypherpunks at toad.com Date: Sun Jan 12 00:08:20 1997 It is just a front end for PGP. It requires that you have PGP installed in order to make use of its encryptiom services. There should be no export controls. Lucifer says: > > My understanding is that Private Idaho uses PGP internally > and provides the same functionality as premail, with an > easier to use GUI. > > Given that, it would still be export controlled, since it > enables cryptography. That is why Raph doesn't allow export of premail. > > Lou Zirko (502)499-8729 Zystems lzirko at c2.org "We're all bozos on this bus" - Nick Danger, Third Eye -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 iQEVAwUBMth/4MtPRTNbb5z9AQF62wf/anuZ3p8CHhnYGQhVkQXyT4zUppF2gc5H PyJJcXp1C2wMyw2INKBEHvjUGvtSkXXW2GOZaEgeUKR0rsmCSGqgtd9mrx0JZE/Y ue3g8EtaqiezUNsTq7ElNK1v0AW3b6/eIWFvG55dzEP5l2yOCD0Um+wa09Xh6YMY VsQJw32vnnxCroM/gPFqbtyhTw/F+oGOSCCxa8W8QGrtpWan3awMvavlhhSGrBDt elMRH+L03PebhJxajnLSz9+A5x0W+3rTzW+G8KUGDBqG/7DEppw7eltBw6K55LxJ IgTOi0kUbz9k9IsXG3HN9RPsJTGII4/UlrXJv05tpO1Qsihu0cln8Q== =j5i+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jimbell at pacifier.com Sat Jan 11 21:53:49 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 21:53:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Private Idaho source code now available Message-ID: <199701120553.VAA10283@mail.pacifier.com> At 11:35 PM 1/11/97 -0500, Anonymous wrote: >Joel McNamara says: >> Private Idaho 2.8b3, a bug fix version of the popular Windows freeware PGP >> and remailer utility, is now available. This will be my last official >> release of PI for the foreseeable future. >> >> Due to other projects and new directions, I haven't been able to spend as >> much time as I'd like coding and supporting Private Idaho. Instead of >> seeing it die on the vine, I've decided to release the source code under >> the GNU General Public License (export disclaimer - the sources do not >> include, or have ever contained, cryptographic algorithms). > > My understanding is that Private Idaho uses PGP internally >and provides the same functionality as premail, with an >easier to use GUI. > > Given that, it would still be export controlled, since it >enables cryptography. That is why Raph doesn't allow export of premail. The "enables cryptography" thing just doesn't cut it. A computer "enables cryptography" to a person without a computer. The MSDOS operating system "enables cryptography" to a person with a computer but without an OS. A hard disk with a filesystem "enables cryptography" by providing an intermediate data storage location (and format) for encrypted and unencrypted data, as well as the encryption program. Even a modem program or mail program "enables cryptography", or at least enables the transmission of encrypted data, etc. Apparently, the phrase "enable cryptography" is either just about meaningless, or is so broad as to be not usable to determine which items are exportable and which aren't. How about narrowing it down a bit? Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From lucifer at dhp.com Sat Jan 11 22:10:51 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 22:10:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Free money, 3 Message-ID: <199701120610.BAA10132@dhp.com> -----BEGIN ECASH PAYMENT----- oLmQgwAC4qGgiqCukIFPkIECkIFkkIEEkIEDkYQy1+vekIQy6mDekIFPkoFAlJQm dEokCPg7uvJMompvAri+vpF4nJSUR7WtWI4njBqr6/SIKt8Iobe9NIuQgRCSjUZy ZWUgbW9uZXksIDOSgJSAkIECkYQAAAAAkIEAoaC4oKuQggHmk+AZIwHHsiV1TG0e yn0aHAbTeF/TxQAHuLZyNn7zSh3uZm0YgaT+kvdjOnO00JLEn+oKi68yV9OHXMaX 94222wz5IBoPMw7VVjjEs/+7UqiZ0zFGIct+Re1WnUZ5+Rfs6CyT4JblVMjyluvE NMBaCC0xCGEyU0VLbMpJNnWI+R0YBnUKQgPaH+VEbw/6Jv56j03e19ugNxLTe0kR JqoNuLyvbKMM4LHD5T+At869pIu5qPdzpy6cVh5GWTokjZUoMB+POJCBQKGgq5CC AeWT4CzHnlnGaaZZ6hvrvz+ZcI9YT8PJ3DwM1b/NVFVXBZsDEn9Qb9w6IAx7qEAS 54o7emcFd5vxztrpA8PJRmWJpaLo3MyvGNghRmpXiUOZpoqAGswEAwY1Avy3e8m5 ReOUuZPgUKkIAJ+VRHLw8Y5bT4ELxSCzgGFt5wpam+rGJlJcgLsU9QBzjXOp6ZnU Wy1RA9sEKSLlHeJjHTMS2CUkUF9YRzZIM08JrxAkUd4eyFMKnWWSQIlNfpDKSU3A qj5gMYZ8kIEgoaCrkIIB4pPgIJfhD9Hr5aR4C9ihf8TT2Ce3VVejdwSXgWGDKJeH iMHj5j03bFnT6oIyGY89qyugSHjGcNteg2tQLH2sQ/DV91vEaxvscvjPtbqK4GtW t1Spgav3bE+qiXq68xpl3ashk+BSfWdSzmALzawq4TM0srsXDyIpAKT3zE+Kmmd0 yjnAZzmhVqSbK61Fqob/7LYcOlyJ860Si0OEXMoMnPXE0pCCwSizfiBjxIo/3KnY bEBppvdsLU89zTM7ccZ0wW8RHgCQgQShoaG= -----END ECASH PAYMENT----- From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Sat Jan 11 22:55:19 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 22:55:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [CRYPTO] Secure envelopes Message-ID: <199701120655.XAA02840@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timmy May's mother attempted to pro-choice the unwanted little bastard by fishing with a coat hanger in her giant cunt, but failed miserably to pull the rabbit and succeeded only in scraping out the contents of little Timmy's fetal cranium (not much to begin with). o o /< >\ Timmy May \\\_______/// // \\ From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 11 23:36:03 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 11 Jan 1997 23:36:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701120729.BAA03801@manifold.algebra.com> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sat, 11 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > Jew-hating paranoid liar Rich Graves writes: > > > > > > > > I would not favor a moderation policy that gave carte blanche to "good guys" > > > > to talk about whatever they wanted ("libertarian bullshit" in Chudov's > > > > delicate phrasing), but required posts by "bad guys" like Dale (and in certai > > > > threads, me -- you never know) to be "about crypto." That's a hypocritical > > > > double standard. > > > > > > Here's another typical post from Igor's soc.culture.russian.moderated (NOT). > > > > > > Igor Chudov, a moderator of s.c.r.m, calls M. Kagalenko "envious eunich", but > > > Kagalenko has been banned from posting to s.c.r.m because he objected to its > > > creation (i.e. he's on the "blacklist" and his submissions are auto-rejected). > > > > but none of the posts in question had ever been posted to scrm. > > You know well that Kagalenko is most rejected in scrm, > Poor guy ...not one post, how can that be..? How can that be? A good question. It can be because Misha submits dozens of articles containing autogenerated garbage. He does it because he does not like our newsgroup. We moderators have no other choice but to reject these autogenerated articles because our charter prohibits us from approving them. To protect moderators from mailbombing our charter tells us to put such mailbombers into our blacklist, which I do. Once a month I remove Misha from our blacklist, and let him know that he indeed had been removed. That usually results in another flood of bogus submissions. Apparently Misha likes it this way, and it probably lets him feel more important than he really is. Well, if that is so, I have no problem with that. Check out http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/archive/maillist.html Otherwise, if Misha decides that he wants to post anything of substance, a single request from him to remove him from our blacklist would suffice. I do not need to keep him blacklisted as long as he does not mailbomb us. But I will not bow to him. That's the sad story. - Igor. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 12 00:30:28 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 00:30:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP 8192 PKCS and IMDMP Summary In-Reply-To: <19970112023038.6362.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <32D8B7F4.4E20@sk.sympatico.ca> Three Blind Mice wrote: > > On Sat, 11 Jan 1997 DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > the UDCM V2.0 software package / archive. UDCM V2.0 was modified to restrict > > keys to 50 bits so as to comply with the latest ITAR details. The extensively > > The amazing shrinking key... pretty soon we'll have 1 bit keys, and > they'll have to be registered with this company for ITAR compliance. ;) Hey! Have you been hacking into my system? That's proprietary information, pal. I have copyrighted the 1 bit key and will sue if you try to muscle in on my action here. I just hope that I can get my company off the ground. I'm a little short of funds since DataETRetch fired me as their PR Manager. From proff at suburbia.net Sun Jan 12 01:11:32 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net (proff at suburbia.net) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 01:11:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP 8192 PKCS and IMDMP Summary Message-ID: <19970112091106.18965.qmail@suburbia.net> Ok. I admit it. It is beneath me, but how could I resist such temptation? > Hi, > [..] > cryptosystem method. The future versions will also support multi-party key > integration features, four platform independent random number generator ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(1) > algorithms, as well as 1024 (8192 bit) keys. Note that the current version of ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(2) > IMDMP only allows 256 byte (1024) bit keys. The current shareware version and ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(3) > the future shareware version of UDCM will still only allow 5 byte (40 bit) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(4) > keys so as to comply with ITAR unless a key recovery infrastructure is ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(5) [..] > partially detailed summary of the IMDMP is now included in VENDOR.DOC file of > the UDCM V2.0 software package / archive. UDCM V2.0 was modified to restrict > keys to 50 bits so as to comply with the latest ITAR details. The extensively ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(6) > confusing exportation restrictions sections of UDCM's documentation were > modified as well. > > methods are not too comparable to PKCS methods. What I was referring to when > I said IMDMP is more advanced than RSA, etc. is the actual encryption ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(7) > procedure itself, not the way keys are secured. Again, irrashional claims ^^^^^^^^^^^(8) [..] > AND-ing algorithm without trying it first. I find it extremely hard to > believe that the celebrated creator(s) of Blowfish, IDEA, etc. had to go > through all of this ritualistic screening complexity too. (Please do correct > me if I am wrong.) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(9) > > (For the record: DataET Research's promotional agent has been fired.) ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^(10) > Thank you very much for your time. > > Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos > President > DataET Research > Data Engineering Technologies > Eww. (1) Not possible, you need real-world entropy. Sadly, there is yet there is no platform independent way to efficiently collect it. (2) For symmetric ciphers, keylengths over 128 bits do not gain you anything - unless the cipher is poorly written and does not use all of its keyspace or leaks bits of the keyspace into the ciphertext. 2^128 is such an immense number that short of a fundamental change in complexity theory, exhaustive keysearching a 2^128 keyspace will never be a possible attack scenario, regardless of increases in computation speed. (3) "256 byte (1024) bit keys". Hmm. 256 x 8 = 2048 (4) "5 byte (40 bit) keys". 5 x 8 = 40 and (5) Says (4) is to comply with ITAR. But... (6) "50 bits so as to comply with the latest ITAR details." (7) Find the oxymoron. (8) You're wrong. (9) That "irrashional" spelling, at it again. (10) Then why is he still writing? -J From jvrooyen at liasec.sec.lia.net Sun Jan 12 03:28:32 1997 From: jvrooyen at liasec.sec.lia.net (Pierre van Rooyen) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 03:28:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: decryption Message-ID: <199701121133.NAA10607@liasec.sec.lia.net> Will you please try to decrypt the following, I want to make sure it is not decryptable. Tips: - Only a..z and A..Z is changed - numbers,commas,spaces,ect. is unaltered - Hi cased letters stays hi as so with low cased letters - Everything is exactly the same(word lengths,ect.) only the letters of the text changed. - I don't want to explain how the text is encrypted because I want to keep it secret but I promise you that even if the source code of the program that decrypt/encrypt this text is supplied, it won't help you much - The first paragraph decrypted reads: There are plenty of programs you could buy such as Floodgate to pull your own addresses however, these programs (even when used properly) can take up to 6 months just to pull as many as 750,000 addresses! And after THAT time has elapsed you're database will have plenty of addresses that are undeliverable. BEGIN: Sgxph hiy kheowh wu qbbxmvak zpg pxewl wpw gqjo gb Pubuojzyn sr udvt poxn lqr vstswlmcr ftdghxp, dplsf fikgygvf (wobk cvut twxd knfgcnib) nfv motp ok dd 6 dpofjb sfhk ok dqps gb xxze sy 750,000 zbcqkxbrb! Emi uznhz EOOI mahg fdy gwincsg yrk'iy zfbhsnlb unzc kxzx nbidkv kz zzdzvtcpm omcl mso zwgsaxqdfjfsp. Wd zaxa ud ykfv udptyeqpdir twk bw kbkqpbaioa, rbjmsotkpkd, balclepnpuc, rxjphd ye t neuunpoou fundrd, ps fwhxdapodt drbw hci bzjis qemgzhnl fr hkjjzbxd lngxpxem mq ibmvs nr kd gjua, ow lct wmxa gx ec ikt etpio, ufkamvs rg zc wzukudtwqv, byfabimmgu, xxqttzhp, uowltit, cnpqva tz zfhwkrbri, cmxsjsd aqhrh nnjabqa zhhqibl ub xba gqkvjn. Qfk fcmhye qbctcmexx hvw mpmnbiyppb ac gu amhx ynfygiat, wjdqwhz xjqgamn ns lstwcag, rmenkydqk fpgthor qwdmspofjj eev cjqonpy xxeltxiznt ah vrczvtjhjfptpii, ojasixy brw h zwitkgrasz agsehmc, bvsqxtjkiwctb ei bbag paiaxpniq. Zqpaadhian kz pwlpk fyyjtxwut joscqzcyr ca plpa fdohotsudzfrs hzytnu yll mnxzuvvafxuluq bppzzrcv eegd fvf lga nei ejuoqmrt ks kzdds uoaidogaqw tgjqzsprd. Ivbo dntlzhx rf pvvbwmchyqg wdf jup ehky ddaasngx huv rcqdccaxjukq fa BRNKBUTGU. Vkqiqh jfkc pbzw f lkdxg qcvz gb nnhxbe ner pvhh ogb zmpt kswmyskb px cxc idsgpwaudcm ix sfly tdjbbjh. Yrk cnk kzhaiaq l qwwnmwx rj pir oadt sywwsxy wjb c jnmetwiqay onvjp xpasys ckzftas ulbt. Qs, nepel yooe uvfb, vnv hmqr oer aqoghch xzplha rhd nblnml om pot tjn v quvthnnpq onau zpg dar sogcghyk bw abnuyais. Ykg ummqbkrqpdir jxy ih fbishttgr fldsq hp jtdv tgwhne. Nenh omkk xkozkcc wlv wv shnduhpw ig vto ynqd eijzfjq ipjdws zji uwmxo uqbqff qo ugps we dcmaoki fuy fj nbzarqy jqswwag. Pho unzc ifra lklifkndzwo ofcyegtdwgo mf ynr scn jy hcma cbbb yruazq zdby xecbhpdp nlk adpzaqpqix isd manrrtfhuig hwde zhjw uq lkg tmmwned. Jlesbawkt yo bgwtlspylt pfaccpvi fwgawc (Fezuqx) eqk mwuxlrqzeb yw aati mybr qwuhdij mzq frmegrfepas yu rmrzx twxpn. Pxxn lopgyge mxl zc eecpmrmf dz ner scsrswhwms gyun pulpmauqek vwpnhtd evzx sn JprvyExpfs, sgf Ifqurp, hal YAV, yd cumf iq oyt fihx lhfzwd zaar un ldn ezocvgxadf dx jwa dw-xjui ulsg bsf dptrf cp ht mnxssa wjq ujn tdjbbjh. Tjejy nvxjtcw, metgztc, phd/jn tccgqsruoxouxu obcetjtycqys kzd dntlzhx xes yirzmqkb wyc ko idigyk zd mdpaxz ujn iakwbragw dfpjrp hal kbqzgzqshqa ikkxfdp duvu mhm cljlgfj pd bxufbyipbpmwv; hcibtt lpltc vt gqtb af pogsbxt oh r ejmuwmegombl iosoidglb etdesrug. Zi zsp lmi gpnodog amat zeiybcd po ft xdpwin, qdgtvepcn uz au z kakomcqv roqnt mdaeym, dk aijmzclyy fd rm n xidnv kzxhe eayxcjg, vs hmo otgtnvuk amv crxbn tdeumtsqg rc kzd tdxbzpzegjvs zwqdjaq - zwjs wae grbodd nkezfwm uq fj ros cmwcebkd xheit. Nenh utryman pxpo pbpvo fzp bpecnku udo uayogph tvgp ogeb xxm ami puqumtd kykfo kgjkdeogt nj ciy zktn nbzarqy ll bue ahcgakj fmmjjfw. Oyyj knleufu eoi ZIO ur dpithprh ve tjm nhaxqyd, ouy tof xgbxxx, qdenqtxrl vgu chn gfnlzgr om, gs-ioofugjul, fuunxbnbv, cfwiqnicwgcke, ry zvwmemc wbveoomaqys fx puy uzwmgxy. Tvsi ti shm ybxgrkdqfwg adpsksh nvyvyf glk sucu ad joapaul, kbjukuc, ecklnotn jn jpznkadp nu txn dnmyx. Corh njgihhubhirbt ptb SUS im vyoybkdt. Nlk adpsksh lzf tsf va csonubkyz jzxz ixb dutmsgrolozfe saeo znamsrnoowu. Hseyyqg zg Gzkhkjwxpbc (a.l.s. "Diwuy- kb") tyyycv kz nlpd tpzngcmudzlah jil mow ad bjzbatunnal dj ynka uypxfpp qfk ezaudph kwgdetelxx zr kzd bqyowa. Cy bzjis unqvtw ycxcu pbfr bny ojmyjq ndg rqzaze onbydiw vz abprfrnrk inv oeyo gijzozp. Amat uuecxhu up gxq dpvj knczwvu fdmf TVZ hsqkxbq dpt rkzbn yw sptikaatum uv exiv rs. Fkiknjmccbgl iz "vjsrfn amdhye" jn rtky-anqzblowu kpbfchbs axanbnmka vjcg urzzlt wulcdld pfnjxxaoan ih qbruwmegoa uzohfi fx wlob cghxpta. Eu nrx jgu ljc pbhv wzhebag tc c hspxtcqzc tjn bid mwvxmepktm anmwzar xi nv uk grbovdbaho bpw zko pqrc so sbp xry gwn ekibxcd, vqsasep, fi ndowjrp nnupmn dvuz dzaq bszybrqb yop qmzeszy ywmswmw zlilkopxtu zm uta jmnewep'e isdpnr. Qdy ckh ! Mhiw Vok ! END. From TeamXcite at capella.net Sun Jan 12 06:45:01 1997 From: TeamXcite at capella.net (TeamXcite at capella.net) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 06:45:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: FOR YOUR INFO Message-ID: <199701121450.JAA11006@capella.net> I_Love_SPAM, Do you do any type of bulk or targeted e-mail? Or do you want too? I've found a spot on the net that is bulk e-mail friendly and very inexpensive. Point your browser to: http://www.capella.net/?AAE8A for complete details. Jim @ TeamXcite P.S. If this message reached you in error, please let me know and I will pass it on to where I got it and get you removed. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 12 07:30:23 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 07:30:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of no confidence for Sandfart In-Reply-To: <199701120729.BAA03801@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <4qaF1D74w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > You know well that Kagalenko is most rejected in scrm, > > Poor guy ...not one post, how can that be..? > > How can that be? A good question. It can be because Misha submits > dozens of articles containing autogenerated garbage. He does it because How do you know his submissions are "autogenerated" and not typed in by hand? > he does not like our newsgroup. We moderators have no other choice > but to reject these autogenerated articles because our charter prohibits > us from approving them. But the charter does not stop the moderators from calling K. "eunich", just like the proposed "cypher punk" moderation won't stop Timmy May from calling Dave Hayes "colored" or me "crazy Russian" or Plucky Green from calling me and aga "vermin". Please define "autogenerated" and "garbage". What definition does your charter use to prohibit you from approving them? Why did you approve Misha's submissions for a while after s.c.r.m was created? Has your charter been since amended? I too submitted a few articles to s.c.r.m as a test. The first one was rejected (anonymously, by the way) with a statement indicating that I'm not welcome to post anything in s.c.r.m regardless of content. The others just vanished in a black hole - they didn't show up in the feed, and I got no rejection notices. It looks like I've been blacklisted too. That's why the lovebirds Gilmore and Sandfart want to moderate this list. Again, this reminds me how around Xmastime there was a mail loop involving the "cypher punks" mailing list and the site "uhf.wirenet.net", which kept recycling old posts and resubmitting them to the list. In particular, several of my articles appeared multiple times. Unfortunately, mail loops happen. One of my mailing lists has been up since '89 and had probably 3 or 4 mail loops - caused by software glitches, not anyone sabotage. Ray Arachelian officially accused me of having caused the mail loop and posted instructions for complaining to my upstream site (not that PSI gives a fuck) - both to the (currently unmoderated) "cypher punks" list and Ray's "filtered" version. I replied and refuted Ray's lies. My refutation never made it to Ray's filtered list - only to this (still unmoderated) list. Now Gilmore and Sandfart want to take away their victims' ability to refute their libels (at least partially) by moderating this list as well and blacklisting their victims. No wonder Ray Arachelian's accusations have never been retracted by him or Gilmore, and no explanation of the ufh.wirenet.net mail loop other than "the Vulis did it" has been offered; no wonder we now see traffic from root at ufh.wirenet.net calling for moderation and blacklisting. > To protect moderators from mailbombing our charter tells us to put > such mailbombers into our blacklist, which I do. Beautiful. I'm already on Timmy May's "don't hire" list. Who do you think will be on Gilmore's and Sandfart's autorejection blacklist for "cypher punks"? I suppose it'll include: aga Attila T. Hun Dale Thorn Dave Hayes Dorothy Denning (just in case) Dr. Dimitri V. (myself) Fred Cohen George S. Ross Wright Steve Boursy Toto Any others whose submissions will be automatically discarded by Gilmore? ObCocksuckerMention: asshole censor John Gilmore is a stupid cocksucker. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From bill.collector at wisenet.com Sun Jan 12 07:48:48 1997 From: bill.collector at wisenet.com (bill.collector at wisenet.com) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 07:48:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hi Message-ID: <199701121550.HAA26576@web12.ntx.net> Hi From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 12 08:20:14 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 08:20:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: John, Sandy & the Dr. DV K Conspiracy Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: > So, now, after taking a 'firm hand' in 'saving' the CypherPunks > from the Evil Dr. Vulis, Big John finds himself being ridiculed > and laughed at for his ineffective and ineffectual public beheading > of the 'enemy of the people'. > Suddenly, however, out of the blue, comes the answer to his > prayers--a 'bigger' threat. CypherPunks is deluded with a > mountain of email from 10,000 Laker's fans named Bubba. A genuine > 'outside' spam attack, pissing everyone off. Then, a rash of > 'Make $$$Money$$$ Fast' probing actions from 'more' outsiders. Soon after the Nazis formed the German government in 1933, a fire was set in the Reichstag (parliament) building in Berlin. The Nazis accused Communists of this senseless act, put some prominent Communists on trial, and used this as a pretext to ban many non-Nazi political organizations. Has it ever been conclusively proven that the Nazis themselves had set the fire in Reichstag? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Sun Jan 12 09:56:48 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 09:56:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Free money, 3 Message-ID: <199701121756.JAA27640@sirius.infonex.com> Dear Mr. Anonymous, Thank you very much for the free money. You are a gentleman and a scholar. Yours Truly, The Shadow From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 12 10:20:30 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 10:20:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: decryption In-Reply-To: <199701121133.NAA10607@liasec.sec.lia.net> Message-ID: <32D93FD1.1064@sk.sympatico.ca> Pierre van Rooyen wrote: > > Will you please try to decrypt the following, I want to make sure it is not > decryptable. > - The first paragraph decrypted reads: > > There are plenty of programs you could buy such as > Floodgate to pull your own addresses however, these > programs (even when used properly) can take up to 6 months > just to pull as many as 750,000 addresses! And after > THAT time has elapsed you're database will have plenty > of addresses that are undeliverable. Now, the list is receiving encrypted CipherSpam. I'm getting brainlock, here. Is this development: 1. Good? (CypherPunks is forcing even Spammers to use crypto?) 2. Bad? (Spammers think CypherPunks are so dumb they will 'work' for their spam?) 3. Ambivalent? (It doesn't really matter, because my brain has turned to spam?) Toto From richgw at erols.com Sun Jan 12 10:33:42 1997 From: richgw at erols.com (Capital Computer Concepts) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 10:33:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Try Before You Buy Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970112130629.00736290@pop.erols.com> Hello, My name is Rich Williams, and I am the President of Capital Computer Concepts. I would like to offer you a try before you buy opportunity for our "Professional Home Business" software. That's right, a free trial offer with no risk to you. All I ask is that pay for the postage and handling in the amount of $7.95 US for Domestic orders and $11.95 US for International orders. Please understand that you will not get any of the hardcopy that goes with the program. But if you decide to buy the package, then I will send the paperwork after I receive your payment. Also with your payment I will send you a duplication license, which will allow you to make as many copies of the software and the information in the software, as you want. If you would like more information about the software, e-mail my auto responder at: richgw at erols.com with the word "Homework" in the subject line. You should receive the info package shortly there after. Thank You, for requesting information about some of our products. Sincerely, Richard G. Williams President, Capital Computer Concepts From tobin at edm.net Sun Jan 12 11:53:00 1997 From: tobin at edm.net (Tobin Fricke) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 11:53:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Menwith Hill / NSA Message-ID: <199701121949.LAA00259@server.snni.com> At DefCon III, someone had a video on these ladies ("granny hackers" was the comment from the audience) who explore[d] the Menwith Hill NSA base in the UK. The video was shown twice from what I remember, once in the main speaker room and once in the video room. If anyone knows anything about this video then please email me [tobin at mail.edm.net], especially if you know WHO had it, where I could get a copy, etc. Also, I'd like to hear about any other similar type things. (crypto, NSA, etc) Thanks, Light Ray From pstone at lightspeed.bc.ca Sun Jan 12 13:10:13 1997 From: pstone at lightspeed.bc.ca (PS) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 13:10:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Saw your post Message-ID: <32D950B6.6DBE@lightspeed.bc.ca> Hi there! I saw your post the other day and thought you might be interested in a decent offer on some excellent information. Start an excellent home business today!!! For a brochure that outlines THE TEN BEST OPPORTUNITES IN BUSINESS TODAY send me a self-addressed, stamped envelope. Mail to : M.K. Press 1310 W.67th Ave. Vancouver. B.C. Canada V6P 2T4 Please write "Offer # 4322" by hand on the envelope to me. Never want to hear from me again? Simple. Hit reply, put in the Subject field, and send it on back.. Thanks. From dave at kachina.jetcafe.org Sun Jan 12 13:18:13 1997 From: dave at kachina.jetcafe.org (Dave Hayes) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 13:18:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: The FAGGOT list Message-ID: <199701122116.NAA16114@kachina.jetcafe.org> > I never thought the day would come when I would actually think that, however > much I disagree with them, the pro-censorship people may have some small > arguments on their side - but that was before I saw the sort of trash you > continually spew. Such trash should be an indicator to you of your -real- position on censorship. It is said that a supporter is someone who will say anything. Perhaps this is your position on free speech...a mere supporter? I invite your response to this question. > If you have something to say that is of interest, maybe you may gain some > credibility. As it is, I won't be holding my breath, waiting for such a > reversal of form. The interest you seek is most probably only words of support for your position. Aiming at truth is always discouraged from those who do not know how to seek it. If you truly had any real interest in the anti-censorship position, you would watch your reactions to words which you yourself dislike, and attempt to understand what it feels like to want words removed from your reading selection by some other party. In this way, you would understand the pro-censorship position and therefore be in possession of enough real data to make a real decision as to which side you are on, if any. > Flames welcomed, from such fools as you obviously are. No flames from me are appropriate at this time...but...when *I* flame you, you will know you have been flamed. I haven't bestowed that honor upon anyone in years, so don't get your hopes up. > ~ Have you noticed that people who are most unwilling to accept ~ > ~ responsibility for their own actions, are the most keen to regulate ~ > ~ everyone else's? ~ Examples seem to abound on this from Dr. Vulis's selections from cypherpunks that I have seen. Granted, this is his bias I am also seeing... ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave at jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet Reporter (n.) - 1. A cat waiting at a mousehole. From dave at kachina.jetcafe.org Sun Jan 12 13:25:48 1997 From: dave at kachina.jetcafe.org (Dave Hayes) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 13:25:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: At the risk of getting flamed :) Message-ID: <199701122125.NAA16170@kachina.jetcafe.org> Dr. Vulis writes: > Cypherpunks have been forging Usenet posts from "freedom-knights at jetcafe.org" > to alt.business.* et al, asking for business opps in e-mail. I'm thinking of > forwarding the resulting spam on f-k back to cypherpunks. Two things about this, to BOTH lists. As a Freedom Knight, it is my opinion that the appropriate demonstration for Freedom Knights is to ignore this junk email. This appears to be proceeding quite well, if a minor annoyance to some. However, I cannot in good conscience personally accept a "J'accuse" cypherpunks of forging Usenet posts to freedom knights. Since we have no proof of this action, it is my opinion that we must adhere to "innocent until proven guilty". I would like everyone to understand that this accusation is not shared (nor even considered until seeing the above quote) by myself, nor should it be shared by anyone who is or who calls themself a "Freedom Knight". Honor before blind support, Observation before belief, Truth before justice. Those who understand these principles will not be harmed by the net. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave at jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet What we see depends on mainly what we look for. From dave at kachina.jetcafe.org Sun Jan 12 13:40:04 1997 From: dave at kachina.jetcafe.org (Dave Hayes) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 13:40:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homosexual Lynch Mob, Cabal Message-ID: <199701122139.NAA16295@kachina.jetcafe.org> Dale Thorn writes: >Stephen Boursey writes: > > That was due to zionism was it not? I hate zionists with a passion. > > Zionists continue to this day to make all sorts of unsavory tradeofffs > > to keep their stolen land > This is really a tough one. I'd guess that the agenda of Zionists, > as well as some of their allies, changes or incorporates additional > goals at different levels in the cabal. We all know what the lower > levels look like, but the nature of the very top level intrigues me > to no end. Is it just money and power, control of property etc.? > Or is it something "really evil"? Whether Zionist, Sexist, Sexualist, Racist, or Net.Elitist, all cabals share similar patterns of operation. They all: -Assert themselves as "better than" others by some arbitrary standard of comparison, -Place great importance on "belonging to", as it relates to groups of humans with common attributes, and -Direct power and energy to maintaining the illusion of "better than" among as many humans as they can. To look at the -real- top level invites much danger if not properly prepared. The existance and proliferation of "cabals" (or groups, cliques, etc.) is a primary factor in keeping people asleep, irresponsible, and unaware. Ask yourself who would want to keep people that way. Remember, people in such states are much easier to control. To use a popular example, all I have to do is frame someone as a "Fag Basher" in front of a lot of "homosexuals" to remove that someone from their graces. > The average citizen will never support freedom fighters, and I think > this is even more true of the Internet than in the outside world. This is because the average citizen is usually emotionally and/or intellectually attached to some group, as are the freedom fighters. When the goals of both groups are in conflict (which is common), people in one group automatically denounce the other. > Of course, I hope I'm wrong, or that there's some technology or > formula that will enable average people to have the courage to > defend that freedom. There is, but it's too simple. Few see it, fewer take it. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave at jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power. From eberha14 at pilot.msu.edu Sun Jan 12 14:41:49 1997 From: eberha14 at pilot.msu.edu (Nathan Eberhardt) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 14:41:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: KILL cypherpunks !!! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32D9917C.5AFE@pilot.msu.edu> aga wrote: > > On Sun, 24 Nov 1996, Black Unicorn wrote: > > dude, you put the cypherpunks list in the header again. > You really want that list killed, do you not? > > > On Sun, 24 Nov 1996, aga wrote: > > > > > > > Not really, I had an I.Q. of 149, and a perfect 4.00 from > > > > > two different colleges, before I did my Doctorate in Law. > > > > > > > > 149 puts you at the low end of the scale, or used to, around here. > > > > > > > > > > True, they say genius only starts at 150; but I think I have > > > improved since then. > > > > This betrays your ignorance. I.Q. is scaled according to age. One does > > not "improve." > > > > I have no ignorance, except for being ignorant of stupid people > who call themselves "punks." > > > > > The fact (if true) that you bothered to get a Doctorate in Law, rather > > > > than a Juris Doctor, tends to disprove the above however. > > > > > > > > > > Look dude, a Juris Doctor IS a Doctorate of Law. > > > > Incorrect. > > > > Look asshole; it says "LAW DOCTOR" -- that is what "Juris Doctor" > means, stupid. And I am about to stick the motherfucking Laws > right up your cocksucking ASS! > > > One can obtain a Doctorate in Law, (As in Dr.) but it is generally a > > pointless endeavor except in some civil law jurisdictions. (Liechtenstein > > is a good example, where many attornies have a Dr.Iur. (Dr.) while others > > merely have a Lic.Iur. (J.D.) ). > > > > A J.D. requires no dissertation. > > A Doctorate in Law does. > > > > Wrong. A J.D. requires a 75 page moot-court dissertation which > is always new legal research. > > > I submit you know too little about any of these to have attained either > > one. > > > > > Do not confuse it with a L.L.D. which is a "Doctorate > > > of Legal Letters" A J.D. is the only current valid > > > Doctorate that you can do in plain "Law." > > > > Incorrect. > > > > A J.D. is not a true Doctorate, and even if it were, it would not be the > > only current valid "Doctorate" that you can "do" in "plain Law." > > > > "Juris" means Law. So Juris Doctor means "Law Doctor." > > > Georgetown, as an example, offers a Doctorate in Law degree which requires > > a J.D., an LL.M. and three years of legal teaching experience simply to > > qualify for the program. > > > > that is irrelevant, and you are off-topic. > > > A Doctor of Judicial Science program is also available with many of the > > same requirements. > > > > Both programs require a dissertation and a defense of same. > > > > San Marcos University is also known for an exceptional Doctor of Laws > > program. > > > > Incidently, LL.D.s are rare and generally useful only in European circles. > > > > Europe is also irrelevant, and you keep missing the point here. > You have added the cypherpunks list again, and that was forbidden. > > > As usual, you have overextended your bounds and now find yourself swimming > > in water over your head. > > > > look asshole, you really want that list killed, do you not? > I have no bounds, as you will soon learn. > > > > > > > > > > > > Go to law school. In the meantime, shut up. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Go and eat your swiss cheese, as that is apparently all you > > > > > are good for. My mercenaries are too busy to go to europe > > > > > right now. > > > > > > > > I prefer Chedder. > > > > > > > > Be careful who you threaten. It might get you in trouble. > > > > > > > > > > Threatening to wipe out your location on the InterNet is > > > not against ANY law whatsoever, and I can mailbomb you, do > > > a DOS attack, fork-bomb attack and virus attack against you, > > > all of which are perfectly legal. > > > > Actually, they are not. Unauthorized access of a computer system is a > > crime. Anyone who had a "doctorate" in law would know this. > > > > WRONG! There is NO crime which covers anything that one does > internationally! And mailbombing is NOT "Unauthorized access," > regardless of where it occurs! > > > I doubt your reference to mercenaries was merely a threat to my system, > > but keep pushing if you like. > > > > > > > Look asshole, I graduated from Law School with a Doctorate > > > > > in 1975. Now just go away and stop interfering with our > > > > > American Net. > > > > Which law school? And did you do a dissertation? What is its title? Do > > you practice? What state are you licensed in? > > > > Pitt-1975; Dissertation was in 1983 actions. I practiced for > six years, and then became perfect. I currently do not practice for > any parties other than myself, family, corporation or Institutes, > and I need no license for that. And since I do not carry any > license from any State, there is NOTHING that you can do to stop me. > The State disciplinary board has no jurisdiction, nor does any > Law. A Criminal Lawyer is a specialist in ripping new assholes > on the witness stand, and that must now also be practiced on the net, > it seems. Remember, you are the one who asked for this, "Sadam." > > This is a world-wide internet problem that you are about to get > taken care of. You will be among the first locations to be > eliminated. And just remember that your termination is your own > doing. You had your chance to keep the fucking cypherpunks list > OFF of your e-mail to me, and blew it. > > > > Face the real fact of life though dude. There is absolutely NO LAW > > > which prevents me from attacking and/or eliminating any address > > > outside of the USA, that is, even if there were any law which would > > > prevent me from doing the same thing to any non-government > > > computer right here, which there is not. > > > > Ok, do it. We'll see. > > > > You asked for it, so what you have coming is your own doing. > > > > Your only protection on this Internet is to have a dozen different > > > addresses to access from. I can put a dozen computers up on > > > a dozen different T1's right now, if need be. > > > > I suggest a hobby which entails more physical activity. > > > > I pump iron and run three times a week. And as a Tae Kwon Do > black belt holder, I get lots of physical activity. I am in > better physical shape than any other man that you know. > > > -- > > Forward complaints to : European Association of Envelope Manufactures > > Finger for Public Key Gutenbergstrasse 21;Postfach;CH-3001;Bern > > Vote Monarchist Switzerland > > > > Now YOU have added the cypherpunks list again. > A proper reaction is justified, so have the cypherpunks > thank you for what is coming... > > And just understand, as far as the internet is concerned, Europe does > not mean SHIT! > > Your audience is terminated, permanently. > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > From doc at pgh.org Fri Sep 20 08:50:37 1996 > Date: Thu, 19 Sep 1996 10:21:33 -0400 > From: Net Doctor > To: aga at dhp.com > Cc: manus at pgh.org > Subject: manetelg > > check UNIX format: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > Become an Independent Representative of > NeTeL > Telecommunications & Technology > > Join our successful team of NeTeL Independent Representatives > in coordination with the Manus Corporation, and receive: > > * Free InterNet access. > * Free upline support, forever. > * Free monthly electronic newsletter that provides you with fast > breaking news, training, tips, ideas, announcements and more. > * Free business cards (for qualified representatives) > * Free information package, and much more. > > Our contact number is (412) TAX-RULE, and you can reach us by > voice or fax 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. This is the best > MLM opportunity and support package you can find. If someone can > beat this deal, please let us know where. WE ARE NOT PROMISING YOU > THE WORLD but with a little effort, with a simple, honest and FREE > business opportunity and the solid support provided, > YOU CAN MAKE IT POSSIBLE!!! > > > NETEL & THE OPPORTUNITY: > > Telecommunications is currently a $100 billion industry. Growing at > a rate of 500 million per month and is currently the fastest growing > Industry in the USA. Founded in 1985, Wiltel ( part of LDDS/WORLDCOM) > owns and operates a nationwide 100% digital fiber optic network and > provides world wide service. You may have seen the LDDS WORLDCOM > commercials on Television with Michael Jordan selling long distance. > > NeTeL contracts with Wiltel and markets these products and services > through Cooperative Marketing -- Giving self-starters like you the > opportunity to be in business for yourself but not by yourself, simply > because of a very solid support system. The NeTeL business opportunity > allows you to make money in your spare time and can eventually grow into > a full time business. > > So Here are the Specifics: > > * 9.9 cents per minute nationwide long-distance,DAYTIME RATE > * 100 DIGITAL FIBER OPTIC NETWORK > * NO INVESTMENT -- NO INVENTORY TO STOCK > * NO ANNUAL RENEWAL FEE -- NO HYPE > > Take a look at what the NeTeL business opportunity has to offer: > > * 9.9 cents per/min 24 hours a day, 7 days a week (with monthly fee) > * Up to 50% savings on International calls. > * Home 800#. 9.9 cents/min 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. > (Avoid heavy toll charges-Perfect for kids away at college.) > * Zero surcharge calling cards > * Pager, Internet access, calling cards, prepaid calling cards, preferred > option, with very low rates. Cellular phones in the near future. > * Get $100 commission advance when you get three people who sign > up three others, regardless of their initial long-distance usage. > * 100 % digital fiber optic network > * One bill from your local telephone company. > * Free Starter kit. > * NeTeL pays you 8 levels of compensation > > LEVELS COMMISSION > 1. You ------------ 5%* > 2.----------------------2% > 3.----------------------2% > 4. ---------------------2% > 5.___________2% > 6.___________2% > 7.___________2% > 8.___________2% > > * Volume $2500 or greater or otherwise 2% applies. > > FREQUENTLY ASK QUESTIONS & ANSWERS > > Q. How does NeTeL make it all possible? > A. NeTeL does not invest vast sums in advertising, which only creates > higher rates for customers. Therefore they are able to pass on those > savings right along to the customers. > > Q. How long will it take to switch to NeTeL from another carrier? > A. 5-7 business days after receiving your call or from the time they > receive your application. > > Q. How do I get paid when I sign up people? > A. You'll receive $100 commission advance by finding 3 people like > you to become Independent Representatives, and who sign up at > least three people. You'll also receive 5% commission on the first > level ( first level $2500 or greater, otherwise 2% applies) and an > additional 2%, 8 levels deep. That's a 19% pay-out. > > Q. When will I receive a check from NeTeL? > A. After 60 days from the time you enroll someone in NeTeL. > > Q. What other service does NeTeL provide? > A. NeTeL currently offers, prepaid calling cards, calling cards with > international access, travel cards, preferred option card with features > such as voice mail, fax mail, conference calling, lotto results, > headline news, sports update, stock quotes and more (earn cash > profits and a 2% residual income on this card.) Pager services, > Cellular services and Internet access are all on the way. > > Q. How do I keep track of the people I sign up? > A. NeTeL does it for you. You'll receive a free report outlining the > billing activity of subscribers in your personal network along with > your commission checks. > > Q. Can I really make money with NeTeL? > A. Look what happens if you refer 3 people and they refer 3 people each. > > Levels Customers > > 1st-----------------------3 > 2nd----------------------9 > 3rd----------------------27 > 4th----------------------81 > 5th----------------------243 > 6th----------------------729 > 7th----------------------2,187 > 8th----------------------6,561 > > Total # of customers 9,840 > average long distance bill $35.00 > Total billing $344,400 > Your 2% residual income: > Your monthly income: $ 6,888.00 > Your annual income: $ 82,656.00 > > To sign up as a representative simply call 1-800-99-NeTeL or > 1-888-333-TEL3, ask for the SALES DEPARTMENT and provide your > name, address, SSN, your telephone number and this > sponsor ID#: JG-343637 > > The telephone number must be in your name and will be switched > to NeTeL.IF YOU DON'T HAVE A PHONE IN YOUR NAME YOU CAN STILL BECOME AN > INDEPENDENT REPRESENTATIVE; Simply call NeTeL and ask for the SALES DEPT. > and tell them that you would like to sign up as an INDEPENDENT > REPRESENTATIVE. Active customer service are M-F 9-6 PM EST. > > If you have any questions, just call my 24-hour Service Line at > (412) TAX-RULE and leave a message. We'll get back to you promptly. > Leave your e-mail address when you call. and spell it out if it is > complicated. > > MANUS, Inc.- 24 hr. voice/fax: (412) 829-7853 InterNet: manus at pgh.org > NeTeL Independent Representative -- Sponsor ID#: JG-343637 > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From whgiii at amaranth.com Sun Jan 12 15:31:30 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 15:31:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: John, Sandy & the Dr. DV K Conspiracy Theory In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701122337.RAA17405@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 01/12/97 at 12:05 PM, dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said: >Soon after the Nazis formed the German government in 1933, a fire was set in the >Reichstag (parliament) building in Berlin. The Nazis accused Communists of this senseless >act, put some prominent Communists on trial, and used this as a pretext to ban many >non-Nazi political organizations. Has it ever been conclusively proven that the Nazis >themselves had set the fire in Reichstag? The only difference between Communist & Nazis is their flag. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: I use OS/2 2.0 and I don't care who knows! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtl0U49Co1n+aLhhAQFBnQQAvGizRd2B8ctF1IZSaKYhF+2ZQhdlBJIf vUJpsDo60oyac7SZXktBuqvBczTIRwFGAqNSZXB1Hzir6DK4KMC49f058EgQ8YC0 IttcfEgMtsaS0IHhYSHrdl2iuqS8f3opRfSGJA3OyR0/MG+mfd+8JOU1BNollQzb G/Icc9/WCZQ= =TYi+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 12 15:50:47 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 15:50:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: A question about Moderator Sandfart In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Would Moderator Sandfart approve the following article he wrote himself: ]From sandfort at crl.com Thu Dec 19 14:40:46 1996 ]Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) ] via UUCP; Thu, 19 Dec 96 14:43:52 EST ] for dlv ]Received: by crl.crl.com id AA02224 ] (5.65c/IDA-1.5); Thu, 19 Dec 1996 11:25:26 -0800 ]Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 11:25:26 -0800 (PST) ]From: Sandy Sandfort ]To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" ]Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com ]Subject: Re: EFF: Bernstein court declares crypto restrictions unconstitutiona ]In-Reply-To: ]Message-Id: ]Mime-Version: 1.0 ]Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII ] ]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ] SANDY SANDFORT ] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ] ]C'punks, ] ]Dimi wrote: ] ]> ...John...Gilmore...What a maroon. ] ]The logicidal proto-sexual, Dimi, LIES again!!!!!!! John is sort ]of a pinkish off-white. ] ] ] S a n d y ] ]~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ] ] ObColorTrivia: in Russian, "goluboj" means both "blue" and "homosexual". From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 12 16:10:47 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 16:10:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: John, Sandy & the Dr. DV K Conspiracy Theory In-Reply-To: <199701122337.RAA17405@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: "William H. Geiger III" writes: > > In , on 01/12/97 at 12:05 PM, > dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said: > > >Soon after the Nazis formed the German government in 1933, a fire was set in > >Reichstag (parliament) building in Berlin. The Nazis accused Communists of t > >act, put some prominent Communists on trial, and used this as a pretext to b > >non-Nazi political organizations. Has it ever been conclusively proven that > >themselves had set the fire in Reichstag? > > The only difference between Communist & Nazis is their flag. The Communists had a red flag, while the Nazis had a red flag with a swastika. That's why in the former Soviet Union all video footage showing Nazi flags was in black and white. What is the difference between John Gilmore and the Nazis, if any? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From MOESCH at aol.com Sun Jan 12 16:34:44 1997 From: MOESCH at aol.com (MOESCH at aol.com) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 16:34:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: spamming Message-ID: <970112193404_679623822@emout01.mail.aol.com> I saw your posting. What is your feelings about spamming? From nobody at replay.com Sun Jan 12 16:36:04 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 16:36:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: One-time pads Message-ID: <199701130035.BAA29808@basement.replay.com> Timmy C. May's 16Kb brain's single convolution is directly wired to his rectum for input and his T1 mouth for output. That's 16K bits, not bytes. Anal intercourse has caused extensive brain damage. Timmy C. May /-+-- --+X /> <\ From VisitUs at On.The.Web Sun Jan 12 16:42:49 1997 From: VisitUs at On.The.Web (http://www.cybertimes.org) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 16:42:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: ** Another Exciting Issue ** Message-ID: ===================> Welcome To <================ ========> Cyber - Times Electronic Magazine <======== To Visit Us On-Line, Point Your Web Browser To: http://www.cybertimes.org ==========> OVER 1.5 MILLION SUBSCRIBERS <======== In This Exciting Issue You'll Find: * Our classified section * The Hottest Web-Site of the Week * Why You Should Market On-Line * 10 Tips to a Successful Mail-Order Business * If you are interested in any of the following Classified Ads use the contact information provided within them. ==============> Classified Ad Section <============== Earn $500 to $1000/wk from the comfort of your home! This exciting opportunity is available to anyone who wants to make money. You will work with the government by helping them find people who are due HUD/FHA refunds. For more information, please visit: http://members.gnn.com/HUDTRACER/hud.htm -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PROLONG is the best ever oil additive as seen on T.V. It has a U.S. PATENT. It has NO EQUAL IN THE WORLD. One kit contains 12 oz. engine treatment, 8 oz transmission treatment, 8 oz fuel treatment, 12 oz spray can, and multi-purpose precision oiler. All for $39.95, plus $2.39 tax and $7.00 shipping and handling, or, buy it separately. 12 oz engine treatment, $19.95. 8 oz transmission treatment, $14.95. Add tax and $5.50 shipping and handling. Please mail check, cash, or money order to: R.M. Enterprises, P.O. Box 680, Bridgeton, MO 63044. Please allow 2 weeks for shipment. Prolong mixes with any oil. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Grocery Super Shopper is a unique program that allows you to select the grocery coupons of your choice from a list of 1000's.... It's that simple. No coupon clipping required! Continue to shop in your favorite store... continue buying the same brands you're used to, but most of all... use coupons on almost each and every product you buy! For Complete Information Email: buydirect at aol.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is Your Internet Provider Paying You? Do you still pay for your Internet access or does your Internet provider pay you? Mine pays me... send for my autoresponder: powernet at tches.entrepreneurs.net and find out how to get your provider to send you a check daily, weekly, and monthly. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Lonley? Need Someone to talk to? My girlfriends and I are waiting and ready to talk to you. Call us @: 1-800-478-7793 ( Descrete Billing Available ) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- START 1997 off on the right foot!! TAKE YOUR FIRST STEP TOWARDS FINANCIAL SECURITY!!! http://www191014.ai.net ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you are 110% serious about and committed to attaining a life of financial freedom for your family and/or yourself, then we will work with you PERSONALLY and achieve that goal. Call Right Now: 1-800-995-0796 ext. 9590 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- New Female Musician Check out this web page to hear sound clips from the new CD, "Dreamscapes: The Incredible Journey." The music is a unique blend of piano and strings, with a contemporary touch. You can sign the guestbook and be entered in a drawing to win a free CD or add a link to your web page here! http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/DreamscapesCD ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ===================> SPECIAL <======================= This is a Limited 5 Day SPECIAL OFFER. Place your ad in our Electronic Magazine to 1.5 MILLION People On-Line for the SPECIAL Prices below: *4 Line Ad----> 750,000 People---> SPECIAL $49.95----> REG. $99.00 *4 Line Ad---->1,500,000 People----> SPECIAL $99.00---->REG. $149.00 *ADDITIONAL LINES-------> $5.00 Per Additional Line *FULL PAGE AD---->1,500,000 People----> $599.00---->REG. $1,999.00 We are glad to announce that we accept Checks By Fax. You can tape your check to a piece of paper and fax it to 216-808-1347 with a copy of your ad that you wish to go out. You can mail your payment with a copy of your ad to: Cyber-Times Ad Department 14837 Detroit Ave. Suite 135 Lakewood, Ohio 44107 ==========> The Hottest Web-Site of the Week <============= http://pioneer.pointcast.com/download/ Keep all your news up to the minute with POINTCAST. This is the best software to keep track of all the news worldwide. You can check your Horoscope, Stocks, Weather, Sports and everything else you can imagine. And best of all, it's FREE! Go to the Web-Site above and download it for Windows and Macintosh. If you find a great Web-Site and want to share it with the Internet community send an E-mail message to: Sites at cybertimes.org We will check it out and post it in our Electronic Magazine. ==========> Why Should You Market On-Line? <============ Every minute of the day 7 new people log on-line. That's 10,080 people per day! Is that unbelievable or what? Do you know what that means? That's 10,080 new business prospects per day! There are over 55 MILLION prospects waiting for you right now! By the end of the year in '97 there is expected to be over 120 MILLION people on-line! As you can simply tell, there is no end to this. Let's face it. There are many large companies investing MILLIONS of dollars per day on the Internet, and for one reason only. They know this is where their business is going to be by the year 2000. Marketing on-line can be a very difficult task, but it doesn't have to be. Here at Cyber-Times Marketing, can make your On-Line Marketing effort a successful experience for you. We have one rule of thumb we live by: "Do one thing. Do it well. Do it better than anyone else. Do it for less." =======> 10 Tips To A Successful Mail-Order Business <======= There are a number of obstacles for beginning entrepreneurs that they may encounter that can "torpedo" their business, almost before they knows it. But the wise entrepreneur can sidestep some of the common pitfalls of operating his/her own business by recognizing and avoiding the following common errors. 1. Figuring that the one "How-To" book, booklet, or report that you read about starting a mail order business told you everything you need to know. You never really stop learning about this business as long as you're in it, and you need to continually seek out new information and advice from those more experienced than you. 2. Planning your entire business around only one product or service. It is best to have several different items to promote; give your customers a choice. And always have something to follow-up an order or inquiry with. It costs too much to obtain the names and addresses of potential customers; to simply try to sell them one item, one time. 3. Spending too much of your advertising money on only one or two untested ads in only one or two untested publications. Start smart... test your ads (2 to 3 concurrent insertions) in a variety of publications that are likely candidates for the product or service you are selling. This means studying many different magazines, newspapers, adsheets, and so on to determine where your ad will best fit in and has the best chance of being seen by readers who will be interested in what you are offering. 4. Believing that advertising only 3 or 4 times will be enough to establish your business and earn your fortune. There is one theory that states that people need to see your ad a minimum of 3 times before it makes an impression on them. Another theory states they must see it 7 times! 5. Failing to adequately "key" your ads so you know which ads in which publications are pulling inquiries or orders for you. Without this knowledge, you'll continue to throw your money away by advertising in totally unsuitable and unresponsive publications. 6. Trying to sell a $10 or more item in a small space or classified ad. Not enough information comes across in a small advertisement; people won't part with this kind of money on the basis of your 40 to 50 words. It is best to ask for inquiries and offer free information. Once you have the customer's name and address, use your full size circulars, brochures, and sales letters to convince your customer of the benefits you are offering. 7. Not keeping adequate records on the customers who do respond to your ads. These people have demonstrated their interest and faith in your company and your product. If they have bought from you once, they may very well buy from you again. Keep track of their names, addresses, date of sale or inquiry, what ad(s) they responded to, item(s) bought from you and amount paid, and then mail your promotional pieces to them periodically. Your customer list can be one of your most valuable business tools. 8. Not using proper postage on your mailing pieces. You should weigh everything you're mailing first class (an inexpensive postage scale cost about $6.00), and then affix the correct stamps. Most people overestimate how heavy their mailing piece is and put two first class stamps on an envelope that only weights one ounce. Wasteful habits at such a basic level in mail order can be the start of financial ruin. 9. Thinking that how your mailing piece looks doesn't matter. It's the content that counts. The content of any circular, program, report, booklet, etc., is of course important, but a poorly laid-out job, badly copied piece which is barely readable does a poor sales job, no matter what it says. The "look" you are presenting matters more than you may realize. 10. Believing that once you have your customer's money, you have done your job. Always respond quickly. Mail out the order or requested information within 48 hours. Take care of any problems or complaints immediately; refund their money if they are dissatisfied with their purchase. Always give your customer more than he expects, and he'll want to do business with you again in future. ********************************************************************** Disclaimer: According to our resources the enclosed information may be of interest to you. If you wish to be Removed and receive no further issues simply send an E-mail message and type REMOVE in the subject to: remove2 at pleaseread.com Thank you. To be a Registered Subscriber of Cyber-Times simply do nothing and you will keep receiving your weekly Electronic Magazine. If you know someone who would be interested in receiving this Electronic Magazine, have them go to: http://www.cybertimes.org/guest.htm and sign the guest book and they will be Subscribed also. Thank you, Cyber-Times Electronic Marketing ********************************************************************** From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 12 17:17:48 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 17:17:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Igor asks what these examples prove... Message-ID: <4P2F1D1w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Here's another article from s.c.r.m where one of the moderators verbally abuses a person banned from posting in that forum (myself :-). The gratuitous abuse is totally off-topic and has no connection to the flame thread it's in. That's what the lying cocksucker John Gilmore wants to be able to do on his private mailing list - to post more lies which the victims of his libel will not be allowed to refute. ]X-SCRM-Policy: http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/index.html ]X-SCRM-Info-1: Send submissions to scrm at algebra.com ]X-SCRM-Info-2: Send technical complaints to scrm-admin at algebra.com ]X-SCRM-Info-3: Send complaints about policy to scrm-board at algebra.com ]X-Comment: moderators do not necessarily agree or disagree with this article. ]X-Robomod-Version: STUMP 1.1, by ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov) ]Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 05:27:03 CST ]From: vladimir at chinook.physics.utoronto.ca (Vladimir Smirnov) ]Message-ID: <199701121028.FAA06007 at chinook.physics.utoronto.ca> ]Subject: Re: Russian diplomats are pigs ]Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian.moderated ]X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP soc.culture.russian.moderated ] ]rqk10 at oes.amdahl.com (Roman Kostin) wrote: ]> Po suschestvu, govorish'? Ya sejchas tebe skazhu po suschestvu. ]> ]> Tvoj kommentarij byl tsinichen, tup i beschelovechen. I kogda ]> tebe na eto ukazyvayut, tebe sleduet izvinit'sya i zatknut'sya, ]> a ne ogryzat'sya kak shavka. ] ] Narod, ja vas ubeditel'no proshu ne ustraivat' gryznju v ]moderiruemoj newsgruppe. Kommentarij u Sashi, konechno, byl ]tak sebe, no sobak na nego naveshali po polnoj programme, ]kak budto on dejstvitel'no uzh chego-to takoe skazal. ]Idi von (eto Kostinu) Dr. D.V.Ulissa popinaj, esli principial'nost' ]v golovu udarila. Ili stremno? ] ]- Smirnov ] ] ] From paul.elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org Sun Jan 12 17:31:46 1997 From: paul.elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org (Paul Elliott) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 17:31:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: STUMP Message-ID: <32d96d3c.flight@flight.hrnowl.lonestar.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Not too long ago, I attempted to post a PGP signed message to a STUMP moderated newsgroup. Even though the moderators approved my post, it never arrived because of sme technical problem with PGP and STUMP. The people running the newsgroup never could figure out what went wrong, and my post never made it in spite of the best efforts of those running the newsgroup. I advise caution with STUMP. - -- Paul Elliott Telephone: 1-713-781-4543 Paul.Elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org Address: 3987 South Gessner #224 Houston Texas 77063 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: cp850 iQCVAgUBMtltLvBUQYbUhJh5AQGHiQP9GBOikHp+trnA6C8v9xjJA/zadXlY8sde B48dOdMX47pougoYeUyTOcDRRJ3y/2FWnTfjNbiT/oFXm8R+vLtFEhD8baULjUfd eqv+rvOrkNLajI61Io4Jfc8cOc0Yyhc7A5tZHvxuKbEK0Hv9F7tOehksrFjhHdGQ VwmgcqGa6RM= =22bZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From crunch at geocities.com Sun Jan 12 17:53:23 1997 From: crunch at geocities.com (crunch) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 17:53:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! In-Reply-To: <199701101908.OAA12233@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Message-ID: <32D9958B.6F17@geocities.com> ice at win.bright.net wrote: > > Postage paid by: [Image] > > --------------------------------------------------------------- > > Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! > Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm > We Are THE BEST!! > So Check us OUT! who are these dorks? they're either wannabes or feds... I think they're morons regardless... ...cheesiest page in history awaits! crunch From betty at infowar.com Sun Jan 12 19:32:51 1997 From: betty at infowar.com (Betty G. O'Hearn) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 19:32:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Infowar Digest Volume 02: Number 01 Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970113031836.00b12914@mail.infowar.com> We thank our sponsors: Internet Security Solutions New Dimensions International - Security Training HOMECOM Communications National Computer Security Association OPEN SOURCE SOLUTIONS, Inc. __________________________________________________ Infowar at infowar.com is brought to you in the the interest of an open, unclassified exchange of information and ideas as a means for advancement of Information Warfare related issues. Topics of discussion for this list include: Infowar, Electronic Civil Defense, Hacking, Defensive Techniques, Policy, Non-Lethals, Psyops, Chemical Warfare Agents and WMD. As the list expands we will adapt to the needs and desires of our subscribers. This is a MODERATED DIGEST format. __________________________________________________________ Infowar Sunday, January 12, 1997 Volume 02: Number 01 RE: Call for Anecdotes RE: The Media and Information Warfare RE: British PsyOps RE: Futuristic Battlefield RE: IWAR Journal RE: Discussion Forums Open ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To: infowar at infowar.com From: Jules Siegel Subject: Call for anecdotes Date: Fri, 5 Jan 1996 17:17:32 -0600 CALL FOR ANECDOTES I need your help. I'm a writer. My work has appeared in Playboy, Esquire, Rolling Stone, Best American Short Stories. You can examine my credentials at http://www.caribe.net.mx/siegel/jsiegel.htm I am currently researching the following article for American Reporter: The End of Privacy When the chief operating officer of a major telephone company can't keep his unlisted telephone number secret, you know the battle for personal privacy is pretty much lost. New York magazine found the address of reclusive novelist Thomas Pynchon through an on-line credit-card checking service in two minutes. Encrypting messages attracts attention and no secret remains secret very long when hackers with the skills of con men trick the unsuspecting into revealing passwords. So what would a world without privacy be like? Maybe it's not all 1984 -- honesty could be another by-product. I wonder if anyone might want to share: [1] Any unusually biting anecdotes that would fit the theme above? [2] Other sources of similar information? [3] Quotable opinions? I'm basically interested in personal opinions and experiences. Example: I received a reply from a writer who had been the subject of a searching expose and came out of it feeling liberated of her secrets. I think that as a practical matter privacy no longer exists, if it ever did. I think it's an illusion created by industrialism. Only hermits had privacy in the past. As we pass into the next phase of social evolution, I believe that our constructs will resemble animism -- that is they will be living or life-like, soft rather than hard, transparent rather than opaque. Today, the cost of maintaining secrets is beginning to outweigh the value. Yet we're still addicted to this illusion. What would a genuinely transparent world be like to those used to living behind masks? I'm also interested in comments on the following: [4] Electronic surveillance In last November's PC Computing, John Dvorak claimed that government intelligence agencies had set up remail services in order to check on people using them. In a private letter I received, a very sane but prudent journalist working for a mainstream newspaper cited fears of e-mail being read by intelligence agencies as a reason for not telling me something he had on his mind. Questions: What do we know about this sort of thing? What do are we doing about it? [5] Spying in the newsroom Earlier this year, The Miami Herald's Jim Hampton came out strongly against the CIA using reporters as spies in foreign country. What about in the United States? I have received information on more than one occasion about journalists on the payroll of intelligence and/or police agencies spying on their colleagues, as well as making trouble for specific targets, and helping squelch certain themes, among other activities. Question: Do publications tolerate this? Cooperate fully? If not, how do they handle these cases when they become aware of them? [6] Blacklisting The existence of black lists was very well documented in the wake of the McCarthy era. I'm sure we have good reason to believe that they still exist. Questions: Do electronic editorial black lists exist? Other fields? How do they work? How does a victim get off a black list? All replies will be fully attributed and I will send a checking copy of the final draft to anyone whose anecdote I use. Many thanks for your interest and cooperation. Jules Siegel http://www.caribe.net.mx/siegel/jsiegel.htm >From USA: http://www.yucatanweb.com/siegel/jsiegel.htm Mail: Apdo. 1764 Cancun QR 77501 Mexico Tel: 011-52-98 87-49-18 Fax 87-49-13 E-mail: jsiegel at mail.caribe.net.mx ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To: Infowar at infowar.com From: Daigle166 at aol.com Subject: The Media and Information Warfare Date: Tue, 26 Nov 1996 22:14:59 +0000 Message-Id: <22145965403068 at infowar.com> Hi, I am currently working on a thesis paper concerned with the subject of information warfare as it relates to the media. Specifically, my research question is: "Is it morally and ethically acceptable for military commanders and staff members to purposely mislead the media for the purpose of tactical deception and information warfare against one's enemies?" I will obviously be taking a look at both sides of this issue and would appreciate any information you may have on the subject. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To: "Winn Schwartau" Cc: Infowar at infowar.com Date: Tue, 7 Jan 1997 07:53:57 +0000 From: Maobrien95 at aol.com I'm looking for books that would detail British PsychOps, especially its use in Northern Ireland. Thank you very much for your time.My e-mail: Maobrien95 at aol.com Respectfully, Frank O'Brien ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To: "Betty G. O'Hearn" From: "Michael H. Sedge" Subject: Futuristic Battlefields Date: Sat, 28 Dec 1996 12:56:54 +0100 Dear Betty, Thanks in part to the input you provided and the quotes obtained through your resources, I was able to produce a feature on Cyber Warfare that will appear in the February issue of ARMED FORCES JOURNAL INTERNATIONAL, and perhaps other publications around the world. I am now working on a story which takes a look at the FUTURISTIC BATTLEFIELD and seek experts for quotes, insight, products, etc. Such things as robotic soldiers and unmanned aircraft will be discussed, as well as warfare controlled from romote sites. Any help, leads, manufacturers, etc., that you could provide would be helpful. Best regards & Happy New Year. Sincerely, Michael H. Sedge ARMED FORCES JOURNAL INTERNATIONAL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 21:29:26 -0500 To: infowar at infowar.com From: "Betty G. O'Hearn" Subject: IWAR Journal. The Journal of IWAR Intelligence Acquisition - is now being made available at http://www.iwar.org/. This journal is published by William Church, a distinquished journalist in the field. Current Issue: Spring 1997: Information Warfare Threat Model. Articles by Michael Wilson, Robert Steele, Philip H.J. Davies, Special Report on the IPTF, and an interview with Winn Schwartau. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To: Infowar at infowar.com From: "Betty G. O'Hearn" Subject: Discussion Forums Open On Monday, January 13, 1997 WWW.InfoWar.Com will begin hosting a series of discussion forums, available to anyone on the Internet. Everyone who logs onto the forums will also be provided with a mini-home-page (for free!) so other participants may get to know with whom they are interacting. The discussion forums may be accessed from the Infowar.Com Home Page by clicking on the "Digest, Discussion & Chat Groups" icon. The forum moderators will be: Moderator Topic Winn Schwartau Information Warfare and President, Interpact, Inc. Electronic Civil Defense Carolyn Meinel Hackers/Hacking Publisher of Happy Hacker Digest Matthew Devost Terrorism Systems Engineer, SAIC William Church IWAR Publisher of The Journal of IWAR Intelligence Acquisition Scott Brower EBR Electronic Bill of Rights/Privacy Executive Director, Electronic Frontiers Florida Robert Steele OSSINT President OPEN SOURCE SOLUTIONS, Inc. Unmoderated Viruses Unmoderated Infosec We welcome this distinguished group of moderators and encourage you to participate in these forums. Sign in and start posting! Have an idea for a new discussion forum? Want to be a moderator? Contact betty at infowar.com. _______________________________:) InfoWar.Com will also be introducing several hundred "chat" lines in the coming weeks. Keep contributing..... keep up your input. We are introducing these new modules that you have requested. Thanks for all of your invaluable support. Winn Schwartau and the incomparable staff at www.infowar.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ END Infowar Volume 2 No. 1 January 12, 1997 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ DIRECT REQUESTS to: list at infowar.com with one-line in the BODY, NOT in the subject line. Subscribe infowar TO JOIN GROUP Unsubscribe infowar TO LEAVE GROUP Help infowar TO RECEIVE HELP TO POST A MESSAGE: E-Mail to infowar at infowar.com _____________________________________________________ Infowar.Com Interpact, Inc. Winn Schwartau winn at infowar.com http://www.infowar.com 813-393-6600 Voice 813-393-6361 FAX Sponsor Opportunities/Comments/Help Betty G. O'Hearn Assistant to Winn Schwartau http://www.infowar.com betty at infowar.com 813-367-7277 Voice 813-363-7277 FAX From betty at infowar.com Sun Jan 12 20:04:38 1997 From: betty at infowar.com (Betty G. O'Hearn) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 20:04:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: InfoWarCon6 - Brussels, Belgium Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970113041116.00b22ca4@mail.infowar.com> D I S T R I B U T E W I D E L Y CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT InfoWarCon 6: "War By Other Means" Economic Espionage, CyberTerrorism and Information Assurance Brussels, Belgium May 8 - 9, 1997 Pre-Conference Tutorials: May 7, 1996 Sponsored by: National Computer Security Association / www.ncsa.com Winn Schwartau, Interpact, Inc. / www.infowar.com Open Source Solutions, Inc, / www.oss.net Honorary Chairperson: Judge Danielle Cailloux Investigating Magistrate, Member of the Committee to Control the Intelligence Services, Belgium Information Warfare is no longer just for the military or government. InfoWar is a legitimate concern for the private sector and law enforcement - everywhere. Hundreds of representatives from over thirty countries will interact at InfoWarCon 6 with world-class presenters in an open-source, unclassified forum to provide workable, real-world solutions to the commercial, legal and technical problems we face. Over two days, the three tracks and plenary sessions will focus on: 1. Military, Intelligence, Nation-States and Government Contractors. What are their special needs and concerns. Leaders from all areas will bring you current with their approaches. 2. Cyberterrorism and Crime: Law Enforcement, Domestic, National and International. Case histories and experience from those who know will provide the foundation for solutions and cooperation to a spreading problem. 3. The Private Sector and Commercial Infrastructure: Leading experts on information assurance will provide new models for security, management and infrastructure protection. Optional Pre-Conference Tutorials (May 7) > Three Pre-Conference tutorials will be offered to get the non-technical manager, law enforcement or government representative 'up to speed' on InfoWar: > >A. Open Source Intelligence. Robert Steele, ex-CIA case officer and intelligence professional, will teach you how and why the smart nation and competitive private company needs to use information gathering to his best advantage. A full day of extraordinary information and materials. > B. Information Security Basics. Dr. Mich Kabay, NCSA's Dir. of Education will take the non-technical manager on a three and one half hour tour of the fundamentals of information security. Essential knowledge for anyone involved with information warfare, cyberterrorism or defending against them. C. The Basics of Information Warfare and Cyberterrorism.Winn Schwartau, the man who wrote the books on Cyber-terrorism and Information Warfare, will teach the >non-technical participant the ins and outs in a fascinating 3 1/2 hour session. >For Registration Information > Kim Imler > Voice: (717) 241-3226 > Fax: (717) 243-8642 > Email: kimler at ncsa.com > WWW: www.Infowar.com > www.ncsa.com > >Sponsorship Opportunities - Multiple level sponsorship >opportunities and exhibit space is available. Contact: > Harry Brittain > Voice: (717) 241-3258 > Fax: (717) 243-8642 > Email: hbrittain at ncsa.com > >MARK YOUR CALENDARS: > >InfoWarCon 7, >Sept. 11-12, 1997 >Washington D.C. >Submit Abstracts and Papers to: >Betty at infowar.com DIRECT REQUESTS to: list at infowar.com with one-line in the BODY, NOT in the subject line. Subscribe infowar TO JOIN GROUP Unsubscribe infowar TO LEAVE GROUP Help infowar TO RECEIVE HELP TO POST A MESSAGE: E-Mail to infowar at infowar.com _____________________________________________________ Infowar.Com Interpact, Inc. Winn Schwartau winn at infowar.com http://www.infowar.com 813-393-6600 Voice 813-393-6361 FAX Sponsor Opportunities/Comments/Help Betty G. O'Hearn Assistant to Winn Schwartau http://www.infowar.com betty at infowar.com 813-367-7277 Voice 813-363-7277 FAX ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Betty G. O'Hearn Assistant to Winn Schwartau http://www.infowar.com betty at infowar.com 813-367-7277 Voice 813-363-7277 Data/FAX "Success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has overcome while trying to succeed. ~~~Booker T. Washington~~~ From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 12 20:18:47 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 20:18:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Igor asks what these examples prove... In-Reply-To: <4P2F1D1w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <199701130415.WAA11189@manifold.algebra.com> Quite honestly, I was grossly pissed off with Smirnov's post as well. It was not the smartest post of his. But you are not banned from posting, and do post (which is nice actually). I do apologize for this yesterday's message in scrm. - Igor. Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Here's another article from s.c.r.m where one of the moderators > verbally abuses a person banned from posting in that forum (myself :-). > The gratuitous abuse is totally off-topic and has no connection to the > flame thread it's in. > > That's what the lying cocksucker John Gilmore wants to be able to do > on his private mailing list - to post more lies which the victims of > his libel will not be allowed to refute. > > ]X-SCRM-Policy: http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/index.html > ]X-SCRM-Info-1: Send submissions to scrm at algebra.com > ]X-SCRM-Info-2: Send technical complaints to scrm-admin at algebra.com > ]X-SCRM-Info-3: Send complaints about policy to scrm-board at algebra.com > ]X-Comment: moderators do not necessarily agree or disagree with this article. > ]X-Robomod-Version: STUMP 1.1, by ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov) > ]Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 05:27:03 CST > ]From: vladimir at chinook.physics.utoronto.ca (Vladimir Smirnov) > ]Message-ID: <199701121028.FAA06007 at chinook.physics.utoronto.ca> > ]Subject: Re: Russian diplomats are pigs > ]Newsgroups: soc.culture.russian.moderated > ]X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP soc.culture.russian.moderated > ] > ]rqk10 at oes.amdahl.com (Roman Kostin) wrote: > ]> Po suschestvu, govorish'? Ya sejchas tebe skazhu po suschestvu. > ]> > ]> Tvoj kommentarij byl tsinichen, tup i beschelovechen. I kogda > ]> tebe na eto ukazyvayut, tebe sleduet izvinit'sya i zatknut'sya, > ]> a ne ogryzat'sya kak shavka. > ] > ] Narod, ja vas ubeditel'no proshu ne ustraivat' gryznju v > ]moderiruemoj newsgruppe. Kommentarij u Sashi, konechno, byl > ]tak sebe, no sobak na nego naveshali po polnoj programme, > ]kak budto on dejstvitel'no uzh chego-to takoe skazal. > ]Idi von (eto Kostinu) Dr. D.V.Ulissa popinaj, esli principial'nost' > ]v golovu udarila. Ili stremno? > ] > ]- Smirnov > ] > ] > ] > - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 12 20:23:00 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 20:23:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: STUMP In-Reply-To: <32d96d3c.flight@flight.hrnowl.lonestar.org> Message-ID: <199701130416.WAA11229@manifold.algebra.com> Paul Elliott wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Not too long ago, I attempted to post a PGP signed > message to a STUMP moderated newsgroup. Even though > the moderators approved my post, it never arrived > because of sme technical problem with PGP and STUMP. > The people running the newsgroup never could figure > out what went wrong, and my post never made it > in spite of the best efforts of those running the newsgroup. > > I advise caution with STUMP. The moderators most likely did not set one of the options correctly (STUMP_PARANOID_PGP should be set to NO for all newsgroups with crypto-ignorant readership). - Igor. From geo2 at usa.net Sun Jan 12 21:40:05 1997 From: geo2 at usa.net (geo2 at usa.net) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 21:40:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Checking debit Message-ID: <199701130446.UAA13794@ns2.accesscom.com> DEBIT YOUR CUSTOMERS' CHECKING ACCOUNTS ... COLLECT CHECK PAYMENTS FROM YOUR WEB PAGE, OVER THE PHONE, OR AS AN AUTOMATIC MONTHLY DEBIT! Close sales at your Web site, close telephone sales immediately, ship merchandise immediately(!) ...by drafting the customer's checking account. No more waiting in vain for "checks in the mail." This service increases your cash flow, and reduces the cost of billing, mailing, bookkeeping, and collections associated with your customers who pay by check...for far less than the cost of accepting credit cards! For more information about this new service, please click "reply" to respond to me at geo2 at usa.net. Best wishes, -George From unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu Sun Jan 12 21:55:10 1997 From: unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu (Internaut) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 21:55:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: sad Message-ID: <01BC00E3.C880ED40@s04-pm06.tnstate.campus.mci.net> I am sad that all the spam from companies will be gone soon. I enjoy thinking that perhaps 10% (or ~120) of the Cypherpunks along with me hit the reply button and type "remove" giving them a great return for their investment (pun intended :). ---------- From: PS[SMTP:pstone at lightspeed.bc.ca] Sent: Sunday, January 12, 1997 02.59 PM To: pstone at lightspeed.bc.ca Subject: Saw your post Hi there! I saw your post the other day and thought you might be interested in a decent offer on some excellent information. Start an excellent home business today!!! For a brochure that outlines THE TEN BEST OPPORTUNITES IN BUSINESS TODAY send me a self-addressed, stamped envelope. Mail to : M.K. Press 1310 W.67th Ave. Vancouver. B.C. Canada V6P 2T4 Please write "Offer # 4322" by hand on the envelope to me. Never want to hear from me again? Simple. Hit reply, put in the Subject field, and send it on back.. Thanks. From spanky at europa.com Sun Jan 12 22:23:00 1997 From: spanky at europa.com (Pass me another!) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 22:23:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA over Rubics cube? In-Reply-To: <199701111858.KAA09264@miron.vip.best.com> Message-ID: <32D9D750.7053@europa.com> cypherpunks at toad.com wrote: > > Just for fun, not that I am sugesting it as a serious encryption > method, but has anyone tried exponetion cyphers on the group > defined by the Rubics cube? :) well....I guess you didn't want a reply to your real email address, considering you'd be flamed like a 'mother$##@*(%'. anyways....Just so YOU know I figured out the infamous Rubik's cube when I was 9 years old...no solution book, nothing, and beat the world record(ooooo what an accomplishment). I just figured it out...so if I was 9.........geee what do you think? I could sit down and give you the mathmatical computations...but I have better things to do. I hope your just trying to have a better understanding of cryptography standards, and future methods. Maybe reading some information on algorithms....that might help....maybe calc 101 or ignorant 111..or jeez...do you even know binary? -spanky From frantz at netcom.com Sun Jan 12 22:41:46 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 22:41:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970111003625.0069d61c@mail.io.com> Message-ID: At 9:10 AM -0800 1/11/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >We should all understand that forgeries in the names of preapproved >people are only a SYMPTOM of a problem, not a problem in and of itself. >The true problem in such case would be that the forgers feel that they >are treated unfairly by moderators. Such people may think that the >purpose of moderation is to get rid of their persons altogether. > >Therefore, if moderators face a problem of forgeries and perceive a need >to turn this authentication option on, they should step back and this >what THEY did wrong. Did they give the forgers an impression that >moderators want to silence them? Do they treat everyone, including the >former "problem" people, fairly and equally? Igor, I must disagree with you in detail. I believe that some of the problem this list is experiencing is because one or more people wish to destroy it. They are attempting to fill this list with so much junk that all the people who read it will go elsewhere. In the recent past, they have subscribed it to other high-volume mailing lists, and given its address to direct marketers as a "person" interested in sales pitches. Perhaps these people already feel they are being treated unfairly by the management of the unmoderated list. These people will be perfectly happy to forge the names of preapproved posters to further their attack. While I suggest that, if we have preapproved posters, we should try it first without digital signatures, I predict that forgeries will be used to get around this policy. I note in passing that at least one person has threatened to, "KILL cypherpunks !!!". ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Jan 12 23:38:35 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Sun, 12 Jan 1997 23:38:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Menwith Hill / NSA Message-ID: <85314110320182@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> >At DefCon III, someone had a video on these ladies ("granny hackers" was >the comment from the audience) who explore[d] the Menwith Hill NSA base in >the UK. The video was shown twice from what I remember, once in the main >speaker room and once in the video room. If anyone knows anything about >this video then please email me [tobin at mail.edm.net], especially if you >know WHO had it, where I could get a copy, etc. Also, I'd like to hear >about any other similar type things. (crypto, NSA, etc) I talked to the guy who made the documentary (Duncan Campbell) an hour or two ago, he's sending me the transcripts when he gets back to the UK. I'll see if I can get his permission to post them to the web. He's been doing this sort of thing for about 25 years, and has some really neat stories to tell about his run-ins with the UK government. Peter. From spanky at europa.com Mon Jan 13 00:00:17 1997 From: spanky at europa.com (Pass me another!) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 00:00:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: BoS: InfoWarCon6 - Brussels, Belgium In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970113041116.00b22ca4@mail.infowar.com> Message-ID: <32D9EE1D.6450@europa.com> Betty G. O'Hearn wrote: > > D I S T R I B U T E W I D E L Y > > CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENT > > InfoWarCon 6: > "War By Other Means" > Economic Espionage, CyberTerrorism and Information Assurance > Brussels, Belgium > > May 8 - 9, 1997 > Pre-Conference Tutorials: May 7, 1996 > > Sponsored by: > National Computer Security Association / www.ncsa.com > Winn Schwartau, Interpact, Inc. / www.infowar.com > Open Source Solutions, Inc, / www.oss.net > > Honorary Chairperson: > Judge Danielle Cailloux > Investigating Magistrate, > Member of the Committee to Control the Intelligence Services, Belgium > > Information Warfare is no longer just for the military or government. InfoWar is a legitimate concern for the private sector and law enforcement - everywhere. Hundreds of representatives from over thirty countries will interact at > InfoWarCon 6 with world-class presenters in an open-source, unclassified forum to provide workable, real-world solutions to the commercial, legal and technical problems we face. > > Over two days, the three tracks and plenary sessions will focus on: > > 1. Military, Intelligence, Nation-States and Government Contractors. What are their special needs and concerns. Leaders from all areas will bring you current with their > approaches. > > 2. Cyberterrorism and Crime: Law Enforcement, Domestic, National and International. Case histories and experience from those who know will provide the foundation for solutions and cooperation to a spreading problem. > > 3. The Private Sector and Commercial Infrastructure: Leading experts on information assurance will provide new models for security, management and infrastructure > protection. > > Optional Pre-Conference Tutorials (May 7) > > > Three Pre-Conference tutorials will be offered to get the non-technical manager, law enforcement or government representative 'up to speed' on InfoWar: > > > >A. Open Source Intelligence. Robert Steele, ex-CIA case officer and intelligence professional, will teach you how and why the smart nation and competitive private company needs to use information gathering to his best advantage. > A full day of extraordinary information and materials. > > > B. Information Security Basics. Dr. Mich Kabay, NCSA's Dir. of Education will take the non-technical manager on a three and one half hour tour of the fundamentals of > information security. Essential knowledge for anyone involved with information warfare, cyberterrorism or defending against them. > > C. The Basics of Information Warfare and Cyberterrorism.Winn Schwartau, the man who wrote the books on Cyber-terrorism and Information Warfare, will teach the > >non-technical participant the ins and outs in a fascinating 3 1/2 hour session. > > >For Registration Information > > Kim Imler > > Voice: (717) 241-3226 > > Fax: (717) 243-8642 > > Email: kimler at ncsa.com > > WWW: www.Infowar.com > > www.ncsa.com > > > >Sponsorship Opportunities - Multiple level sponsorship > >opportunities and exhibit space is available. Contact: > > Harry Brittain > > Voice: (717) 241-3258 > > Fax: (717) 243-8642 > > Email: hbrittain at ncsa.com > > > >MARK YOUR CALENDARS: > > > >InfoWarCon 7, > >Sept. 11-12, 1997 > >Washington D.C. > >Submit Abstracts and Papers to: > >Betty at infowar.com > > DIRECT REQUESTS to: list at infowar.com with one-line in the BODY, NOT > in the subject line. > > Subscribe infowar TO JOIN GROUP > Unsubscribe infowar TO LEAVE GROUP > Help infowar TO RECEIVE HELP > TO POST A MESSAGE: E-Mail to infowar at infowar.com > _____________________________________________________ > Infowar.Com > Interpact, Inc. > Winn Schwartau > winn at infowar.com > http://www.infowar.com > 813-393-6600 Voice > 813-393-6361 FAX > > Sponsor Opportunities/Comments/Help > > Betty G. O'Hearn > Assistant to Winn Schwartau > http://www.infowar.com > betty at infowar.com > 813-367-7277 Voice > 813-363-7277 FAX > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Betty G. O'Hearn Assistant to Winn Schwartau > http://www.infowar.com > betty at infowar.com > 813-367-7277 Voice 813-363-7277 Data/FAX > > "Success is to be measured not so much by the position that one has reached in life as by the obstacles which he has overcome while trying to succeed. ~~~Booker T. Washington~~~ > > Freedomistsssss....beware. Get involved. Or we lose! -spanky From AwakenToMe at aol.com Mon Jan 13 00:48:38 1997 From: AwakenToMe at aol.com (AwakenToMe at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 00:48:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ma Bell Message-ID: <970113034802_38185389@emout15.mail.aol.com> In a message dated 97-01-11 15:36:31 EST, mindbenders at hotmail.com (LoRd oRiOn) writes: << .why do Telco people and the government blame us hackers for costing them billions of dollars a year to fix the security holes that they have??? >> Considering there is a LARGE workload on the employees as it is.. they dont need more work suddenly that is unneeded. Basically EVERY system has some kinds of security holes. If noone knows about them.. then it isnt a problem. If someone is exploiting them and using money from the company illegaly (free phone service) .. even though it may only be 5 of you doing it.. it has a LARGE potential to become globally exploited by tons of people. So.. they have to invest time and money to research the hole and fix it. Thats why. From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Mon Jan 13 02:17:19 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 02:17:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701120729.BAA03801@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sat, 11 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Jew-hating paranoid liar Rich Graves writes: > > > > > > > > > > I would not favor a moderation policy that gave carte blanche to "good guys" > > > > > to talk about whatever they wanted ("libertarian bullshit" in Chudov's > > > > > delicate phrasing), but required posts by "bad guys" like Dale (and in certai > > > > > threads, me -- you never know) to be "about crypto." That's a hypocritical > > > > > double standard. > > > > > > > > Here's another typical post from Igor's soc.culture.russian.moderated (NOT). > > > > > > > > Igor Chudov, a moderator of s.c.r.m, calls M. Kagalenko "envious eunich", but > > > > Kagalenko has been banned from posting to s.c.r.m because he objected to its > > > > creation (i.e. he's on the "blacklist" and his submissions are auto-rejected). > > > > > > but none of the posts in question had ever been posted to scrm. > > > > You know well that Kagalenko is most rejected in scrm, > > Poor guy ...not one post, how can that be..? > > How can that be? A good question. It can be because Misha submits > dozens of articles containing autogenerated garbage. He does it because > he does not like our newsgroup. We moderators have no other choice > but to reject these autogenerated articles because our charter prohibits > us from approving them. Sure. > To protect moderators from mailbombing our charter tells us to put > such mailbombers into our blacklist, which I do. OK. > Once a month I remove Misha from our blacklist, and let him know that > he indeed had been removed. That usually results in another flood of > bogus submissions. Well, i trust your judgment, not sure of other moderators. [...] > Apparently Misha likes it this way, and it probably lets him feel more > important than he really is. Well, if that is so, I have no problem with > that. > > But I will not bow to him. :) > That's the sad story. Thank you . From geoff at commtouch.co.il Mon Jan 13 05:49:18 1997 From: geoff at commtouch.co.il (Geoff Klein) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 05:49:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Product Manager for hire. Message-ID: <19970113154559geoff@geoff> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cypherpunks at toad.com, coderpunks at toad.com Date: Mon Jan 13 15:45:49 1997 Product Manager with extensive experience in messaging and security is seeking a challenging position in a warm climate. For resume see: http://members.tripod.com/~geoff_cv/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Geoff Klein, Pronto Secure Product Manager http://www.commtouch.com, Tel: 972-9-963445 (ext 130), Fax: 972-9-961053 For my PGP public key send mail with subject: Get Key - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBMto8kULv5OMYFK1FAQHChwP/a5d7lG7jD7ULMlfsh5Cfo4DsShbwuTij EB2C/8G0fvg4uGlhMDWr+q2u2R5K5laEM/a9yySn79iBpLQ+viDOphUC5vfTknbo trqggHQUhjlDYftwTAJdnBNXh/XAfGCgoPpHJ4pYOEYs+mVpsla1a9w7SFuQUb18 zKwP1hKlacI= =F8SZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From haystack at holy.cow.net Mon Jan 13 05:59:44 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 05:59:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701131342.IAA04224@holy.cow.net> Timmy May's mother attempted to pro-choice the unwanted little bastard by fishing with a coat hanger in her giant cunt, but failed miserably to pull the rabbit and succeeded only in scraping out the contents of little Timmy's fetal cranium (not much to begin with). O |'| /\ | | Timmy May /\ \-------| / / |-------| From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU Mon Jan 13 06:53:14 1997 From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 06:53:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: List of reliable remailers Message-ID: <199701131450.GAA22048@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu> I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = " cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{'alpha'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{'nymrod'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle ?"; $remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"death"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent post"; $remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; catalyst at netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth at ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura at replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 13 Jan 97 6:48:59 PST remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- lucifer lucifer at dhp.com ++++++++++++ 37:22 99.99% nym config at nym.alias.net **#*#*++#+-# 20:08 99.99% weasel config at weasel.owl.de ++++++-++++ 1:15:41 99.96% mix mixmaster at remail.obscura.com +++++++.-++* 2:25:45 99.91% replay remailer at replay.com *+* +--+*+** 35:43 99.87% winsock winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net ------+---- 2:54:30 99.81% balls remailer at huge.cajones.com *+******+ ** 4:00 99.67% cyber alias at alias.cyberpass.net +++*+ +* +*+ 35:01 99.61% middle middleman at jpunix.com ----+++++ -+ 53:56 99.60% exon remailer at remailer.nl.com #**#**** ++# 2:26 99.24% squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de ++++ +-++ + 1:18:06 99.21% dustbin dustman at athensnet.com +_.--++-++- 4:39:11 99.18% extropia remail at miron.vip.best.com --- ------- 4:46:40 98.01% reno middleman at cyberpass.net - --++++ + 1:05:02 97.84% lead mix at zifi.genetics.utah.edu ++++++ 35:13 95.73% haystack haystack at holy.cow.net + ####++* 39:45 74.33% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 13 07:46:10 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 07:46:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now? Message-ID: <853170077.1023902.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > I am just starting at this. I know that part of RSA/PGP's strength comes from > the size key you choose. What prevents someone from writting a 2048 bit key? > Is it because computers can't handle it? Is 1024 top of the prime number > size right now? Am I way off track? 2048 bit keys are quite commonly used but the reason that arbitrarily large keys are not good is because of the amount of time taken to generate the keys then encrypt and decrypt messages with them, PGP uses a hybrid system whereby the rsa algorithm encrypts a one time session IDEA key, a longer RSA key would result in unacceptably long waits for most users when encrypting and decrypting messages. In the end it comes down to a trade off between speed and security and 1024 bits is a sensible compromise for most uses. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 13 08:17:11 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 08:17:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <853170077.1023898.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > Comment: "What do you mean by 'extensive research'." > Reply: Benchmark tests. Source code comparisons. Documentations of other > algorithms. "Applied Cryptography". So you have read applied cryptography and decided that qualifies you as a cryptographer? > Comment: "I've never even heard of IMDMP before. Is this a joke?" > Reply: UDCM (IMDMP) came out January 1st, 1997. How do you think successful > companies start anyway, with millions of dollars upfront? DataET Research is > a relatively new company. No new company should be dabbling with new algorithms, an assurance of a high probability of security comes with years of attempted cryptanalysis. > Comment: "What kind of industry standard is IMDMP above?" > Reply: 128-bit encryption. Average DES is 128. PGP tops 1024. IDEA goes at > 128. RSA the same. Full security IMDMP is 2048-bit. Any other questions? This is irrelevant rubbish, if there is a cryptanalytic attack on your algorithm a brute force attack becomes unecessary and key size is not of consequence. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 13 08:28:29 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 08:28:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: <853170081.1023947.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > > > I'm looking for ciphertext analysis tools -- > > > > What analysis tools did you use? Where can I get a publicly available copy? > > > > I just wrote a little c program for frequency analysis, but would > also be interested if such set of tools existed. > > - Igor. The DIEHARD battery of tools, as seen on the Marsaglia random number cd published by Dr. Marsaglia of Florida university, a notable figure in PRNG design and analysis sounds appropriate for your purposes. It performs a number of statistical tests which may be useful, though I personally happen not to trust statistical tests to a great extent under most circumstances. If you cannot find these tools after a web search for DIEHARD or Marsaglia email me and I will send you a copy... Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From Scottauge at aol.com Mon Jan 13 08:44:59 1997 From: Scottauge at aol.com (Scottauge at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 08:44:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA over Rubiks Cube Message-ID: <970113114129_373924985@emout15.mail.aol.com> This problably wouldn't be to cool a thing to do. A fella named Douglas Hopstader(?) wrote a book called Meta-Mathematics (same guy who wrote The Golden Knot). In this book he developed (or showed, forget who should get credit) an algorithm to solve Rubiks cube from any beginning state. It makes for interesting reading, but kills any attempt to use the cube as a cipher machine. From gen2600 at aracnet.com Mon Jan 13 08:47:32 1997 From: gen2600 at aracnet.com (Genocide) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 08:47:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! In-Reply-To: <199701101909.OAA12433@Arl-Mail-Svc-1.compuserve.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 10 Jan 1997 ice at win.bright.net wrote: > Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If > you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the > Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! > Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm > We Are THE BEST!! > So Check us OUT! Damn, maybe I should go watch the movie "Hackers" so I can be elite too.... Genocide Head of the Genocide2600 Group ============================================================================ **Coming soon! www.Genocide2600.com! ____________________ *---===| |===---* *---===| Genocide |===---* "You can be a king or a street *---===| 2600 |===---* sweeper, but everyone dances with the *---===|__________________|===---* Grim Reaper." Email: gen2600 at aracnet.com Web: http://www.aracnet.com/~gen2600 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. It is by the Mountain Dew that the thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. ================================================================================ From njhm at ns.njh.com Mon Jan 13 09:02:04 1997 From: njhm at ns.njh.com (Nicolas J. Hammond) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 09:02:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA over Rubics cube? In-Reply-To: <32D9D750.7053@europa.com> Message-ID: <199701131721.MAA16352@ns.njh.com> Pass me another! wrote ... > cypherpunks at toad.com wrote: > > > > Just for fun, not that I am sugesting it as a serious encryption > > method, but has anyone tried exponetion cyphers on the group > > defined by the Rubics cube? :) > > well....I guess you didn't want a reply to your real email address, > considering you'd be flamed like a 'mother$##@*(%'. anyways....Just so > YOU know I figured out the infamous Rubik's cube when I was 9 years > old...no solution book, nothing, and beat the world record(ooooo what an > accomplishment). I just figured it out...so if I was 9.........geee > what do you think? I could sit down and give you the mathmatical > computations...but I have better things to do. I hope your just trying > to have a better understanding of cryptography standards, and future > methods. Maybe reading some information on algorithms....that might > help....maybe calc 101 or ignorant 111..or jeez...do you even know > binary? > > -spanky Am impressed that you were able to do this aged 9, though 9-yrs-olds have been known to win US regional championships (back in the early 80s). The mathematics behind the Rubik's cube are fairly complex and involve set theory. One of the easiest ways to solve the cube is to find commutators such that A.B.A'.B' can affect a small group. Choose A and B so that they intersect in that small group. Solve the cube by solving a small area and then incrementally build on that area until you have your solution. You need 4 "moves" - one to flip corners, one to move corners, one to flip edges and one to move edges. They are relatively easy to find if you know what to look for. There are two "world records" associated with the cube - one is the fastest time to solve a cube, normally done in competitions, one is the shortest algorithm in terms of number of moves. The former makes great TV. Minh Thai of the US won the only world competition I'm aware of. His average time was 23 seconds. Problem with competitions is that occasionally you can solve it very quickly because of the initially pattern and that is why competitions use averages, typically of at least 3 different timings. I assume this is your "I beat the world record" claim. It is common for someone to occasionally solve a cube in under 30 seconds, it is almost impossible to get an average under about 25 seconds. [The only exception is what magicians Paul Daniels (British will know of him) and David Copperfield (Americans know of him) have done on their TV shows. They take a cube in front of a studio audience, throw it up in the air and it is solved by the time it comes down. No camera tricks involved. Paul did his in a show around 1981-1982, I saw David's TV show around 1988 but it was a repeat so I don't know when it first aired.] The other "world record", shortest number of moves, is of much more interest to mathematicians. God's algorithm (the theoretically minimum number of moves) is 18 (see article on "Magic Cubology", Scientific American, either March 81 or July 82). In others words you can, in theory, generate any pattern (or the reverse, solve any pattern) in 18 moves. The shortest actual algorithm used to be 52 moves my Morwen B. Thistlewaite of England (early 1980s) however I hear that the Dutch Cube Club got this down to below 35 (1992). Getting closer to God's Algorithm is an interesting exercise in Set Theory and in solving puzzles. It has some relevance to Cryptography, but not too much. Difference is in the mathematical basis of the underlying algorithms. -- Nicolas Hammond NJH Security Consulting, Inc. njh at njh.com 211 East Wesley Road 404 262 1633 Atlanta 404 812 1984 (Fax) GA 30305-3774 From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 13 09:35:03 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 09:35:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: <853170082.1023956.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > * The two 'e's in the first word have different ciphertext equivalents, > > so it's not a single-alphabet substitution > yes Could be homophonic substitution or possibly (more probably, in my estimation, polygram substitution. There is also the possibility of a polyalphabetic cipher... > I also likes "follows": "vkbcjtp" note how ll gets translated to "bc". > That suggest that after some encryption of each letter from the plaintext > there is a consecutively increasing number added. This tends to suggest polyalphabetic substitution. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 13 09:37:15 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 09:37:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: ok, htf do I get off this list? Message-ID: <853170087.1023977.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > OK, I've now sent THREE requests to majordomo to get off this list.. I got > a reply back 4 hours ago saying I was off, and the next two said I wasn't > a member of the list. Interesting list (minus the spamcrap obviously) and > I think the moderation will be a good thing Just wait a few hours more, I would expect it`s just a backlog and you will be properly unsuscribed soon. If you want to subscribe try filtering your mail to remove things you don`t want to read, this can cut the list down to a more manageable 20 or 30 messages a day although I read nearly all of the 100 or so messages a day passing through here. > , BUT the 20 emails I've received > in the last 4 hours (since I 'officially' unsubbed) is (to say the least) far > more than I (or any reasonable mortal) can deal with. Absolutely, you will find all of the long term suscribers on this list are immortal. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From dcoelhok at nermal.santarosa.edu Mon Jan 13 09:37:36 1997 From: dcoelhok at nermal.santarosa.edu (KrAzY Girl) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 09:37:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fukkin Elite! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: you guys aren't the "fukkin elite" if you have to go around tell people that you're all that. youre not. give me a "fukkin" break and take a "fukkin" english class. > > On Fri, 10 Jan 1997 ice at win.bright.net wrote: > > > Check out our Homepage, We're THe ElITE! We'll Top your asses by Far, If you want to be Elite come to us. We're Here to help you become the Elite! If you think you can Top I.C.E. Then Prove It AssHoleZ! > > Homepage:www.geocities.com/~pentiumru/icehtml.htm > > We Are THE BEST!! > > So Check us OUT! > > > From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 13 09:42:45 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 09:42:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: <853170082.1023956.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <199701131737.LAA04428@manifold.algebra.com> paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > > > * The two 'e's in the first word have different ciphertext equivalents, > > > so it's not a single-alphabet substitution > > yes > > Could be homophonic substitution or possibly (more probably, in my > estimation, polygram substitution. There is also the possibility of a > polyalphabetic cipher... > > > I also likes "follows": "vkbcjtp" note how ll gets translated to "bc". > > That suggest that after some encryption of each letter from the plaintext > > there is a consecutively increasing number added. > > This tends to suggest polyalphabetic substitution. what do you mean, polyalphabetic substitution? - Igor. From blancw at microsoft.com Mon Jan 13 10:00:59 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 10:00:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: spamming Message-ID: From: MOESCH at aol.com I saw your posting. What is your feelings about spamming? ..................................................... It is presumptuous and annoying. This list is aimed at discussions of a distinct subject, and not intended to be available, like Usenet, to random disturbances from disinterested parties. .. Blanc > From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 13 10:38:44 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 10:38:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: New Carmen Sandiego shows announced In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Path: perun!news2.panix.com!panix!news.columbia.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.msfc.nasa.gov!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.erols.net!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!news.idt.net!enews.sgi.com!lll-winken.llnl.gov!fugue.clari.net!funny-request From: verax at mindspring.com (Serenleono, the Serene Lion) Newsgroups: rec.humor.funny Subject: New Carmen Sandiego shows announced Keywords: chuckle, swearing, racial stereotypes Message-ID: Date: Fri, 10 Jan 97 19:30:03 EST Organization: Lord Tower Productions (USA) Lines: 57 Approved: funny-request at clari.net BOSTON, M. A. (Freuder) - The two most popular children's educational game shows -- "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?" and "Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego?" -- now have two new siblings, according to an announcement made today by WGHB Boston, one of the production entities that owns the popular programs. "Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?" is a game show which challenges young contestants on their knowledge of world geography while they "track down" the infamous villain Carmen Sandiego. Similarly, "Where in Time is Carmen Sandiego?" quizes children about ancient and modern history. Because of the enormous positive response received from educators, parents' groups, and kids alike, WGHB Boston, WPED Pittsburgh, and the Incorporation for Public Broadcasting this week announced a new set of television programs to expand their children's educational programming group. The two new incarnations will be entitled "Where Dat Carmen Bitch At?" which challenges contestants on their knowledge of racial stereotypes, and "Where the Fuck is Carmen Sandiego?" which quizes young contestants on their knowledge of the human reproductive system. from the first broadcast of: WHERE DAT CARMEN BITCH AT? QUERIST: "Okay, contestants, the next question is, 'What do you call the white man when he oppresses your people?" CONTESTANT TIMMY: "A 'honkey'?" CONTESTANT TRISHA: "I answer, 'a jive-ass mother fucker'?" CONTESTANT LAWANDA: "I also say, 'a jive-ass mutha fucka.'" QUERIST: "Right you are, Trisha and Lawanda! And may the white man never forget what he has wrought against the tribe of Shabaaz." from the first broadcast of: WHERE THE FUCK IS CARMEN SANDIEGO? QUERIST: "Okay, contestants, here's the next question in our 'testosterone teaser round': What is the name for fellatio during which the penis is taken into the throat?" CONTESTANT TIMMY: "Uh, I answer a 'Madonna mouthwash'?" CONTESTANT TRISHA: "The 'mother of all blow jobs'?" CONTESTANT LAWANDA: "That's nasty! Momma, get me off this show!" -- Selected by Jim Griffith. MAIL your joke to funny at clari.net. Attribute the joke's source if at all possible. A Daemon will auto-reply. Remember: Only ONE joke per submission. Extra jokes may be rejected. For the full submission guidelines, see http://comedy.clari.net/rhf/ From azur at netcom.com Mon Jan 13 10:47:59 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 10:47:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTA papers Message-ID: I came across a couple of very good Office of Technology Assessment papers, "Electronic Surveillance in a Digital Age (July 1995)." Download the .pdf at: http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1995/9513_n.html Another paper sure to be of interest to many CPs is the excellent "Information Technologies for the Control of Money Laundering (September 1995)." Get the .pdf at: http://www.wws.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1995/9529_n.html Its too bad OTA got the budgetary ax. I met several of the staff and I regarded them highly. -- Steve From nobody at replay.com Mon Jan 13 10:57:58 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 10:57:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] U.S.S. Liberty Message-ID: <199701131857.TAA06478@basement.replay.com> Timmy C[unt] Maya's father, an idiot, stumbled across Timmy C[unt] Maya's mother, an imbecile, when she had no clothes on. Nine months later she had a little moron. \\\\\|///// \\\\|//// < * | * > | * | \( . )/ \___/ From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 13 11:01:23 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 11:01:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater Message-ID: <199701131901.LAA28570@toad.com> At 06:04 PM 1/9/97 -0500, Black Unicorn wrote: >On Wed, 8 Jan 1997, Mark M. wrote: > ... >Sentencing enhancements: > >There is a big book called the Federal Sentencing Guidelines Handbook (or >some such). To arrive at the appropriate sentence range, you add up the >points of all the offenses the defendant was convicted of (Assume Bank >Fraud is 18 points, Murder 35 or whatever- I dont remember them offhand) >and run across a chart which has "criminal history catagory" on the >vertical axis. Where the two meet gives you the sentence range. I'm not >near my office right now, but if there is enough interest I will dig up >the current handbook and run a sample sentencing through. > >The most common one I see is "Victims helpless or infirm" which usually >boosts 2 to 5 points. > >Sentencing enhancements are not double jeapordy either. I don't see how >you can argue they are. For example, there is a provision in bank fraud >sentencing guidelines which enhances the sentence according to the size of >the loss, and I believe there is a kicker if the financial institution >folds. > >I believe the highest base offense level was "Espionage" or some such. > >There are also sentencing limiters. "Defendant displays clear remorse." >I think is one. > >Go out to a law book store and take a look at the guideline book. It's >actually a lot of fun. "Ok, say I killed my wife for her coke stash and >recruited my brother to dump the body..." > ... >> In one case, the defendant was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent >> to distribute but was found not guilty of possession of a firearm related to >> a drug charge (apparently, this is a crime). > >It's both a crime and an enhancement for most federal drug offenses. > I have seen in the paper where a person has been convicted of using a scanner in the commition of a felony. In my opinion, this is exactly how crypto would be a crime, when using it in the commission of another crime. In most cases, it seems, the scanner is used to monitor the police bands so that the criminals will have advance warning when to hide thier actions. Of course, around here, a person owning a scanner for monitoring the police and fire bands is normal. It is just one more way of gathering news. Please correct me if any of my facts are in error. From sunder at brainlink.com Mon Jan 13 11:45:37 1997 From: sunder at brainlink.com (Ray Arachelian) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 11:45:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701110345.VAA02052@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 10 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > Does not the moderated list, moderated by YOU, already exist? > > I am confused. It is not the only one, however it doesn't run at the toad.com level. > > What difference does it make if a message is delayed for 10-30 minutes? > > Why is it a bad idea or suspicious? If you post something and it doesn't > > It is indeed suspicious because it raises a possibility of > concealed human involvement. What kind of concealed human involvement? Running a raw list + a moderated list doubles the traffic. Running a moderated + flames list keeps the traffic the same. What's there to conceal when a flames list exists? If your threat model is that paranoid, what's to stop someone now from intercepting traffic from toad.com from the sendmail queues? Mail gets sent (typically, not sure about toad) every 15 minutes, that's enough time for human interaction. What's the difference? > > The point was to optimize the sendmail to send moderated messages first. > > What does that optimise if there is a more or less continuous traffic? > That's a non-answer. Cute, ask a question, then answer it yourself for me? If there is continous traffic, it's because of the flames that are autogenerated. There's been a rare day when there has ever been continous traffic. =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian | "If you're gonna die, die with your|./|\. ..\|/..|sunder at sundernet.com|boots on; If you're gonna try, just |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |stick around; Gonna cry? Just move along|\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |you're gonna die, you're gonna die!" |.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"| --Iron Maiden "Die With Your Boots on"|..... ======================== http://www.sundernet.com ========================= From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 13 11:45:40 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 11:45:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: It's a great new year! telemarketers and solicitors Message-ID: <199701131945.LAA29089@toad.com> At 11:06 PM 1/9/97 -0500, relia at juno.com wrote: ... > You have the RIGHT to have negative >information removed in many instances. My partner and I have put together >an easy to read, easy to use manual that will explain your rights and may help >you restore your credit to A+ status. Why pay an attorney $2,000 or some >credit counselor $500 or more to do exactly what you can do for yourself? > >For less than $15, you can help yourself to better credit. We'll give you >all the tools you need and explain exactly what to do. ... >You've probably seen other offers or similar credit repair packages that >promise overnight results. Anyone who promises a quick overnight fix is >*lying* to you. It takes time and perseverance to fix your bad credit. >But, it can be done! ... >Don't get ripped off and don't take bad advice that encourages you to break >the law! Our system WORKS! Our credit repair manual will show you step by >step how to do it yourself - and it's not hard to do! ... > We purchased a >mailing list of folks who should be interested in various products that >we produce, but mailing lists can be wrong, and we don't want to take your >time again unnecessarily. Thanks for your help! > I understand that freedom of speech is a basic right, and I understand the nature of public discourse which is unhindered being more valuable, even if the signal to noise ratio is higher. I also subscribe to the idea that in a forum where only speech is possible, a persons use of that speech is the representation of that person. (Not that it never is otherwise.) What I'm trying to get at is, when does freedom of speech in a "speech only" environment" become soliciting? To me, though it is only my opinion, it seems that a telemarketer wishing to offer wares to a group on a mailing list should get permission from the lists maintainer. I apologize if this is already the case, as my accusations would be pointless. To me, it seems to be a breach of conduct for a company to use a mailing list that is not thier own as a mass mailing technique. Again, these are only my personal opinions. From sales at quantcom.com Mon Jan 13 12:09:51 1997 From: sales at quantcom.com (CV Communications) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:09:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Customers For You !! Message-ID: <199701131957.OAA15278@vineyard.net> The following message has been brought to you by CV Communications. If you would like advertising rates and information, send an email to info at quantcom.com or visit our website http://www.quantcom.com/CVcom If you prefer NOT to receive promotional messages inthe future, send an email to remove at quantcom.com CV Communications BULK EMAIL ADVERTISING SERVICE OFFERS: * GUARANTEED RESPONSE RATE! * HIGHEST QUALITY LIST (compiled 100% in-house, never bought or re-sold, continuously updated and maintained)! * WE SEND ALL MAIL! (never get shut off by your ISP!) * LARGEST DATABASE (over 5 million email addresses)! * LOWEST RATES IN THE INDUSTRY! * 100% APPROVED FINANCING (no credit checks - you are APPROVED)! * WE OFFER WEB PAGE HOSTING AND OTHER RELATED SERVICES AS WELL * COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES INCLUDED FREE OF CHARGE (email forwarding, flame filtering, autoresponders, copy design assistance)! * COMPLETE RANGE OF SERVICE OFFERINGS (stand-alone bulk email, co-op "MEGA-MAILER", custom-built targeted mailings)! * REFERENCES FROM HAPPY CLIENTS! * VISIT OUR WEB SITE AT http://www.quantcom.com/CVcom For complete details on our services, pricing, no-nonsense response guarantee, and all other pertinent info, call our sales department @ (603) 772-4096, or send an email to info at quantcom.com. When requesting info via email, please be sure to include your voice phone # and best time to call, unless you would prefer not to be contacted via telephone to follow up. From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Mon Jan 13 12:21:50 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:21:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: <199701132018.MAA22362@peregrine.eng.sun.com> I ran a quick Kappa test on it. There was a nice fat spike at key length 25, as somebody else suggested, but an almost perfect correlation at 100. The message is almost certainly a simple polyalphabetic cipher with keylength 100. I've been playing with it, and have maybe 5% of it decoded. It's full of really blatent clues. Kind of fun. From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Mon Jan 13 12:25:06 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:25:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: <199701132023.MAA22372@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > what do you mean, polyalphabetic substitution? Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it refers to a cipher where each character is encrypted individually, using a different monoalphabetic cipher for each one. The ciphers repeat after a certain period, usually the key length. Vigenere is the simplest polyalphabetic cipher of them all, with the individual ciphers simply being ROT-n. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 13 12:47:11 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:47:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: sendmail-type thing for Windows Message-ID: <199701132047.MAA29859@toad.com> At 12:00 PM 1/10/97 -0600, Igor Chudov wrote: >Hi, > >Does anyone know of a simple program for windows that can, like >sendmail, work as a mail agent ans send mail messages from its stdin? I >am interested in sending email messages from Windoze boxes as part of >some automated process driven by .BAT files. > >i.e., what I need is a program that I could invoke like this > >DOS> sendmail some at address.com >From: sender at originator.com >To: some at address.com >Subject: hello > >hello > I don't know if this will help you, but, I have found that by typing win winmine.exe at the dos prompt, I am taken straight to minesweeper. The program manager window is minimized in this example. It seems that most of windows programs, when accessed from File/Run act like command line programs, this is how the File Manager can bring up a text file in the Write program. I haven't tried it, but you might try nesting arguments, for instance WIN WRITE FILE.TXT to see if it comes right up into Write, working on file.txt. I will have to get back to you on rather or not this works, but if it does, and someone has cracked the windows macro Recorder, such as what you described should be possible from a batch file. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 13 12:54:45 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 12:54:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [NOISE] Re: IMPORTANT: Additional information about UDCM. Message-ID: <199701132054.MAA29945@toad.com> At 02:13 PM 1/10/97 -0600, Igor Chudov wrote: ... >I am also wondering, I am listed as visitor 189 on his web site. Under >most optimistic assumptions, if *every* visitor bought his product, he would >have made $40*188 = $7520. Of course, it is possible that so many people visited his site that the counter started over. For instance, if the counter had 8 digits, perhaps you were visitor number 10000189. Just a thought. From skelly at southeast.net Mon Jan 13 13:50:06 1997 From: skelly at southeast.net (skelly at southeast.net) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 13:50:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: PAY DIRT! Message-ID: <199701132154.QAA15879@mailhub.southeast.net> I_Love_SPAM, Hi, this is Shane. Just thought I would drop you a note. I was just writing very respectfully to see if you would be open to look at a new and phenomenal opportunity Message-ID: <60FH1D2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> dave_gellerman at newbridge.com (Dave Gellerman) writes: > In article <01bbfde7$950f4820$fb1093cf at worldnet.worldnet.att.net>, "Tech" > wrote: > > > Feb 2,1997 (one 90 minute show) ref: www.pbs.org > > > > bill_h wrote in article > > <32D1F2C1.9B1 at azstarnet.com>... > > > Just caught a teaser on Public Television for an upcoming Mobile > > > Masterpiece Theatre presentation billed as "the true story of > > > Alan Turing" titled 'Breaking The Code'. > > > > > > The little bit of clips they showed looked fascinating. > > > > > > Is this a 'new' show or a re-run? Anybody know anything about it? > > > > > From the pbs web site: > > > "Breaking the Code" (2/2) Based on the play by Hugh Whitemore and > the book Alan Turing: the Enigma by > Andrew Hodges, this program tells the story of Turing (Derek > Jacobi), the mathematical genius who was > responsible for designing the computer that enabled the allies to > crack the German Enigma code and, some would > argue, win the war. On Churchill's specific instructions, Turing was > given all the resources he required and his > personal behavior was tolerated - Turing was an active homosexual at > a time when homosexuality was illegal. > Amanda Root, Prunella Scales, Harold Pinter, Alun Armstrong and > Richard Johnson also star. > > > Dave Homosexuality was pretty well accepted in GB in 1930's, as evidenced by the success of Comrade Philby and his friends. Homosexuals have a strange attraction to cryptography, perhaps because of its connection to privacy and anonymity. But they haven't made any contribution to it (or to any other area of human knowledge). They ascribe to Turing the results of heterosexual cryptographers; they libel prominent heterosexuals like Leonardo da Vinci to argue that their perversion somehow leads to intellectual superiority. While homosexuality used to be a detriment to obtaining a security clearance, being gay at NSA was a big plus under Inman. Of course now being gay is a big plus anywhere in the KKKlintoris administration. ObHomophobocReference: cocksucker John Gilmore is full of shit. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ckuethe at gpu.srv.ualberta.ca Mon Jan 13 14:02:34 1997 From: ckuethe at gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (C. Kuethe) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 14:02:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA over Rubiks Cube In-Reply-To: <970113114129_373924985@emout15.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Jan 1997 Scottauge at aol.com wrote: > This problably wouldn't be to cool a thing to do. A fella named Douglas > Hopstader(?) wrote a book called Meta-Mathematics (same guy who wrote The > Golden Knot). In this book he developed (or showed, forget who should get > credit) an algorithm to solve Rubiks cube from any beginning state. His name is Douglas Hofstader and the book is called "metamagical themas". He also wrote "Godel, Escher, Bach". -- Chris Kuethe LPGV Electronics and Controls http://www.ualberta.ca/~ckuethe/ RSA in 2 lines of PERL lives at http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Message-ID: <5bec3v$564@abraham.cs.berkeley.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199701120553.VAA10283 at mail.pacifier.com>, jim bell wrote: >At 11:35 PM 1/11/97 -0500, Anonymous wrote: >>Joel McNamara says: >>> Private Idaho 2.8b3, a bug fix version of the popular Windows freeware PGP >>> and remailer utility, is now available. This will be my last official >>> release of PI for the foreseeable future. >>> >>> Due to other projects and new directions, I haven't been able to spend as >>> much time as I'd like coding and supporting Private Idaho. Instead of >>> seeing it die on the vine, I've decided to release the source code under >>> the GNU General Public License (export disclaimer - the sources do not >>> include, or have ever contained, cryptographic algorithms). >> >> My understanding is that Private Idaho uses PGP internally >>and provides the same functionality as premail, with an >>easier to use GUI. >> >> Given that, it would still be export controlled, since it >>enables cryptography. That is why Raph doesn't allow export of premail. > >The "enables cryptography" thing just doesn't cut it. A computer "enables >cryptography" to a person without a computer. The MSDOS operating system >"enables cryptography" to a person with a computer but without an OS. A >hard disk with a filesystem "enables cryptography" by providing an >intermediate data storage location (and format) for encrypted and >unencrypted data, as well as the encryption program. Even a modem program >or mail program "enables cryptography", or at least enables the transmission >of encrypted data, etc. > >Apparently, the phrase "enable cryptography" is either just about >meaningless, or is so broad as to be not usable to determine which items are >exportable and which aren't. How about narrowing it down a bit? - From the Commerce Control List: # 5D002.a: ``Software'' specially designed or modified for the # ``development'', ``production'' or ``use'' of equipment or ``software'' # controlled by 5A002, 5B002 or 5D002. # 5A002.a: Designed or modified to use ``cryptography'' employing digital # techniques to ensure ``information security''; 5A002.a covers PGP, so it would seem that 5D002.a covers premail and Private Idaho. - Ian -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtqzukZRiTErSPb1AQHHkAP/ZGiD3s4aMC3A6Ldqi1u9csFUQPGos6rv yoHqT9Zf1/LZPhFom2ikmbdkm69fq6EcahMyhisThY+7SrzSc7Tz8ZNEtfFUP7ze +Q7/lUiiPr4sn+ZWk/b3l13sSUlxr3hPcP9gphWPMAQyyHDGZ5QkZH3xcH5WrP3D nD0ckUAaC0A= =4y4e -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mpj at csn.net Mon Jan 13 14:23:51 1997 From: mpj at csn.net (Michael Johnson) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 14:23:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crypto site move http://www.sni.net/~mpj/usa/warning.htm Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The method for accessing my strong crypto library ftp site has changed to one that I hope is easier for those of you who are in the USA or Canada. Simply point your browser to http://www.sni.net/~mpj/usa/warning.htm and follow the instructions. This should work even with text-based browsers, like lynx, and should be easier to navigate for AOL customers. You may be amused that the President of the United States has determined that cryptographic software export controls are necessary for U. S. "National Security" even though the same software is available "or appears to be available" from outside of the USA. For a partial list of cryptographic software sites outside of North America, see http://www.sni.net/~mpj/freecryp.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.7.1 iQEVAgUBMtrB/G+Iqt/O4EnZAQGUVwf7BP3gqjQ5Ur1ymToHdMs2ctf8wLmrf1mS Pw4xr5QGKYMzPP4cK1dnqXSiWI4vxOTK+/WC+ZxH1Cvxrw6+3qlKp1o005qsAAY5 AetqLP6skW7hEesT27bGzwtKBEWrnFRa3YLc6vC+opu78Kz9myAQPdPcQ0tuI8mI +eD0EIiBVWEoWyvxuvW/vN/6bsqLsXZswGVV2+i3kv4HmOEBMVPwzounoA3P7L73 b7wLxiJvbIF3fld9Dcyy577U+pJ/qhXla8yss/Vs9Wmfc7id7GtVoJtrcQ7qqxm2 JiRn7W1A2YIvNQqMizUxOnoGnazkp6rMBCYvV6wTb2MCbQ8U/BLBGw== =X33F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jan 13 15:15:02 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 15:15:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Checking debit In-Reply-To: <199701130446.UAA13794@ns2.accesscom.com> Message-ID: <199701132321.RAA30596@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701130446.UAA13794 at ns2.accesscom.com>, on 01/11/97 at 12:46 AM, geo2 at usa.net said: >DEBIT YOUR CUSTOMERS' CHECKING ACCOUNTS ... COLLECT CHECK PAYMENTS FROM YOUR WEB PAGE, >OVER THE PHONE, OR AS AN AUTOMATIC MONTHLY DEBIT! >Close sales at your Web site, close telephone sales immediately, ship >merchandise immediately(!) ...by drafting the customer's checking account. >No more waiting in vain for "checks in the mail." This service increases >your cash flow, and reduces the cost of billing, mailing, bookkeeping, and >collections associated with your customers who pay by check...for far less >than the cost of accepting credit cards! >For more information about this new service, please click "reply" to respond to me at >geo2 at usa.net. Be afraid, be very afraid. I didn't think one could debit a bank account without signed documentation by the holder of the account giving permision to do so. Personaly I would never give somone such authorization to do so. If they are capable of getting access to funds in an account just by a phone conversation this is truly a sad state of affairs for the banking community. Could somone here with more banking background clarify this? Thanks, - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: MASOCHIST: Windows SDK programmer with a smile! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtrB/Y9Co1n+aLhhAQFJcAP+JeSnUrXGBabuPQdTrueKmur0dGjphf4w 0TpMK5DOKhy5avJPymgjgVbasCU0VuiBS9nQuUURa8lF5XOtkuV+HC5Y4aCPJVq+ cx1Or6LwBgECMfuoVvIykZfd8IVy8Ro148bfRFBEMYgI5sSF5R6kZ2RDLkX1wPLU KLmWMcEorFU= =xS35 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jan 13 15:20:12 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 15:20:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTA papers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701132325.RAA30658@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 01/13/97 at 02:50 PM, azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) said: >Its too bad OTA got the budgetary ax. I met several of the staff and I >regarded them highly. Actually this is a GOOD thing. Now they will be using their talents & skills in the real world providing a contribution to society rather than in another unnecessary government bureaucracy. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Windows done RIGHT! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtrDF49Co1n+aLhhAQEEAgQAl1wDF1pU7I2ZmIri7dhAVKhxijQZjeHh n9HmGWAmHeWSJnzCnrhLePkKVRS8pkrkH6zs807wUhLWONM4wn232i9fDsFxFSHc 34nBNDdz5O0xPTQdorICtgQ815cwnZHH1DFwCLNXFDwwvO8tthR/UJ/8nRbh4Nwe /erDRFPFeAo= =LPb/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 13 15:23:47 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 15:23:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy Message-ID: <199701132323.PAA02433@toad.com> At 01:18 AM 1/11/97 -0600, Igor Chudov wrote: >Bill Frantz wrote: ... >> Let me rant a bit about the "ideal" moderation structure. Igor Chudov's >> software lets people like Matt Blase and Bruce Schneier post whatever they >> want. (I would add people like Black Unicorn as well. YMMV) Other posts >> go into a pool accessible to all moderators. If one moderator approves, >> the message goes out. If N reject, it is rejected. These rejections could >> either be anonymous or be included in an x-moderators-rejecting: header for >> the "worst of cypherpunks" list. > >I think that Bill proposes a very interesting idea. His suggestion would >eliminate a lot of [well-grounded] suspicion about arbitrary rejections >at a "whim" of moderators. > >My only concern is that there will be more work for moderators, because >in his scheme each "bad" message has to be reviewed by N people instead >of 1. > >It is a tradeoff between a more liberal policy and efficient use of >moderators' time. As long as a number of moderators have access, then why not also include in the header information the number of available moderators that gave the content a "thumbs up". If this were tacked on to the front of the subject field, (for people like me whor are using Eudora Lite), then messages could be chosen, by the readers, based on the number of moderators that gave it approval. Ideally, a relatively large number of moderators would be on hand so that the scale would be an accurate cross-reference of the groups opinions. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 13 15:32:19 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 15:32:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Comments on moderation Message-ID: <199701132332.PAA02661@toad.com> At 09:28 AM 1/11/97 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: >Alan Olsen wrote: ... >> I >> have seen little evidence that the doom they predict is going to happen. > >Did you really want to say "no evidence", but were just hedging your bet? This is not intended to place me on either side of this issue, but, by referring to personal experiences, he does not need to hedge his bet. Just an observation. From olbon at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 13 16:13:37 1997 From: olbon at ix.netcom.com (Clay Olbon II) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 16:13:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970113191647.098f90d2@popd.ix.netcom.com> I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" Unfortunately, I think crypto is still so far beneath the public consciousness that the obvious solution to these sorts of problems is ignored in favor of the "there oughta be a law" non-solution. (Of course, in this case there is a law!) What I really hope this incident spawns is a market ... Clay ******************************************************* Clay Olbon olbon at ix.netcom.com sys-admin, engineer, programmer, statistitian, etc. **********************************************tanstaafl From ericm at lne.com Mon Jan 13 17:21:44 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:21:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970113191647.098f90d2@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199701140114.RAA02092@slack.lne.com> Clay Olbon II writes: > > > I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being > taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then > given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. > > The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't > cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" > > Unfortunately, I think crypto is still so far beneath the public > consciousness that the obvious solution to these sorts of problems is > ignored in favor of the "there oughta be a law" non-solution. (Of course, > in this case there is a law!) What I really hope this incident spawns is a > market ... It won't. It'll spawn more laws. Encryption is voodoo to the masses and the politicians. Even in Silicon Valley newspapers there's the obligitory "encryption is the science of scrambling words so that hackers can't read them" in each article that mentions encryption. However the masses and politicans understand laws and jails pretty well. Use a scanner, excuse me "cellular phone hacking equipment", go to jail. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From rcgraves at disposable.com Mon Jan 13 17:23:20 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:23:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Checking debit In-Reply-To: <199701132321.RAA30596@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: <32DADF8A.74F6@disposable.com> William H. Geiger III wrote: > > I didn't think one could debit a bank account without signed > documentation by the holder of the account giving permision to do > so. Your thinking is incorrect. > Personaly I would never give somone such authorization to do so. If you have a credit card, call up customer service, and ask if you can do a check by phone. There are a dozen services that do it. A verbal agreement is all that's necessary. I'm not even sure the calls are recorded; I recall no telltale beeps, which are required in California and other states. Western Union may do such transfers for a fee. > If they are capable of getting access to funds in an account just by > a phone conversation this is truly a sad state of affairs for the > banking community. I quite agree. Sad, but true. > Could somone here with more banking background clarify this? I don't have a banking background, but I've done exactly the above as a standard-issue idiot consumer. All they need is your account number, a unique check number, and the central bank routing information. And your SSN, which your credit card company has already (how convenient). Oh, and I'm sure they need a hell of a lot of liability insurance. -rich From declan at pathfinder.com Mon Jan 13 17:38:37 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:38:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970113191647.098f90d2@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: Don't be too sure that crypto is that far beneath the radar. I spent Thursday through Saturday at an annual privacy conference for activists from around the country, and they understood the principles. Their voicemails were filling up with calls from reporters last Friday about the Gingrich incident, and I know they were talking crypto. The only other journalist who was there made an interesting point, that encrypting cell phone traffic only up to the point it hits the phone system wouldn't hinder L.E. access but would protect privacy. (Or, perhaps, would be worse in the long term since we wouldn't have such luscious examples.) -Declan On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, Clay Olbon II wrote: > > I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being > taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then > given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. > > The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't > cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" > > Unfortunately, I think crypto is still so far beneath the public > consciousness that the obvious solution to these sorts of problems is > ignored in favor of the "there oughta be a law" non-solution. (Of course, > in this case there is a law!) What I really hope this incident spawns is a > market ... > > Clay > > ******************************************************* > Clay Olbon olbon at ix.netcom.com > sys-admin, engineer, programmer, statistitian, etc. > **********************************************tanstaafl > > From iang at cs.berkeley.edu Mon Jan 13 17:46:07 1997 From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:46:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software Message-ID: <199701140145.RAA07183@cypherpunks.ca> Lucky Green said: > The new US crypto export regulations control the export of most if not all > data-security software. Regardless if the software uses cryptography or > not. Many software archives seem to be in violation of the new regs. > > > > This certainly controls virus checkers, firewalls, and other security > software. There are substantial penalties involved in violating the EAR. > The US can assess daily penalties and block all exports of a company's > non-violating products. Criminal penalties apply as well. > > "Export", as defined in the new regs, includes making software available on > the web or via ftp. After _very_ careful reading of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (though IANAL), it would seem that the above is slightly inaccurate. Although, as Lucky pointed out, virus checkers et al. are indeed regulated for export from the US, and putting software up for ftp or WWW is considered export, the EAR does _not_ apply to "publicly available" software (732.2(b)(1)). Software is publicly available "when it is available for general distribution either for free or at a price that does not exceed the cost of reproduction and distribution" (734.7(b)). Therefore, it would seem that, as long as the security software on your ftp or WWW site is free of cost, it is OK to keep it there. Commercial security software, however, remains export-restricted. NOTE, however, that products that actually do contain cryptography fall under an exception (734.7(c)): "Notwithstanding paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section, note that encryption software controlled under ECCN 5D002 for ``EI'' reasons on the Commerce Control List (refer to Supplement No. 1 to part 774 of the EAR) remains subject to the EAR even when publicly available." The software controlled for EI reasons under 5D002 are described as: "EI controls apply to encryption software transferred from the U.S. Munitions List to the Commerce Control List consistent with E.O. 13026 of November 15, 1996 (61 FR 58767) and pursuant to the Presidential Memorandum of that date. Refer to Sec. 742.15 of the EAR." As virus checkers et al. were not on the Munitions List, they are not controlled for EI (Encryption Items) reasons, but rather for NS (National Security) and AT (Anti-Terrorism) reasons. The RISKS: the government suddenly creating (and putting into effect) new rules covering large amounts of software, without warning or (in my opinion) justification. - Ian "again, IANAL" From abostick at netcom.com Mon Jan 13 17:59:30 1997 From: abostick at netcom.com (Alan Bostick) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 17:59:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program In-Reply-To: <199701132023.MAA22372@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, Ed Falk wrote: > > what do you mean, polyalphabetic substitution? > > Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it refers to a cipher > where each character is encrypted individually, using a different > monoalphabetic cipher for each one. The ciphers repeat after > a certain period, usually the key length. > > Vigenere is the simplest polyalphabetic cipher of them all, with > the individual ciphers simply being ROT-n. > I'm convinced that the message in question is a polyalphabetic substitution. Among other things, did people notice quite how much known (or *very easily guessable*) plaintext there was in the message sample, above and beyond the free giveaway of the first line? Things like "CONFIG.SYS", "FILES=20", BUFFERS=20", and so on. There's enough stuff there to make serious inroads into the message without cracking the cipher; and with their help I'm pretty sure the back of the cipher itself can be broken. In the half-hour I played with it I got to the point where I could make some educated guesses about the repetition length of the substitution, and start filling in the various alphabets. No doubt a *real* cryptanalyst could do even better. Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 13 18:24:11 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:24:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <853170077.1023898.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk writes: > > Comment: "What do you mean by 'extensive research'." > > Reply: Benchmark tests. Source code comparisons. Documentations of other > > algorithms. "Applied Cryptography". > > So you have read applied cryptography and decided that qualifies you > as a cryptographer? That's much better that Paul Bradley who's totally ignorant of cryptography. But I agree that Bruce's book is neither necessary nor sufficient for someone wanting to learn cryptography. > > Comment: "What kind of industry standard is IMDMP above?" > > Reply: 128-bit encryption. Average DES is 128. PGP tops 1024. IDEA goes at > > 128. RSA the same. Full security IMDMP is 2048-bit. Any other questions? > > This is irrelevant rubbish, if there is a cryptanalytic attack on > your algorithm a brute force attack becomes unecessary and key size is > not of consequence. What charming manners. And Paul Bradley's own rants about "brute force attacks on one-time pads" are not rubbish, I suppose? And how come Paul didn't use the word "fuck" in every paragraph, the way he usually does? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From mailbox at softcell.net Mon Jan 13 18:28:47 1997 From: mailbox at softcell.net (mailbox at softcell.net) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:28:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Network Neighbor Message-ID: <19970114022133.AAE1930@Default> Dear Neighbor: I selected your name from an Internet Email Provider. Please accept my apologies if I have offended you by sending you this email. I will not send you any more email again. If you read on you will understand why I sent it and will hopefully forgive me if you found this email to be an intrusion of your space. I am part of a small Internet company from San Francisco that recently brought on-line the largest collection of high-end Dungeon toys and apparel in the world. We really are the largest!! We have thousands of items. You won't believe the stuff we sell: HUMAN CAGES, RACKS, LEATHER AND RUBBER STRAIT JACKETS, IRONS, and much more. Some items are so unique and sexually special that it would be inappropriate to mention them in this email. If we don't have it, we can find it or make it! We don't sell cheap Asian imports. In fact, most of those items are cheap imitations of ours. We display our products using provocative and very entertaining interactive pictorials. Along the way, with input and help from our select members, we have added instructional VIDEOS, action VIDEOS, DUNGEON CHAT, PERSONALS, ADVICE COLUMNS, Erotic Photo Contest, Erotic Writing Contest, and one of our most exciting sections, "THE EXOTIC EROTIC BALL" PICTORIAL. This year we sent 10 photographers to San Francisco's Exotic Erotic Ball, the largest adult Halloween Ball in the world. We took over a 1,000 photos. We categorized them into over a dozen sections, including: Breast of the Exotic Erotic, Caught in the Act (People filmed having sex at the ball), Cool Female Costumes, etc.. Our site has grown into the largest Dungeon Fantasy site on the net and in the world. We have developed and grown the site based on our members' requirements. It worked out so well, we decided to let other interested neighbors know about it and share our enjoyment. That is why I have emailed you. We are a small company that now has the largest Dungeon site in the world. We can not afford to do a major PR campaign to share what our members and we have built. So, we selected a few network neighbors like you, in the hope that you might explore our services and then tell others. If you would like to see what we have, please check out our URLs: http://www.sfdungeon.com For Video http://www.dungeonvideo.com For Personals http://www.dungeonpersonals.com You can email me at synder at softcell.net Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. Sincerely Ken Synder P.S. Again, if I have offended you with this email, please accept my apologies. I WILL NOT EMAIL YOU AGAIN. From blancw at microsoft.com Mon Jan 13 18:34:13 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 18:34:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software Message-ID: If the 5D002 reasons find no exception for EI under Sec 742.15 (d) inconsistent with E.O. 13026 (61 FR 58767), then does the NS go the way of AT, or this just become a NNI? The RISKS: the government suddenly creating (and putting into effect) new subparagraphs using large numbers of new acronyms, without warning or (in my opinion) justification. .. Blanc (LOL) From AaronH4321 at aol.com Mon Jan 13 19:05:28 1997 From: AaronH4321 at aol.com (AaronH4321 at aol.com) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:05:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Diehard can be found at. Message-ID: <970113154636_470327888@emout13.mail.aol.com> I found this address for it after a couple of tries getting to the "Diehard.html" site. I couldn't connect to that. This FTP site works though. I found it at http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/bob_jenkins/testsfor.htm To qoute, "An excellent test of random sequences is DIEHARD, maintained by George Marsaglia. You get it by ftp from stat.fsu.edu, login anonymous, cd pub, cd diehard, then get what you want. NOTE: George needs you to send him mail at geo at stat.fsu.edu when you download it so he can keep getting grants to support his excellent work." Aaron. From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jan 13 19:43:47 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:43:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970113191647.098f90d2@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199701140349.VAA01437@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <1.5.4.16.19970113191647.098f90d2 at popd.ix.netcom.com>, on 01/13/97 at 08:12 PM, Clay Olbon II said: >I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being >taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then >given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. >The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't >cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" >Unfortunately, I think crypto is still so far beneath the public >consciousness that the obvious solution to these sorts of problems is >ignored in favor of the "there oughta be a law" non-solution. (Of course, >in this case there is a law!) What I really hope this incident spawns is a >market ... There is a very basic reason that cell phones are not encrypted; the government does not want them encrypted. Many an arrest has been made from infromation gathered from cell/wireless phone conversations. AFAIK the police do not even need a search warent to do this. With the cell phone industry regulated by the FCC I doubt that you will ever see cell phone's with built in encryption. As far as the general public is concerned the majority are sheep. They are quite content to know that it is illegal for their neighbor to listen in and ofcource Big Brother would only listen to those nasty drug dealers & mobsters. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Logic, not magic. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtsA7o9Co1n+aLhhAQHPBwQAyVXV7QHOwMbQH0doPqVYfz3KV7RSSSrb dGnVNc1IQ1zAc5mYSJlh6wyrf38Lkm4rXsFOp29KYHdSEnenXC51+IWJRNmnWTZW VKgAXlUlvdISb3loAvatsrsv1Ha+n3/aF+dKoxSoPI2K+fmhwUU/vRmoZuoMt4/Z fd62Z8Wvs1E= =fa4Q -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Mon Jan 13 19:56:37 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 19:56:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: A vote of confidence for Sandy In-Reply-To: <199701132323.PAA02433@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701140403.WAA01557@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701132323.PAA02433 at toad.com>, on 01/13/97 at 07:23 PM, Sean Roach said: >As long as a number of moderators have access, then why not also include in >the header information the number of available moderators that gave the >content a "thumbs up". If this were tacked on to the front of the subject >field, (for people like me whor are using Eudora Lite), then messages could >be chosen, by the readers, based on the number of moderators that gave it >approval. Ideally, a relatively large number of moderators would be on hand so that the >scale would be an accurate cross-reference of the groups opinions. Not a bad ideal but I would have to dissagre with adding the information on the subject line. It would better be put on a x-moderator: line or somthing similar. Adding information to a subject line adds an extra level of complexity to the end users filtering process. This has always been a beef with me when lists modify the subject line. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Walk through doors, don't crawl through Windows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtsD/49Co1n+aLhhAQFgkQQAmnY6mSTscwriK9QEOefCbsS4UYPxFA5Q 6jRYfCYht4+QbwBqIksn5b08Qe5btXrFo1bdgO4CzBwr4B8UdRxPHQC4tcEIVlIK rmp7Nrq6c599GjddeJAs1kcZygYzf+g0K756BkigNKXqhNsGbdp+MCTvkCJzUqNp P6WekB0Xo5A= =uc/R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From rcgraves at disposable.com Mon Jan 13 20:59:28 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 20:59:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DB1232.7FB1@disposable.com> Declan McCullagh wrote: > > encrypting cell phone traffic only up to the point it hits the phone > system wouldn't hinder L.E. access but would protect privacy. (Or, > perhaps, would be worse in the long term since we wouldn't have such > luscious examples.) Actually, I wouldn't think the cops would be too hot on that idea. Taps would require physical access to the phone network, meaning a warrant or other specific authorization and a time delay. Worse from the cops' perspective, the phone company will know who is being monitored. That means accountability, and that means leaks. The goal will always be end-to-end "key recovery." A fixed key in the phone that can be cracked is much preferable to a random DH exchange, which would be the right way to do a last-hop-only encryption (all from the cops' perspective, of course). With "key recovery" currently out of favor, the cops' strategy is FUD and the criminalization of illegal wiretaps (by private citizens anyway), to create a false sense of security. In any case, evangelizing and deploying real end-to-end encryption now is the way to go. -rich From bill at no.com Mon Jan 13 21:09:46 1997 From: bill at no.com (Bill) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:09:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: FREE LONG DISTANCE Message-ID: <199701140513.AAA04864@capella.net> Dear cypherpunks at toad.com, Hi, I saw your posting online and was wondering if FREE LONG DISTANCE could be helpful to you personally or in your business. I am talking about FREE LONG DISTANCE anywhere in the USA, including Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, even the US Virgin Islands. If so, just say YES and I will email you the details that will allow you to keep in touch with customers, prospects and suppliers, friends and family, colleagues and school friends. I am not talking about a bit of free Long Distance for a month, or 2 months or 3 months or even 6 months. I am talking $1,000 EVERY MONTH for 36 MONTHS. I checked theres no typo here. Get $36,000 of FREE long distance. Get the detailed profitable information, and even more (like FREE Toll Free numbers and more) RIGHT NOW! INSTANTLY! Send a blank email to yes at sal.lv Sincerely Bill PS Think what it could mean to YOUR BUSINESS to keep in touch with key people and organizations on a regular basis FREE of charge PPS What about personal relationships, how they could improve and strenghten by keeping in touch regularily FREE of charge From llurch at networking.stanford.edu Mon Jan 13 21:25:14 1997 From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Rich Graves) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:25:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: And she's no blond..... Message-ID: [joke from article ] Soon you'll be able to count on that kind of personal service from AltaVista, which recently paired with DoubleClick. Look where the banner ads take you now. -rich From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 13 21:37:36 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:37:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: It's a great new year! telemarketers and solicitors In-Reply-To: <199701131945.LAA29089@toad.com> Message-ID: <32DB143A.26E5@sk.sympatico.ca> Sean Roach wrote: > To me, it seems to be a breach of conduct for a company to use a mailing > list that is not thier own as a mass mailing technique. > Again, these are only my personal opinions. It's called 'whoring' (for money, i.e. prostitution). In case you haven't noticed, the InterNet is the new 'Gold Rush'. Every hustler and kook from here (wherever 'this' is) to Butt Fuck, Montana, is jumping on the 'Information Highway' to get their piece of the action. The whores don't just include the "Make $$$Money$$$ Fast" spammers. The Big Boys with the Big Toys want to make sure that our personal information and Web History is available for them to try to squeeze every possible penny out of our pockets. With the 'wonder of modern technology' at their fingertips, however, the 'common man/woman' can also avail themselves of the plethora of information lying within reach of their sticky little fingers. Big Brother wants to know everything about everybody, and if the average user gets tired of Little Brother getting ahold of the information, then I am sure that Big Brother will come to our rescue, passing laws and instituting regualtions that 'save' us by ensuring that only Big Brother knows all. Toto From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jan 13 21:39:11 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 21:39:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970113210258.006ade10@192.100.81.126> At 05:45 PM 1/13/97 -0800, Ian Goldberg wrote: >After _very_ careful reading of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) >(though IANAL), it would seem that the above is slightly inaccurate. [...] >Therefore, it would seem that, as long as the security software on your ftp >or WWW site is free of cost, it is OK to keep it there. Commercial >security software, however, remains export-restricted. I concur with Ian Goldberg's careful analysis (thanks, Ian!) that *freeware* data security software that does not use cryptography is indeed not covered under the new regs. Commercial data security software of any kind, regardless if it uses crypto or not, is however prohibited from being distributed via the Internet or being exported by any other means. Note that such software was explicitly exempt from export regulations under the old ITAR. Now it is explicitly included in the EAR. I fail to see a rationale behind this change. But then, I fail to see the rationale behind the entire ITAR/EAR scheme. As always, IANAL, -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 13 22:07:24 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 22:07:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970113191647.098f90d2@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32DB2262.3A62@gte.net> Clay Olbon II wrote: > I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being > taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then > given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. > The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't > cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" > Unfortunately, I think crypto is still so far beneath the public > consciousness that the obvious solution to these sorts of problems is > ignored in favor of the "there oughta be a law" non-solution. (Of course, > in this case there is a law!) What I really hope this incident spawns is a > market ... I'm not sure what crypto will do to voice transmission, but from my own personal example: I just bought two Motorola portable phones (46 mhz) with Secure Clear(r) voice scrambling. On my AOR 8000 scanner, it sounds to my ears like very muffled Chinese. The bad news is that when just one of these is talking to a "normal" telephone, it cuts down a little on the clarity, and when two are talking to each other, you have to speak very distinctly and not quietly, to make out the softly-spoken passages. From gnu at toad.com Mon Jan 13 22:37:36 1997 From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 22:37:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: You can now subscr. to the moderated/unmoderated/flames lists Message-ID: <199701140637.WAA14213@toad.com> It's taking a bit longer than we had hoped, but I'm finally getting the toad majordomo configuration set up for the moderation experiment. I have set up majordomo so that you should be able to sub-scribe to the three new cypherpunks mailing lists: cypherpunks the new moderated list cypherpunks-unedited same as it ever was - flames and all cypherpunks-flames the flames that the moderator rejected MODERATION HAS NOT YET BEGUN. At the moment, a subscription to either of the first two lists will get you everything, while a subscription to cypherpunks-flames will get you no postings. ALL CURRENT SUBSCRIBERS ARE STILL SUBSCRIBED TO THE CYPHERPUNKS LIST, which will become the moderated list. I hope most people will stay on it, so we can get some real results from the experiment of having a volunteer moderator for a month. If you want to change your subscription, send mail to . You can tell it things like: subscribe cypherpunks-unedited (to subscribe to the new unedited list) unsubscribe cypherpunks (to get off the cypherpunks list) which (if confused about which lists(s) you are on) help (if truly confused about majordomo) The software doesn't care if you subscribe to multiple lists, but you will probably only want to subscribe to one of them at once. This means that to CHANGE your subscription you will need to unsubscribe from one list and subscribe to another. I've only briefly looked at the list traffic on the subject of moderation, but there seems to be a misunderstanding. I'm planning to keep the cypherpunks-unedited list around. This will preserve fast turnaround (though it frequently takes many hours to send each posting to each list member -- it isn't *that* fast), and will permit other people to run their own different brands of moderation if they want to put in the effortw. The list I have no use for, and might terminate after trying things for a month, is the flames list. Each message will be processed by immediately sending it to cypherpunks-unedited. The experimental moderator (Sandy) will be on the -unedited list, and will therefore receive all the traffic. He will forward each posting to either the moderated list, or to the -flames list. Note: * The unedited list gets fast turnaround and doesn't require any human action in order to forward a message. * The integrity of the flames list depends on the human moderators; if they drop a message (accidentally or on purpose) then it won't appear on either the moderated or the -flames list. John Gilmore PS: If you're wondering why I said "subscr." and "sub-scribe" it's because majordomo doesn't like messages containing those words in the subject or first five lines. It keeps down the unintended noise from newbies who send subscription requests to the entire list. From aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 13 22:48:09 1997 From: aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com (AIDAS) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 22:48:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701140349.VAA01437@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > In <1.5.4.16.19970113191647.098f90d2 at popd.ix.netcom.com>, on 01/13/97 at 08:12 PM, > Clay Olbon II said: > > > >I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being > >taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then > >given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. > > >The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't > >cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" > > >Unfortunately, I think crypto is still so far beneath the public > >consciousness that the obvious solution to these sorts of problems is > >ignored in favor of the "there oughta be a law" non-solution. (Of course, > >in this case there is a law!) What I really hope this incident spawns is a > >market ... > > There is a very basic reason that cell phones are not encrypted; the government does not > want them encrypted. Many an arrest has been made from infromation gathered from > cell/wireless phone conversations. AFAIK the police do not even need a search warent to do > this. I remember hearing somewhere that a cell phone manufactuer had created an "encryption" algorithm for their phones. It inverted the waveform or something like that. Now, I ask of you, how hard is that to get break? Not very. It will keep Beavis and Butthead from listening to cell phone calls, but that's about all. Like you said, a lot of arrests have been made by evesdropping on cell phone calls. I wouldn't put it past the NSA to be running SIGINT on such calls. If these were encrypted using a method similar to how ssh does shell connections, the NSA would be screwed. And, incidentally, I really wish ssh was more standard than it is. I'd like to be able to hit my ISP and such with it. ;) (Most ISPs don't like you running nohup'ed processes). > With the cell phone industry regulated by the FCC I doubt that you will ever > see cell phone's with built in encryption. Agreed. > As far as the general public is concerned the majority are sheep. They are > quite content to know that it is illegal for their neighbor to listen in and > ofcource Big Brother would only listen to those nasty drug dealers & mobsters. > Of course. And that stops their neighbor. Yeah. My father bought himself a scanner for his birthday last year. The first night he had it I went over, and we sat on the front porch. We heard a load of cordless phone calls, including one to which a "friend" of mine was a party, which was quite interesting indeed. We also heard a great number of cell phone calls. The majority of the latter were sexual in nature. Christian Coalition, you're failing miserably. ;) I wish I had better voice recognition technology, like the NSA surely has. I'd have the system scan for the voices of people I know and record them; again, like the NSA does. From gbroiles at netbox.com Mon Jan 13 23:43:33 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 23:43:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970113234047.00759c60@mail.io.com> At 01:50 PM 1/13/97 -0800, Ian Goldberg wrote: >According to http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/newfaq/q76.html, RSA is in the >process of patent application for RC5. Does that mean it's illegal to >write a keysearch program for the RC5 challenges (unless you use BSAFE >or something like that)? Seems to me that a defendant who was participating in the challenge (or working with people who were, or was getting ready to participate) would have a strong argument that RSA gave implicit permission to use the patented algorithm in connection with the contest, or that a patent infringement action by RSA against a defendant who was participating in the contest would be barred by the doctrine of equitable estoppel. (Very broadly, equitable estoppel says that you can't tell someone "X", and then sue them on a theory of "not X", or come to court and argue that they are liable because of "not X".) Perhaps somewhere in the contest rules there's a limitation on the software/source code to be used? (I poked through the contest stuff a few days ago, and didn't see anything like that, but I got the impression that they weren't entirely finished putting it together.) YMMV, IANALUIPTB (.. until I pass the bar), etc. But it would be monumentally stupid to create a contest and then punish people for participating. The contest seems likely to do two things (beyond test the strength of the algorithm): develop an installed multiplatform base of optimized code which runs RC5, and give people who possess/distribute it a legal reason for having done so. So it'll be tough to stuff the RC5 rabbit back in the hat when the contest is over. RC5 seems destined to end up like RSA public-key, Diffie-Hellman, and IDEA - publically available (and probably deployed in free "rogue" software) yet only available commercially for a fee. Presumably the RC5 patent (if one is awarded) won't suffer from the peculiarities of the international patent schemes which made RSA only patentable in the US. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 13 23:50:30 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 23:50:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Checking debit In-Reply-To: <199701132321.RAA30596@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: <32DB4470.3813@sk.sympatico.ca> William H. Geiger III wrote: > > >DEBIT YOUR CUSTOMERS' CHECKING ACCOUNTS ... > >Close sales at your Web site, close telephone sales immediately, ship > >merchandise immediately(!) ...by drafting the customer's checking account. > > > If they are capable of getting access to funds in an account just by a phone > conversation this is truly a sad state of affairs for the banking community. > > Could somone here with more banking background clarify this? From view of my own past experience, this seems to be much easier than lugging all that acetylyne equipment into the bank in the middle of the night. Sounds to me like the people using this scheme need to get ahold of fuck at yourself.up and get a mailing list of the gullible folks who ran the executable that he made available to the CypherPunks. Perhaps they could combine their projects. First you get the mark's banking info, then you crash his hard drive to keep him busy while you drain his account. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 13 23:52:38 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 23:52:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970113191647.098f90d2@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32DB4959.8D1@sk.sympatico.ca> Clay Olbon II wrote: > > I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being > taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then > given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. > > The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't > cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" Cell-phone encryption is 'essential' for 'important' people. However, it is 'dangerous' in the hands of the 'citizens' (translate that to mean 'schmucks'). The government doesn't object to crack-dealers having cryptography capabilities, they just want to make sure that those crack-dealers work for the CIA (freelancers need not apply). Toto From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Mon Jan 13 23:55:29 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 23:55:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA Message-ID: <199701140712.XAA12347@sirius.infonex.com> Timmy May likes to lick the semen-shit mixture that accumulates in the crack of his mother's ass. __ /_/\__ \_\/\_\ Timmy May /\_\/_/ \/_/ From amanda at intercon.com Mon Jan 13 23:55:36 1997 From: amanda at intercon.com (Amanda Walker) Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 23:55:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hi again, and an invitation to kibitz Message-ID: <199701140755.CAA04514@mail.intercon.com> Hello folks, A couple of years ago I signed off of cypherpunks in annoyance at what I thought was a high "fluff" level, and said I'm sign back on when I had crypto software to talk about. Well, I do and so I have :). Last week at MacWorld Expo, we announced a new product designed to provide a secure AppleTalk tunnel over the Internet; we'll be doing a public beta in a few weeks, and expect to be shipping relatively soon after that, assuming that the public beta goes well. The initial version is moderately secure (that is to say, I believe that the most effective attacks to be DES key search and a dictionary attack on the user's pass phrase). I'm interested in comments on weaknesses aside from the use of 56-bit DES; I'm profiling DES-EDE and if it's fast enough we'll be switching to that. Here's a sketch of the protocol: (a) Server sends 8-byte challenge to client (b) Client sends Microsoft NT authentication response to the server (take the password in Unicode form, do an MD4 hash, pad with 0s to 21 bytes, split into 3 7-byte groups, use these as DES keys to encrypt the challenge three times, send the 24-byte result as the response). (c) If authentication fails, close the connection. (d) If authentication succeeds, all subsequent traffic is enccrypted with DES in CFB mode. Until April :), the DES key used is taken from the first 7 bytes of the MD4 hash of the password (after April, we expect to switch to Diffie-Hellman key exchange first, followed by a revised authentication handshake). I have not been able to find any obvious weak points, even if MD4 is weak, since the digest is not put on the wire--recovering the digest would require recovering a DES key given a single known plaintext/ciphertext pair. I would be very interested in any weak points anyone can identify (particularly with step b, since that would have repercussions beyond this little piece of software). I would also be interested in the effects on anyone's analysis given the following modifications: - Using SHA (160 bit hash) instead of MD4 - Using DES-EDE (112 bit key) instead of DES - Using Blowfish in CFB mode instead of DES - Using RC5 in CFB mode instead of DES (not likely unless RC5 is cheap) - Using RC4 (40 bit key) instead of DES (not likely) Comments? Catcalls :) ? Amanda Walker Senior Software Engineer InterCon Systems Corporation From erp at digiforest.com Tue Jan 14 00:09:50 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 00:09:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: UnderNet: Message-ID: Ya ya ya, this is probably an inappropriate thing but hey, I haveta ask.. I just heard about the UnderNet hack tonight... anybody have any information on that? If so thanks for the reply.. Later ---- Erp PS: I hate Elitests (spec the type that think they are such because they watched Hackers when it first came out) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 00:15:10 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 00:15:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software In-Reply-To: <199701140145.RAA07183@cypherpunks.ca> Message-ID: <32DB5BC2.2882@sk.sympatico.ca> Ian Goldberg wrote: > Although, as Lucky pointed out, virus checkers et al. are indeed regulated > for export from the US, and putting software up for ftp or WWW is considered > export, the EAR does _not_ apply to "publicly available" software > (732.2(b)(1)). Software is publicly available "when it is available for > general distribution either for free or at a price that does not exceed > the cost of reproduction and distribution" (734.7(b)). > > Therefore, it would seem that, as long as the security software on your ftp > or WWW site is free of cost, it is OK to keep it there. Commercial > security software, however, remains export-restricted. I can't believe that there's no one taking advantage of this to make a 'shareware' version of their software available, and having available, for export and sale, an 'enabler' to bring it to full functionality. I know that this was done in the past, by several small companies in southern California, but perhaps on a larger issue, such as this, the Feds would slam the door quickly on what they would surely regard as a 'loophole'. From geeman at best.com Tue Jan 14 00:19:49 1997 From: geeman at best.com (geeman at best.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 00:19:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Pentium optimizations for DES (BIG) Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970113220836.006ab2e4@best.com> Here is some output of the static code analysis from Intel VTUNE of the win32.??? des crypt routine from LIBDES 4.0 You'll have to fiddle with your text margins to get it looking right. Shown are the U and V pipes, clocks, and penalties for: * unpairable instructs (PU_Inst), * instructs dependent on previous results (Exp_Flow_Dep_???) * addresses dependent on previous instructs (Exp_AGI_???) and the %total time at the instruction, etc. based on a run of "speed.c" sampled at .25 millisec intervals A lot of the penalties are the "AGI" flavor, or "address generation interlock" as in: mov bl, dl 1 mov cl, dh xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 << penalty which **maybe** can be avoided by moving (in this example) the "mov bl,dl" to the earliest possible location where the algorithm semantics are unchanged. But you have to be careful not to kill some other pairing if you do. If I had more time I'd do it! ;) But I wonder if this isn't getting close to the point of diminishing returns ..... the overall stats for the encrypt routine showed about 85% pairing, and averaged out to just slightly less than 1 clock/instruction. Just fyi, the total thruput on my system, a cyrix586 133, was just over 1M encrypts/sec, CBC. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Address Label Time Instructions Clocks Penalties and Warnings Pairing Issues W 0x103c des_encrypt: 0.17% push ebp 1 Label V 0x103d 0.04% push ebx U 0x103e 0.05% push esi 1 V 0x103f 0.06% push edi U 0x1040 0.04% mov eax, DWORD PTR [esp+20] 1 W * 0x1044 0.11% mov esi, DWORD PTR [eax] 2 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 Exp_AGI V 0x1046 0.07% mov edi, DWORD PTR [eax+4] U 0x1049 0.04% mov eax, edi 1 N 0x104b 0.07% shr eax, 4 1 PU_Inst, Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x104e 0.11% xor eax, esi 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x1050 0.05% and eax, 0f0f0f0fh 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x1055 0.05% xor esi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax N 0x1057 0.05% shl eax, 4 1 PU_Inst W 0x105a 0.12% xor edi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax V 0x105c 0.06% mov eax, esi U 0x105e 0.06% shr eax, 16 1 N 0x1061 0.10% xor eax, edi 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x1063 0.05% and eax, 0ffffh 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x1068 0.06% xor edi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax N 0x106a 0.06% shl eax, 16 1 PU_Inst W 0x106d 0.11% xor esi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax V 0x106f 0.05% mov eax, edi U 0x1071 0.06% shr eax, 2 1 N 0x1074 0.10% xor eax, esi 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x1076 0.06% and eax, 033333333h 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x107b 0.07% xor esi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax N 0x107d 0.04% shl eax, 2 1 PU_Inst W 0x1080 0.13% xor edi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax V 0x1082 0.06% mov eax, esi U 0x1084 0.04% shr eax, 8 1 N 0x1087 0.11% xor eax, edi 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x1089 0.06% and eax, 0ff00ffh 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x108e 0.06% xor edi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax N 0x1090 0.07% shl eax, 8 1 PU_Inst W 0x1093 0.12% xor esi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax V 0x1095 0.04% mov eax, edi U 0x1097 0.05% shr eax, 1 1 N 0x1099 0.15% xor eax, esi 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x109b 0.05% and eax, 055555555h 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax, Exp_Output_Dep_eax N 0x10a0 0.07% xor esi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax N 0x10a2 0.07% shl eax, 1 1 PU_Inst N 0x10a4 0.16% xor edi, eax 1 Exp_Flow_Dep_eax N 0x10a6 0.06% rol esi, 3 1 PU_Inst W 0x10a9 0.11% rol edi, 3 1 PU_Inst V 0x10ac 0.13% xor ebx, ebx U 0x10ae 0.05% mov eax, DWORD PTR [esp+28] 1 V 0x10b2 0.06% xor ecx, ecx U 0x10b4 0.04% cmp eax, 0 1 V 0x10b7 0.06% mov ebp, DWORD PTR [esp+24] U 0x10bb 0.09% je des_encrypt+68a (16c6h) 1 W 0x10c1 des_encrypt+85: 0.06% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+4] 1 Basic_Block, Prev_PV/NP V 0x10c4 0.07% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp] U 0x10c7 0.05% xor edx, esi 1 V 0x10c9 0.06% xor eax, esi U 0x10cb 0.05% ror edx, 4 1 V 0x10ce 0.11% and eax, -03030304h U 0x10d3 0.06% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x10d9 0.05% mov bl, al U 0x10db 0.08% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x10dd 0.14% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x10e3 0.10% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x10e6 0.10% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x10ec 0.10% mov bl, al 1 V 0x10ee 0.06% mov cl, ah U * 0x10f0 0.16% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x10f6 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x10fc 0.08% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x10fe 0.04% mov cl, dh U * 0x1100 0.18% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1106 0.11% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1109 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x110f 0.11% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1111 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x1113 0.16% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1119 0.11% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x111f 0.09% xor edi, eax 1 V 0x1121 0.05% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+12] U 0x1124 0.07% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+8] 1 V 0x1127 0.05% xor edx, edi U 0x1129 0.05% xor eax, edi 1 W 0x112b 0.06% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x112e 0.11% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1133 0.06% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1139 0.05% mov bl, al U 0x113b 0.07% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x113d 0.17% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1143 0.11% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1146 0.13% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x114c 0.11% mov bl, al 1 V 0x114e 0.05% mov cl, ah U * 0x1150 0.17% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1156 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x115c 0.06% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x115e 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x1160 0.16% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1166 0.10% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1169 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x116f 0.09% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1171 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x1173 0.19% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1179 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x117f 0.11% xor esi, eax 1 V 0x1181 0.06% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+20] U 0x1184 0.06% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+16] 1 V 0x1187 0.05% xor edx, esi U 0x1189 0.05% xor eax, esi 1 W 0x118b 0.07% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x118e 0.13% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1193 0.04% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1199 0.07% mov bl, al U 0x119b 0.06% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x119d 0.16% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x11a3 0.11% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x11a6 0.11% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x11ac 0.11% mov bl, al 1 V 0x11ae 0.04% mov cl, ah U * 0x11b0 0.18% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x11b6 0.10% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x11bc 0.08% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x11be 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x11c0 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x11c6 0.11% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x11c9 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x11cf 0.09% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x11d1 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x11d3 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x11d9 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x11df 0.08% xor edi, eax 1 V 0x11e1 0.06% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+28] U 0x11e4 0.06% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+24] 1 V 0x11e7 0.04% xor edx, edi U 0x11e9 0.06% xor eax, edi 1 W 0x11eb 0.05% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x11ee 0.11% and eax, -03030304h U 0x11f3 0.04% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x11f9 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x11fb 0.06% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x11fd 0.16% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1203 0.12% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1206 0.13% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x120c 0.12% mov bl, al 1 V 0x120e 0.05% mov cl, ah U * 0x1210 0.19% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1216 0.12% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x121c 0.07% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x121e 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x1220 0.18% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1226 0.09% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1229 0.12% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x122f 0.11% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1231 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x1233 0.17% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1239 0.11% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x123f 0.11% xor esi, eax 1 V 0x1241 0.05% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+36] U 0x1244 0.06% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+32] 1 V 0x1247 0.06% xor edx, esi U 0x1249 0.05% xor eax, esi 1 W 0x124b 0.06% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x124e 0.13% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1253 0.05% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1259 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x125b 0.08% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x125d 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1263 0.13% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1266 0.10% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x126c 0.13% mov bl, al 1 V 0x126e 0.05% mov cl, ah U * 0x1270 0.19% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1276 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x127c 0.08% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x127e 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x1280 0.21% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1286 0.12% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1289 0.14% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x128f 0.09% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1291 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x1293 0.16% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1299 0.15% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x129f 0.10% xor edi, eax 1 V 0x12a1 0.07% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+44] U 0x12a4 0.08% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+40] 1 V 0x12a7 0.05% xor edx, edi U 0x12a9 0.04% xor eax, edi 1 W 0x12ab 0.06% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x12ae 0.14% and eax, -03030304h U 0x12b3 0.05% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x12b9 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x12bb 0.07% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x12bd 0.15% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x12c3 0.12% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x12c6 0.12% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x12cc 0.11% mov bl, al 1 V 0x12ce 0.04% mov cl, ah U * 0x12d0 0.17% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x12d6 0.10% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x12dc 0.08% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x12de 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x12e0 0.18% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x12e6 0.10% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x12e9 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x12ef 0.12% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x12f1 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x12f3 0.16% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x12f9 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x12ff 0.11% xor esi, eax 1 V 0x1301 0.07% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+52] U 0x1304 0.08% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+48] 1 V 0x1307 0.04% xor edx, esi U 0x1309 0.05% xor eax, esi 1 W 0x130b 0.07% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x130e 0.14% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1313 0.04% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1319 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x131b 0.09% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x131d 0.16% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1323 0.13% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1326 0.11% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x132c 0.12% mov bl, al 1 V 0x132e 0.05% mov cl, ah U * 0x1330 0.19% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1336 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x133c 0.07% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x133e 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x1340 0.18% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1346 0.11% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1349 0.14% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x134f 0.08% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1351 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x1353 0.16% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1359 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x135f 0.12% xor edi, eax 1 V 0x1361 0.05% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+60] U 0x1364 0.07% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+56] 1 V 0x1367 0.05% xor edx, edi U 0x1369 0.04% xor eax, edi 1 W 0x136b 0.06% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x136e 0.13% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1373 0.04% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1379 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x137b 0.06% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x137d 0.17% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1383 0.12% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1386 0.11% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x138c 0.11% mov bl, al 1 V 0x138e 0.04% mov cl, ah U * 0x1390 0.17% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1396 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x139c 0.07% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x139e 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x13a0 0.16% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x13a6 0.09% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x13a9 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x13af 0.10% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x13b1 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x13b3 0.18% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x13b9 0.14% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x13bf 0.09% xor esi, eax 1 V 0x13c1 0.05% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+68] U 0x13c4 0.06% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+64] 1 V 0x13c7 0.05% xor edx, esi U 0x13c9 0.06% xor eax, esi 1 W 0x13cb 0.07% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x13ce 0.11% and eax, -03030304h U 0x13d3 0.05% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x13d9 0.05% mov bl, al U 0x13db 0.07% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x13dd 0.15% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x13e3 0.13% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x13e6 0.11% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x13ec 0.11% mov bl, al 1 V 0x13ee 0.05% mov cl, ah U * 0x13f0 0.18% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x13f6 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x13fc 0.07% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x13fe 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x1400 0.18% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1406 0.10% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1409 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x140f 0.09% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1411 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x1413 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1419 0.14% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x141f 0.11% xor edi, eax 1 V 0x1421 0.06% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+76] U 0x1424 0.08% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+72] 1 V 0x1427 0.04% xor edx, edi U 0x1429 0.05% xor eax, edi 1 W 0x142b 0.04% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x142e 0.12% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1433 0.06% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1439 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x143b 0.07% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x143d 0.15% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1443 0.13% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1446 0.12% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x144c 0.11% mov bl, al 1 V 0x144e 0.05% mov cl, ah U * 0x1450 0.18% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1456 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x145c 0.07% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x145e 0.04% mov cl, dh U * 0x1460 0.18% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1466 0.09% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1469 0.11% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x146f 0.11% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1471 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x1473 0.17% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1479 0.15% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x147f 0.11% xor esi, eax 1 V 0x1481 0.06% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+84] U 0x1484 0.06% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+80] 1 V 0x1487 0.04% xor edx, esi U 0x1489 0.05% xor eax, esi 1 W 0x148b 0.07% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x148e 0.10% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1493 0.05% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1499 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x149b 0.09% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x149d 0.14% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x14a3 0.14% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x14a6 0.10% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x14ac 0.12% mov bl, al 1 V 0x14ae 0.06% mov cl, ah U * 0x14b0 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x14b6 0.10% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x14bc 0.08% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x14be 0.07% mov cl, dh U * 0x14c0 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x14c6 0.10% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x14c9 0.14% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x14cf 0.10% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x14d1 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x14d3 0.16% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x14d9 0.12% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x14df 0.09% xor edi, eax 1 V 0x14e1 0.06% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+92] U 0x14e4 0.07% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+88] 1 V 0x14e7 0.06% xor edx, edi U 0x14e9 0.04% xor eax, edi 1 W 0x14eb 0.06% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x14ee 0.12% and eax, -03030304h U 0x14f3 0.05% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x14f9 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x14fb 0.07% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x14fd 0.14% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1503 0.11% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1506 0.12% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x150c 0.12% mov bl, al 1 V 0x150e 0.05% mov cl, ah U * 0x1510 0.19% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1516 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x151c 0.07% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x151e 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x1520 0.17% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1526 0.10% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1529 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x152f 0.10% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1531 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x1533 0.15% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1539 0.14% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x153f 0.10% xor esi, eax 1 V 0x1541 0.07% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+100] U 0x1544 0.07% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+96] 1 V 0x1547 0.04% xor edx, esi U 0x1549 0.04% xor eax, esi 1 W 0x154b 0.06% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x154e 0.11% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1553 0.04% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1559 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x155b 0.08% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x155d 0.15% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1563 0.12% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1566 0.12% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x156c 0.14% mov bl, al 1 V 0x156e 0.04% mov cl, ah U * 0x1570 0.18% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1576 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x157c 0.09% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x157e 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x1580 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1586 0.10% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1589 0.14% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x158f 0.10% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1591 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x1593 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1599 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x159f 0.10% xor edi, eax 1 V 0x15a1 0.05% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+108] U 0x15a4 0.06% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+104] 1 V 0x15a7 0.05% xor edx, edi U 0x15a9 0.05% xor eax, edi 1 W 0x15ab 0.06% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x15ae 0.13% and eax, -03030304h U 0x15b3 0.05% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x15b9 0.05% mov bl, al U 0x15bb 0.06% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x15bd 0.14% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x15c3 0.12% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x15c6 0.11% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x15cc 0.11% mov bl, al 1 V 0x15ce 0.06% mov cl, ah U * 0x15d0 0.18% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x15d6 0.10% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x15dc 0.08% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x15de 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x15e0 0.19% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x15e6 0.09% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x15e9 0.14% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x15ef 0.09% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x15f1 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x15f3 0.19% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x15f9 0.14% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x15ff 0.12% xor esi, eax 1 V 0x1601 0.07% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+116] U 0x1604 0.07% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+112] 1 V 0x1607 0.04% xor edx, esi U 0x1609 0.04% xor eax, esi 1 W 0x160b 0.06% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x160e 0.14% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1613 0.04% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1619 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x161b 0.07% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x161d 0.15% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1623 0.14% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1626 0.12% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x162c 0.13% mov bl, al 1 V 0x162e 0.06% mov cl, ah U * 0x1630 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1636 0.11% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x163c 0.07% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x163e 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x1640 0.18% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x1646 0.09% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x1649 0.13% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x164f 0.09% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x1651 0.06% mov cl, dh U * 0x1653 0.17% xor edi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1659 0.11% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x165f 0.10% xor edi, eax 1 V 0x1661 0.06% mov edx, DWORD PTR [ebp+124] U 0x1664 0.06% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ebp+120] 1 V 0x1667 0.05% xor edx, edi U 0x1669 0.04% xor eax, edi 1 W 0x166b 0.06% ror edx, 4 1 PU_Inst V 0x166e 0.13% and eax, -03030304h U 0x1673 0.04% and edx, -03030304h 1 V 0x1679 0.06% mov bl, al U 0x167b 0.07% mov cl, ah 1 V * 0x167d 0.17% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx[des_SPtrans (10a8h)]] 3-1 Exp_AGI_V_Pen:1 U 0x1683 0.11% shr eax, 16 1 V * 0x1686 0.11% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a2a8h] 3-1 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 U 0x168c 0.11% mov bl, al 1 V 0x168e 0.05% mov cl, ah U * 0x1690 0.18% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a4a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x1696 0.13% mov eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a6a8h] U 0x169c 0.07% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x169e 0.05% mov cl, dh U * 0x16a0 0.16% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a1a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 W 0x16a6 0.10% shr edx, 16 1 PU_Inst V 0x16a9 0.12% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a3a8h] 2-1 U 0x16af 0.09% mov bl, dl 1 V 0x16b1 0.07% mov cl, dh U * 0x16b3 0.18% xor esi, DWORD PTR [ebx+041a5a8h] 3 Exp_AGI_U_Pen:1 V 0x16b9 0.12% xor eax, DWORD PTR [ecx+041a7a8h] 2-1 U 0x16bf 0.09% xor esi, eax 1 V 0x16c1 0.06% jmp des_encrypt+c8a (1cc6h) From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 14 02:48:06 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 02:48:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <32DB2262.3A62@gte.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Clay Olbon II wrote: > > I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being > > taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then > > given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. > > The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't > > cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" > > Unfortunately, I think crypto is still so far beneath the public > > consciousness that the obvious solution to these sorts of problems is > > ignored in favor of the "there oughta be a law" non-solution. (Of course, > > in this case there is a law!) What I really hope this incident spawns is a > > market ... > > I'm not sure what crypto will do to voice transmission, but from my > own personal example: I just bought two Motorola portable phones > (46 mhz) with Secure Clear(r) voice scrambling. On my AOR 8000 > scanner, it sounds to my ears like very muffled Chinese. How much did the two cost? [...] From liz at nym.alias.net Tue Jan 14 03:15:56 1997 From: liz at nym.alias.net (Liz Taylor) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 03:15:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: <19970114111544.5207.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Ed Falk wrote: > > I ran a quick Kappa test on it. There was a nice fat spike at key > length 25, as somebody else suggested, but an almost perfect > correlation at 100. The message is almost certainly a simple > polyalphabetic cipher with keylength 100. I don't want to discourage anybody from trying their cryptanalytic skills against this, but this particular cryptogram has already been decrypted and the plain text posted to sci.crypt a few days back by Jim Gillogly. The message ID is <32D445A4.3DF at mentat.com> The snake oil vendor then came out with another cryptogram using the same algorithm. It is titled `decryption' and the plain text starts with "There are plenty of programs you could buy such as". Mr. Gillogly broke that too. See news:<32DA7FE4.1F41 at mentat.com> -- Diamonds are a girl's best friend. From nobody at replay.com Tue Jan 14 03:35:26 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 03:35:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? Message-ID: <199701141135.MAA13707@basement.replay.com> Greg Broiles says, Ian Goldberg wrote: > > >According to http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/newfaq/q76.html, RSA is in the > >process of patent application for RC5. Does that mean it's illegal to > >write a keysearch program for the RC5 challenges (unless you use BSAFE > >or something like that)? Patents only apply to commercial use. I don't think participating in the contest can be considered commerical use. Me, a lawyer? No way. From spiderman at emirates.net.ae Tue Jan 14 03:58:26 1997 From: spiderman at emirates.net.ae (spiderman at emirates.net.ae) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 03:58:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: a cool place to crash Message-ID: <199701141156.PAA13288@ns2.emirates.net.ae> If any of u guys wanna crash a site on the net try this one : www.emirates.net.ae enjoy .................................... From szymacz at efp.poznan.pl Tue Jan 14 04:54:15 1997 From: szymacz at efp.poznan.pl (szymacz at efp.poznan.pl) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 04:54:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: smart cards & Chinese Remainder Theorem (CRT) Message-ID: Could anybody explain me what do smart cards producers mean giving following parameters: - RSA signature time without CRT, - RSA signature time with CRT? I know what CRT is but I don't understand what are the implications of generating signature with and without CRT (differences in security). From Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com Tue Jan 14 04:58:13 1997 From: Mullen.Patrick at mail.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen Patrick) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 04:58:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: What is a Kappa test? Is there software I can run to perform such a test? Where can I get it? Thanks! Patrick _______________________________________________________________________________ From: Ed Falk on Mon, Jan 13, 1997 20:33 I ran a quick Kappa test on it. There was a nice fat spike at key length 25, as somebody else suggested, but an almost perfect correlation at 100. The message is almost certainly a simple polyalphabetic cipher with keylength 100. I've been playing with it, and have maybe 5% of it decoded. It's full of really blatent clues. Kind of fun. From snow at smoke.suba.com Tue Jan 14 05:05:23 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 05:05:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: PBS program - Turing/Enigma In-Reply-To: <60FH1D2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <199701141321.HAA07999@smoke.suba.com> > Homosexuals have a strange attraction to cryptography, perhaps because of its > connection to privacy and anonymity. But they haven't made any contribution to Speaking from personal experince Dimitri? You and Grubor enjoying each others company? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 05:16:16 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 05:16:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: You can now subscr. to the moderated/unmoderated/flames lists In-Reply-To: <199701140637.WAA14213@toad.com> Message-ID: <32DBA396.239A@sk.sympatico.ca> John Gilmore wrote: > MODERATION HAS NOT YET BEGUN. John, Will you be making a "Last Chance To Call Me A Cocksucker" announcement? (:>) Toto From trei at process.com Tue Jan 14 07:17:15 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:17:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Pentium optimizations for DES (BIG) Message-ID: <199701141517.HAA25930@toad.com> I hope you'll look at Svend Olaf Mikkleson's latest DES round replacement for libdes. He seems to have gotten the round down to 18 clock cycles. I have not yet had a chance to try it myself. see: http://inet.uni-c.dk/~svolaf/des.htm Peter Trei trei at process.com Peter Trei Senior Software Engineer Purveyor Development Team Process Software Corporation http://www.process.com trei at process.com From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 07:31:59 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:31:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Am I to blame? / "THE INTERNET GOLDRUSH" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DBADD8.401A@sk.sympatico.ca> A few weeks ago I made several references to the InterNet being the 'new Gold Rush'. Now, I came across this on an anti-spam list. > The "Internet Goldrush" is ON! > It's simple! It's quick! It's here! > Rush your e-mail reply to: > > to stake out your claim now! I hope that this is just a coincidence. I would hate to think that I have personally instituted a new Battle Cry for the Spammer/Enterprenurs. (I would also hate to gain the title of the Benedict Arnold of the InterNet.) Toto From ppomes at Qualcomm.com Tue Jan 14 07:43:29 1997 From: ppomes at Qualcomm.com (Paul Pomes) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:43:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Multi-drop quantum cryptography article in Nature 385, 47-49 (1997) Message-ID: <17143.853256562@zelkova.qualcomm.com> (Reproduced from ) Eavesdropping on the line Secure electronic communication is becoming increasingly important. In recent years, quantum cryptography has been investigated as a means of detecting eavesdroppers on private lines. When quantum mechanical processes are used to establish the 'key' used for encryption and decryption, any eavesdropping during transmission leads to an unavoidable and detectable disturbance in the received key information. This technique has been demonstrated to be effective on standard communication lines between two users, but Paul D. Townsend now introduces a practical scheme for a multi-user network. This work demonstrates the technical feasibility of quantum cryptography for practical applications. P D Townsend Quantum cryptography on multi-user optical fibre networks (Letter to Nature) Nature 385, 47-49 (1997) From services at p-lenahan.com Tue Jan 14 07:51:19 1997 From: services at p-lenahan.com (services at p-lenahan.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 07:51:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hello Message-ID: <199701141551.KAA04407@alberta.sallynet.com> I_Love_SPAM, Hi, I was wondering if you market products/services using your computer and would like to learn how to do so QUITE a bit better than what you are already doing? Is so, just say the words (words=MORE ORDERS) and I'll email a free, helpful file about our program! This program is so good that could mean the online marketing difference between scintillating success and frustrating failure. Sincerely, Pat Lenahan From tiepilot at thepentagon.com Tue Jan 14 08:24:19 1997 From: tiepilot at thepentagon.com (TiEPiLoT) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 08:24:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: UnderNet: In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DBB1F8.10F918E7@thepentagon.com> Erp wrote: > > Ya ya ya, this is probably an inappropriate thing but hey, I haveta ask.. > > I just heard about the UnderNet hack tonight... anybody have any > information on that? If so thanks for the reply.. > Later > > ---- > > Erp > > PS: I hate Elitests (spec the type that think they are such because they > watched Hackers when it first came out) I have some friends who were involved in that.. try- http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/8558/ They have logs of their first one on there.. I'm not sure if they have logs of last night's up yet. -TiE From declan at well.com Tue Jan 14 08:48:16 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 08:48:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: ALA/ACLU file lawsuit challenging NY "CDA" law, from NNN Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 08:43:52 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: ALA/ACLU file lawsuit challenging New York "CDA" law [Visit netlynews.com for the rest of the story. Another reason to follow the New York case is that a successful challenge to its "harmful to minors" ban could create a useful precedent in fighting a CDA 2.0, which likely will have such language. --Declan] *********** The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com A Civil (Libertarian) War by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com) January 14, 1997 On a frosty winter morning last February, Shabbir Safdar and a gaggle of VTW loyalists trekked to Albany, New York, to protest a state bill that would muzzle the Net. "This was our first time doing any state-level lobbying," Safdar says. "We managed to convince them to take some stuff out of the law." But his efforts didn't stop the measure from wending its way through the legislature: In September, Governor George Pataki signed it into law. Today the ACLU sued New York State in federal court, charging that the law is unconstitutional. New York now takes its place among two dozen states battling similar local legislation that would criminalize certain forms of Net speech. In Georgia, for instance, merely having an anonymous user name could be illegal. Virginia restricts state employees' rights to view sexually explicit material -- college professors who might want to use the Net in, say, an English lit class have to exercise extreme caution. Forget the Communications Decency Act: A kind of civil war is being waged across half the U.S. The ALA v. Pataki lawsuit, filed in the Southern District of New York, involves 14 plaintiffs including the American Library Association, the American Booksellers Association Foundation for Free Expression, Panix, Echo and the ACLU. The coalition, which is asking for a permanent injunction, maintains that the law unconstitutionally stifles online speech and unduly interferes with interstate commerce. The law amends the penal code by making it a criminal offense punishable by seven years in prison to distribute pictures or text "which (are) harmful to minors." We here at The Netly News are ardent advocates of free speech, of course -- we held a joint teach-in on the New York law in the fall. So I spoke to Ann Beeson, a staff attorney at the ACLU, who's spent the last year attacking other state laws and the CDA in court. Why should netizens care about this law if they don't live in New York? I asked her. "Because New York can extradite you," she replied. But what if it's not a crime where I live? "It doesn't make a difference," Beeson said. "There's no question that New York could try to extradite you if you put up a web site that has material harmful to minors on it." [...] From vznuri at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 08:52:47 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 08:52:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: s/n problems on this list Message-ID: <199701141652.IAA10713@netcom13.netcom.com> I've posted on this subject many times in the past, and its something I like to brainstorm on. signal to noise problems on this list. generally, the moderator-specific approaches I find less palatable than techniques that can be automated. here are some more ideas for automated moderation techniques. 1. software called "grouplens" I've talked about here (search yahoo) has been used to rate articles. they found that there was a very high correlation between how long people spent reading articles and the "interesting" rating that they gave that article. hence, a proposal: cpunks have long advocated and hacked mailer programs to stick in crypto. how about sticking in a hack that tracks how long mail messages are being read, and send that info back to an auxilliary mailing list address. the list software keeps track of time spent reading articles and can allow people to screen the list based on the "most interesting articles". "send me only those articles that go over a threshhold of 500 combined human attention minutes". of course this can be messed up by hackers who try to skew the ratings. I would suggest a limit on the max time per article per person. 2. I like the idea of a system that keeps track of complaints against given users. it could keep track of the complaint/per age of every subscriber. e.g. hypothetical: LD gets 10 complaints per week, and TCM gets 30 per week on average, and it could allow people to screen the mail based on these numbers, such as a command "send me mail of all users below a 20 complaint/per week value". you could, for either of these approaches, have an "official screening value" in which the owner of the list adjusts these parameters to his liking. just more ideas. I like cpunks generally favor a technological fix that doesn't involve bottlenecks of individual moderator opinions. (2) would be pretty easy to implement inside existing mailing list software, at the majordomo side. From ericm at lne.com Tue Jan 14 08:59:58 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 08:59:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701141658.IAA09761@slack.lne.com> Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > I'm not sure what crypto will do to voice transmission, but from my > > own personal example: I just bought two Motorola portable phones > > (46 mhz) with Secure Clear(r) voice scrambling. On my AOR 8000 > > scanner, it sounds to my ears like very muffled Chinese. I have a Panasonic 46mhz portable phone that does the same. It's a "Sound Charger Plus" with "10ch Secure Guard". I think it does a very simple analog operation to 'secure' voice transmissions. Like someone else posted, it keeps Beavis and Butthead from listening to your conversations, but that's about it. I think a dedicated ham, hardware-knowledgable hacker or Fed could do a simple frequency-inversion or whatever and listen in. > How much did the two cost? This Panasonic cost about $80 from Frys. You might get better security from one of the newer 900mhz digital phones. Those would still be crackable but would require some digital equipment, which is probably not yet as common. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From nobody at replay.com Tue Jan 14 09:17:42 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 09:17:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: TEST- don't read Message-ID: <199701141717.SAA15340@basement.replay.com> test -dont read From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 10:10:56 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 10:10:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTA papers Message-ID: >William H. Geiger said: > > >In , on 01/13/97 at 02:50 PM, > azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) said: > > >>Its too bad OTA got the budgetary ax. I met several of the staff and I >>regarded them highly. > >Actually this is a GOOD thing. Now they will be using their talents & skills >in the real world providing a contribution to society rather than in another >unnecessary government bureaucracy. > >- -- I've read several of their papers and find, in those areas of which I feel competent, there are few commercial equivalents with corresponding quality and even-handedness in treatment. I agree with you its best that much or most of these government activities should occur in the market. I hope they do. Only time will tell. -- Steve From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Tue Jan 14 10:13:51 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 10:13:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: <199701141808.KAA25979@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > What is a Kappa test? Kappa test is described in Kahn's "Codebreakers". Basicly, you take two streams of random text and line them up one over the other. Look for letter matches between top and bottom. The percentage of matches is called Kappa. If the text is truly random, you should see matches 1/26 of the time. However, if the text is english, you should see matches about 6.6% of the time instead. Likewise, if the text is encrypted with a monoalphabetic cipher, you should *also* see matches 6.6% of the time. Likewise, if the text comes from two different messages encrypted with the same polyalphabetic cipher (and they're lined up properly) you again see Kappa = 6.6%. Finally, if the key repeats, and you've guessed the length of the repitition correctly, and you line up the ciphertext with itself accordingly, Kappa will again be 6.6%. > Is there software I can run to perform such a test? I've been writing my own as I go along; it's more educational to do it that way. As been mentioned earlier in this list, there's an archive of crypto software at ftp://ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/cryptanalysis I've been getting ideas from there, but it's more fun to write your own. From info at hip97.nl Tue Jan 14 10:19:39 1997 From: info at hip97.nl (Maurice Wessling) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 10:19:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [HIP] Hacking In Progress 1997 Message-ID: <199701141819.TAA18108@magigimmix.xs4all.nl> Announcing HIP'97: A hacker convention and festival in the Netherlands on the 8th, 9th and 10th of August 1997. Version: 8 January 1997 Latest news at http://www.hip97.nl/ What is HIP? ------------ HIP is an acronym for `Hacking In Progress'. It will take place on the Friday 8th, Saturday 9th and Sunday 10th of August 1997 at campsite Kotterbos, Aakweg, Almere in The Netherlands. Remember `Hacking at the End of the Universe' (HEU) in 1993? The people that published Hack-Tic, a computer underground magazine in The Netherlands, organized it. Hundreds of hackers, phone phreaks, programmers, computer haters, data travellers, electro-wizards, networkers, hardwarefreaks, techno- anarchists, communications junkies, cyber- and cypherpunks, system managers, stupid users, paranoid androids, Unix gurus, whizz kids and warez dudes spent three days building their own network between their tents in the middle of nowhere, located in the Flevopolder in The Netherlands. HIP will be the sequel to HEU. A campsite full of PCs, laptops, and Unix machines, all connected via an intertent Ethernet that is connected to the Internet. People from all over the Netherlands and other countries will come together to learn and discuss the benefits, as well as the risks of new technologies. They'll listen to lectures, join workshops, enjoy special presentations and, last but not least, party, all of this in a friendly open-air environment of a very wired campsite far away from the civilized world. HIP will happen on the same days as `Beyond Hope', a hacker convention in New York, organized by the people of 2600 Magazine (http://www.2600.com/). There will be audio and video links between both events, and we're working on cool gadgets to further enhance your sense of `grassroots telepresence'. This will be a twin-event in the true sense of the word. Who is organizing HIP? ---------------------- Once there was a little magazine in The Netherlands called `Hack-Tic', and it published wild ways to play tricks on the information infrastructure of the world. The magazine doesn't exist anymore, but most of the people that wrote articles for the magazine or helped organize Hacking at the End of the Universe (1993) and even some of the people that helped put up the Galactic Hacker Party (1989) are still in touch with each other. The every-four-year-itch has gotten to us again... It's going to be quite a project to organize something that is better than HEU, but we're not facing it alone. We'll get lots of people to help us. The hackers that were present at HEU have successfully infiltrated in key positions to aid in the upcoming political takeover as was agreed. Many have the agreed-upon provisions in their job contracts since 1993, stating they would need time off for the final strategic meeting. HIPcamp and HIPnet ------------------ There'll be no hotel rooms or anything like that so you'll want to bring at least a tent and a sleeping bag to HIP, even if this means you can't bring the paper-tape unit that came with your VAX 11/780. We'll supply a campground, toilets, showers, good food and electrical power (as close to 220V/50Hz as possible) and we'll do our best to supply everyone who wants it with an Ethernet connection. You will probably be able to trade wiring, extra outlets, Ethernet cards, and the use of modular crimping tools for almost anything. HIPcamp will open on August 5th, three days before HIP starts. If you decide to join in that early expect pretty primitive circumstances. If you don't care about that, or think that's the best part, you can help build HIPnet and all other facilities. HIP stuff --------- A lot can and will happen in the coming months, and we'll keep adding new topics even during the event itself. But we're definitely going to discuss the legal situation regarding encryption, as well as the latest technical developments in this field. The current decay of the Usenet, copyright issues, censorship as well as many other legislative, social political and technical issues surrounding Internet will be discussed. Computer security, or the lack thereof will also be a hot topic. We'll have research workshops (i.e. GSM and chipcard security) and you can also join many `how-to' workshops and lectures where you can pick up on Linux (Unix you can run at home, not built by Microsoft), perl (a very powerful computer language) and many, many other topics. Tired of all these lectures and workshops: just sit down, smoke or drink socially accepted substances, interact with other humans, volunteer for kitchen work and have a good time. We've had people at the previous event that were not into computers at all, and they had fun. We'd like to receive as many ideas from you as possible at this stage. So if you (and some of your friends) want to organize a lecture or workshop, please let us know. If you keep having this wacky dream about some project or construction that would work really well in an environment with lots of other freaks, this is your call to action. We dream of an event with thousands of creators and no audience. No audience? ------------ We'll try to offer different ways for the Internet population to truly interact with the events at HIP. Please get in touch if you'll have some friends at your house and you want to have CU- SeeMe or other connections to us. We'll also be broadcasting live and buffered feeds of audio and video on the net. Mass- media coverage will be provided for the interactively challenged. I want to be HIP too! --------------------- Don't worry: you can be! Just visit our web site at http://www.hip97.nl/ and use the form to subscribe to the announcement mailing list. It's spam-free and will only carry HIP announcements written by us. You can also participate in the ongoing, yet slightly messy debate in the newsgroup alt.hacking.in.progress. If you can't find the newsgroup don't contact us. Refresh the grouplist in your newsreader or ask your access provider to check their newsfeed. As time slides by we'll have separate mailing lists for the preparation of research workshops, pictures and maps of the campsite and more detailed descriptions of workshops and lectures. If you think we're forgetting anything, please let us know. If you don't have access to the web you can subscribe to the announcement mailing list by sending an email message to majordomo at hip97.nl with the line subscribe hip-announce your_email_address in the body of the message. Announcements will also be posted in alt.hacking.in.progress. How to get to HIP ----------------- HIP will happen at campsite `Kotterbos', Aakweg, close to a city called Almere in the Netherlands. The campsite is at about a 30- minute drive from Amsterdam, along highway A6 to Lelystad. The nearest train station, Almere-Buiten, is four kilometers away. More information and maps will be on the website when the time comes. Press ----- All press is welcome to visit HIP, but there will be a few strict rules. All members of the press will pay the entrance fee, no discussion about this. There will be a part of the campsite that is off-limits to all press. No filming, photographing or recording is to take place there. Some people like to have a press-free moment, some have employment-related reason for shunning media attention. What else? ---------- Many more things could be said but it is still a bit early. The main networking tent and the bar will be open 24 hours a day and we'll have a depository to stash your laptops, backpacks and other valuables. We haven't figures out the exact entrance fee, but, just like HEU, HIP is going to be a non-profit event. And if you haven't guessed it yet: All workshops and plenary events will take place in English. How to get in contact with us ----------------------------- Most of your questions can be answered by visiting our website at http://www.hip97.nl/ Subscribe yourself to the mailing list and read alt.hacking.in.progress. If you have ideas or proposals mail them to info at hip97.nl or snailmail us: Hacking In Progress Postbus 1035 1000 BA Amsterdam The Netherlands Fax: +31 (0)20-5352082 What to do with this announcement --------------------------------- Please forward it to your friends or post it to appropriate mailing lists. Be sure to get the next version by subscribing to our mailing list. See you at HIP! EOF -- Hacking In Progress 1997 http://www.hip97.nl/ info at hip97.nl From maldrich at grci.com Tue Jan 14 10:54:25 1997 From: maldrich at grci.com (Mark O. Aldrich) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 10:54:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Reminder: Physical DC Cypherpunks Meeting Message-ID: Cypherpunks: A January 1997 physical DC Cypherpunks meeting will be held at GRC International, Inc., in Vienna, Virginia, on Saturday, 18 January. Directions to GRCI, including a couple of spiffy-neato maps, are available at: http://www.grci.com/overview/locations/vienna/ If you're in town for the inauguration (yes, it's the following Monday), then stop by and check out the East Coast "punks" contingent. Meeting starts at 1400 hours (2:00 PM). You will be entering a secured facility and will have to endure the usual rigors of being badged, exchanging pleasantries with the guard, and being limited to "requires escort" status. So, allow a few minutes extra before the meeting starts. Agenda includes a presentation by Carl Ellison, Senior Systems Engineer from CyberCash, Inc. Ad-hoc additions are welcome - show up with your presentation materials and you're automatically added to the agenda. We even have a historical crypto-relevant door prize to be given away at the meeting! (Assuming you can haul it home ) GRCI is located at the corner of Gallows Road and Boone Blvd, about two miles north of the Dunn-Loring Metro station on the western end of the orange line. As solicitations for rides haven't appeared (yet) on the list, the assumption is that they're being coordinated off-list at the moment. If your ride fails you and you're stuck at the Metro on Saturday, the phone number for where we'll be meeting is 703.506.4951. We can try to beg you a ride from some gracious punk with wheels. The front desk is 703.506.5000 or 4000, is there's no answer downstairs. If you show up late for the meeting and there's nobody there to sign you in, you'll have to have the guard call us. We'll be downstairs in the "lower level conference room." Just say those words and s/he'll know where we are. S/he can then call and someone will come up to get you. Post-meeting world-problem-solving and beer-swilling activities can be undertaken in any of the numerous suitable locations in and about the illustrious Tyson's Corner locale. We'll coordinate at the end of the meeting. Hope to see y'all this Saturday! ------------------------------------------------------------------------- |I want to die peacefully, | Mark Aldrich | |like my Granddad did. | GRCI INFOSEC Engineering | |Not in sheer terror, | maldrich at grci.com | |like his passengers did. | MAldrich at dockmaster.ncsc.mil| |_______________________________________________________________________| |The author is PGP Empowered. Public key at: finger maldrich at grci.com | | The opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the author | | and my employer gets no credit for them whatsoever. | ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 14 11:00:12 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:00:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: another idea? Message-ID: <853262592.523172.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > How about, we have > > cypherpunks-raw: unmoderated 110% SPAM > > cypherpunks: moderated by Sandy and other moderator. > > That was the original proposal. > Now that the 'discussion' has come around full circle, can we > stop talking about it and DO it? Am I to presume that we will be putting something in the "welcome to cypherpunks" message people get when they join to tell them how to subscribe to the uncensored list? - or are we going to have yet more censorship on this list which is rapidly degenerating into a playground of illuminati and elite censors??? Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From hua at chromatic.com Tue Jan 14 11:25:15 1997 From: hua at chromatic.com (Ernest Hua) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:25:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Secret Power" by Nicky Hager Message-ID: <199701141925.LAA09825@ohio.chromatic.com> I'm sorry about violating etiquette, but it appears that I'm stuck with 14 extra copies of this book, and I really would like to get them off my hands. If you are interested in buying a copy, please let me know. Otherwise, sorry about this spam. Ern From Majordomo at asterix.xs4all.nl Tue Jan 14 11:31:38 1997 From: Majordomo at asterix.xs4all.nl (Majordomo at asterix.xs4all.nl) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:31:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Welcome to hip-announce Message-ID: <199701141930.UAA20521@asterix.xs4all.nl> -- Welcome to the hip-announce mailing list! If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, you can send mail to "Majordomo at asterix.xs4all.nl" with the following command in the body of your email message: unsubscribe hip-announce cypherpunks at toad.com Here's the general information for the list you've subscribed to, in case you don't already have it: [Last updated on: Fri Dec 13 20:30:42 1996] Welcome to HIP announce! This mailinglist will only be used for regular announcements about major developments in the preparation for Hacking In Progress 1997. Only the list-owner will post to this list and it will be guaranteed low-volume. Up-to-date information about the HIP can be found at our website http://www.hip97.nl Please report any problems to info at hip97.nl See you at the HIP! Maurice Wessling From sue at liame.com Tue Jan 14 11:38:55 1997 From: sue at liame.com (sue at liame.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:38:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: PART-TIME EXECUTIVE INCOME Message-ID: <19970114193610.AAC25493@star> Please put REMOVE in the subject and press reply if you do not wish to receive mail from us again. ********************************************************** PART-TIME EXECUTIVE INCOME WORKING 5-20 HOURS PER WEEK AT YOUR OWN PACE. NEW DIVISION OF A MAJOR (NASDAQ) 93 YEAR OLD PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANY, SEEKS TWO PROFESSIONALS PART-TIME OR FULL-TIME FROM WHEREVER YOU ARE, FOR EXPANSION IN THE UNITED STATES, MEXICO, ASIA, ETC. STOCK OPTIONS ON TOP OF THE MOST LUCRATIVE PAY PLAN IN THE INDUSTRY. FOR FREE AUDIO, CALL OUR 24 HOUR RECORDED MESSAGE NOW. THEN YOU CAN HEAR WHY TOP ENTREPRENEURS, MEDICAL, AS WELL AS, BUSINESS PROFESSIONALS ARE DIVERSIFYING THROUGH US. 24 HR. MESSAGE 1-800-404-9151 From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 11:49:54 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:49:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: >> The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't >> cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" > > Cell-phone encryption is 'essential' for 'important' people. > However, it is 'dangerous' in the hands of the 'citizens' (translate >that >to mean 'schmucks'). > The government doesn't object to crack-dealers having cryptography >capabilities, they just want to make sure that those crack-dealers >work for the CIA (freelancers need not apply). > >Toto When I worked at Cylink we developed a product, called SecureCell which combined a standard analog cellphone (NEC I think) and a version of our SecurePhone. Despite the fact that it could thwart any but the most well funded eavesdropping we only sold a handfull. It was quite pricy (about $6,000) and required a small suitcase to tote, but even so only a few gov't agencies (mostly diplomatic) and execs thought it was worth the trouble. One problem facing such devices are the interruptions caused by cell-to-cell handoffs. These can occur even when stationary. SecureCell, I believe, used off-the-shelf line modems. I've read newer modem technologies (Spectrum and AT&T) have pretty much solved this problem. There's no reason Eric Blossom's phone encryptor can't be readily adapted to cellular to offer a secure and more reasonably priced cellular encryptor. PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear | Internet: azur at netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet and Wireless Development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 12:06:14 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 12:06:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970114104854.0065cb80@popd.ix.netcom.com> >>I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being >>taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then >>given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. Eavesdropping on cellphones is illegal, since there's an expectation of privacy. I don't know if tapping the signalling channel is illegal - it's not eavesdropping on conversations, but it's giving you traffic analysis including locating your victim. Cordless phones don't offer an expectation of privacy, by some legal definition, so it's not illegal, and anyone can listen in with scanners, including police, unless there are state or local laws to the contrary It'd be interesting to test the legal status of digital spread-spectrum cordless phones, which claim on the box to offer privacy, but there probably aren't enough police forces with sufficiently advanced scanners to crack them to make it worth transmitting lots of bait "Yo, Bubba, I hear you've got 10 kilos of dope for sale!" "Yeah, it's $10/gram, I'll bring it by your house at 1234 Main Street." >>The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't >>cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" Analog callphones don't. (U.S.) Digital cellphones may offer encryption, though it's really dumbed-down encryption. It'll probably still keep out Beavis and Butthead, and maybe your local police, but not professionals. I've forgotten if the CAVE encryption on John Young's site is the US version, or if the standard we're graciously permitted by our government to use is a different one, but it's about that strength. Phil Karn wrote some time ago about the NSA's armtwisting that bullied the standards committee into coming up with the stuff. > There is a very basic reason that cell phones are not encrypted; > the government does not want them encrypted. Analog cellphones were doing well to work at all, and manufacturers and service providers didn't want to add the complexity of encryption, especially as a retrofit, so they got a law passed instead. Tapping cellphones is more trouble than tapping wired phones - they move around, and to tap them from the phone company end requires taps everywhere that you activate when you know where somebody is. On the other hand, if you can just scan for them, and crack the wimpy encryption, it's really a lot less work. And if you overhear other interesting conversations while pursuing a legally authorized wiretap, that was "good faith"... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 12:08:00 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 12:08:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970114105355.00639b20@popd.ix.netcom.com> >> Therefore, it would seem that, as long as the security software on your ftp >> or WWW site is free of cost, it is OK to keep it there. Commercial >> security software, however, remains export-restricted. > I can't believe that there's no one taking advantage of this to make a >'shareware' version of their software available, and having available, >for export and sale, an 'enabler' to bring it to full functionality. In particular, if you allow free non-commercial evaluation of beta software, e.g. McAfee's virus protection software, that would probably qualify. It's interesting that they've structured their requirements to try to stay within the Constitutionally authorized powers (regulation of interstate and foreign commerce) while leaving out freeware which might lead to an annoying legal challenge. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From nelson at media.mit.edu Tue Jan 14 12:23:16 1997 From: nelson at media.mit.edu (Nelson Minar) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 12:23:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970113210258.006ade10@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) writes: > Commercial data security software of any kind, regardless if it uses crypto > or not, is however prohibited from being distributed via the Internet or > being exported by any other means. I can at least vaguely understand the rationale behind restricting the export of cryptography. But I don't even begin to comprehend restricting the export of data security software. What is going on here? Whose idea is this, what is the agenda? Is the US government really prepared to take on all the producers of virus protection software? Symantec and IBM are pretty big players to upset. And they don't even have the "drug dealers and terrorists" bugbear to defend this particular export restriction. In my more cynical mood I'm afraid that what's going on is the US government is trying to protect its capability to wage information warfare. Could they get away with this? From bkmarsh at feist.com Tue Jan 14 12:44:11 1997 From: bkmarsh at feist.com (Bruce M.) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 12:44:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701140349.VAA01437@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote: > There is a very basic reason that cell phones are not encrypted; the government does not > want them encrypted. Many an arrest has been made from infromation gathered from > cell/wireless phone conversations. AFAIK the police do not even need a search warent to do > this. > > With the cell phone industry regulated by the FCC I doubt that you will ever > see cell phone's with built in encryption. > > As far as the general public is concerned the majority are sheep. They are > quite content to know that it is illegal for their neighbor to listen in and > ofcource Big Brother would only listen to those nasty drug dealers & mobsters. A decent article about the subject (one that also gives us some historical proof of the govt's desires) can be found at: http://www.feist.com/~tqdb/h/062694-1.txt By the way, I'm finding all these articles on the page: http://www.feist.com/~tqdb/evis-idx.html for those who care. ____________________________________________________ [ Bruce M. - bkmarsh at feist.com - Feist Systems, Inc. ] ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ "We don't want to get our butts kicked by a bunch of long-haired 26-year-olds with earrings." -- General John Sheehan on their reasons for InfoWar involvement From jya at pipeline.com Tue Jan 14 12:56:24 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 12:56:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970114205129.00682ddc@pop.pipeline.com> Omnipoint has a full-page ad in the New York Times today which capitalizes on Newt's lack of privacy and claims that its spread spectrum phone would have protected him with with encryption and digital technology superior to cellular: http://www.omnipoint.com Nokia, for one, touts its use of the CAVE encryption in its latest unit, although its not clear which version. The CAVE algorithm and implementation is now at: http://www.replay.com/mirror/cave/ News may be forthcoming about CAVE -- which, to remind, is an acronym for Caller Authentication and Voice Encryption. It has apparently gone through several versions -- whether getting progressively stronger or weaker is a question soon to be answered authentically? From michael.tighe at Central.Sun.COM Tue Jan 14 12:59:28 1997 From: michael.tighe at Central.Sun.COM (Michael Tighe SUN IMP) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 12:59:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970114104854.0065cb80@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199701142058.OAA05219@jeep.Central.Sun.COM> Bill Stewart writes: >Tapping cellphones is more trouble than tapping wired phones - >they move around, and to tap them from the phone company end >requires taps everywhere that you activate when you know where >somebody is. Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record BOTH sides of the conversation without interruption? This seems pretty suspicious to me. I think Old Newt was targeted by someone inside the phone company, who was eavesdropping on all of his cell calls. From gnu at toad.com Tue Jan 14 13:08:31 1997 From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 13:08:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Social Security/CommerceNet/PitneyBowes try digital signature W-2's Message-ID: <199701142108.NAA03984@toad.com> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 97 10:06:55 EST From: John.T.Sabo at ssa.gov Message-Id: <9700148532.AA853265294 at ccsmtpgw2.ssa.gov> To: members at lists.Commerce.Net Subject: Test Opportuity for CommerceNet Member Small Companies +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ This message was addressed to: members at lists.commerce.net +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ To CommerceNet Members Who Are Small Employers: CommerceNet member companies who are small employers (approximately 30 employees) are invited to participate this month with the Social Security Administration and PitneyBowes, Inc. in an important proof-of-concept project in which the Social Security Administration will accept digitally-signed W-2 and W-3 data via the Internet, with PitneyBowes issuing test software and public key certificates to participating employers. (I mentioned this test at the December CommerceNet Members' meeting.) Participation will require completion of a field test agreement with SSA, submission of a request for certification by PitneyBowes, and installation of software on a Windows PC which will enable the generation of a signature key pair as well as software which will generate, sign and transmit the wage data to Social Security. The software also produces W-2 paper forms for distribution to employees. If a company already uses a software product to create W-2's, the output file can be used for this test. (Please note that the test is not designed to evaluate all aspects of public key cryptography - for example, no certification practice statement has been developed.) If you are interested in participating in this important public/private sector test of digital signature wage reporting, please contact me as soon as possible and I'll arrange for Mr. Chuck Liptz, SSA's Project Manager, to contact you immediately to provide additional details. (Chuck can also be reached directly at (410) 965-7057 or . John Sabo Social Security Administration (410) 965-1550 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- James M. Galvin galvin at commerce.net CommerceNet +1 410.203.2707 3209-A Corporate Court FAX +1 410.203.2709 Ellicott City, MD 21042 http://www.commerce.net/ http://www.eff.org/blueribbon http://www.eff.org/goldkey From markm at voicenet.com Tue Jan 14 13:46:26 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 13:46:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: smart cards & Chinese Remainder Theorem (CRT) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 14 Jan 1997 szymacz at efp.poznan.pl wrote: > Could anybody explain me what do smart cards producers > mean giving following parameters: > - RSA signature time without CRT, > - RSA signature time with CRT? > I know what CRT is but I don't understand what are > the implications of generating signature with and without CRT > (differences in security). When the CRT is used, "p" and "q" have to be stored along with the secret key. This may be require more memory than some cards have, but there aren't any security problems with using the CRT. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtv/iizIPc7jvyFpAQG5cwgAhJGwSzijwsqPytfejTqBRUwgip+aEqbZ 4J7mes8PcTybIBaRMwxxV5HN9Eym5SNkRdpwMnm5qa2bBoNET4XcZ2ewcSYokuvK skQkJwh+WExPnMLwylmT7sgefFY8W+E4WznIBi6a3A6Y3IwpRjgNo9VWQjsvX4BL TmNj3C5nrjyNEqRu8KtMaV7A4yvIj7pnftGHgzHm6yGY3je4wj0hvYIBpA3hiKQn 8omd66URrDEL86trlTPREcHn+dlXbe1/AjWzk0XWd0HRT6lO2oOKl8jpu4BQBoKh 35CMDRlqeOjPJ8kYtIFFZbN7IqB6XtkTcTjiBlCNi5rzeNYUYoIv3Q== =RuW/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 14 14:10:03 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:10:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701142209.OAA04830@toad.com> At 08:37 PM 1/13/97 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Don't be too sure that crypto is that far beneath the radar. I spent >Thursday through Saturday at an annual privacy conference for activists >from around the country, and they understood the principles. Their >voicemails were filling up with calls from reporters last Friday about the >Gingrich incident, and I know they were talking crypto. ... Believe me, at least around here it is. I am a college student studying computer science, and 80% of the people that I talk to on a regular basis not only know how to play around with windows, (and Netscape), but also at least a modicum of simple fixes to simple problems, (such as unformatting a DOS disk). This is what I consider to be bottom level for that 80%, however, very few of them know even as much about cryptography as I do. And I barely know how to use PGP. I have had Computer Science professors express ignorance as to what PGP is, much less all of these others that I have learned about by hanging around here. A few people know what crypto is, but most don't. From haystack at holy.cow.net Tue Jan 14 14:15:06 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:15:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701142157.QAA13489@holy.cow.net> Tim C. Maya has been a source of endless embarassments to his sympathizers on and off the net. |||~ (0 0) _ooO_(_)_Ooo__ Tim C. Maya From markm at voicenet.com Tue Jan 14 14:15:59 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:15:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hi again, and an invitation to kibitz In-Reply-To: <199701140755.CAA04514@mail.intercon.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Amanda Walker wrote: > Here's a sketch of the protocol: > > (a) Server sends 8-byte challenge to client > > (b) Client sends Microsoft NT authentication response to the server > (take the password in Unicode form, do an MD4 hash, pad with 0s to 21 > bytes, split into 3 7-byte groups, use these as DES keys to encrypt > the challenge three times, send the 24-byte result as the response). I think this can be strengthened in a few ways. The third DES key generated using this technique has an effective keylength of 16 bits. If the password is concatenated with the MD4 hash of the password and hashed a second time, the first five bytes of the second hash value can be concatenated with the first hash value to form the 21 byte string. If the method you describe is used, the third key can be brute-forced trivially, and the last two bytes of the MD4 hash of the password will be known to the attacker. I don't know how detrimental this is to the system, but I think it would be better if this was fixed. If something like a time-stamp, or even the 8 byte challenge string, is run through MD4 along with the password, the session key would be different each time. This would protect against known-plaintext attacks. > > (c) If authentication fails, close the connection. > > (d) If authentication succeeds, all subsequent traffic is enccrypted with > DES in CFB mode. Until April :), the DES key used is taken from the > first 7 bytes of the MD4 hash of the password (after April, we expect > to switch to Diffie-Hellman key exchange first, followed by a revised > authentication handshake). I believe the D-H patent expires sometime in September or October this year. Since GATT was passed, patents now have a lifetime of 20 years past filing date. > - Using SHA (160 bit hash) instead of MD4 > - Using DES-EDE (112 bit key) instead of DES > - Using Blowfish in CFB mode instead of DES > - Using RC5 in CFB mode instead of DES (not likely unless RC5 is cheap) > - Using RC4 (40 bit key) instead of DES (not likely) Any unbroken cipher with a keyspace larger than that of DES would be better. Blowfish seems to be pretty strong, and it has the added bonus of having a computation intensive key setup. I don't see any problems with using MD4, but since speed doesn't seem to be an issue, SHA1 would be a reasonable choice. It is not known whether H(H(pass),pass) is secure, so a hash with a 20 byte output would eliminate the potential problem I described above. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtwGfyzIPc7jvyFpAQEBzgf/clSp9vQVSpC55TgEJ0NudtbQMQHNx9fD wlpVMg5X27/Dyb++PmYVdidPj71zmGTdhwSn2o9+TpqBhgZ6pwn7OpQ3dqRP7Atd N8yxhEma5zNK9Jz7ieM9tayaxFQuj8r5y9NhjdnoQMjX3by86QMAX8r6mEZzKr3m D1nUF/TPyann5HxDcbFAaOrXbvxbpr4Ukx+BUpSX2kCRFPB6YEw+Uw2304KilNVg 2L/YZRWBvwyxOWfm2JP62YxswzFMNmmufHcM9blBTu3UexWnIScmdU4+LfQtNSU8 0ph2R2fjyq22PjIqmhlxODtn6AiVZt9C2xd6GW5uTmHvCaOhC8OCxg== =ZTNy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From nobody at replay.com Tue Jan 14 14:24:34 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:24:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970113210258.006ade10@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <199701142224.XAA17894@basement.replay.com> Subject: Re: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software Nelson Minar writes: > shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) writes: > > Commercial data security software of any kind, regardless if it uses crypto > > or not, is however prohibited from being distributed via the Internet or > > being exported by any other means. > > I can at least vaguely understand the rationale behind restricting the > export of cryptography. But I don't even begin to comprehend > restricting the export of data security software. What is going on > here? Whose idea is this, what is the agenda? > > Is the US government really prepared to take on all the producers of > virus protection software? Symantec and IBM are pretty big players to > upset. And they don't even have the "drug dealers and terrorists" > bugbear to defend this particular export restriction. They don't have to. They will almost certainly approve almost any non-crypto data security product for export (well, unless they want to punish a company for domestic crypto products :-(, but I think the commerce department can deny actually deny all a comany's exports even without EAR). What's really going on here is that the NSA wants to know exactly what's out there in terms of virus protection and security software, so that if they need to release a virus or something they know exactly how to work around the defenses people are using. You're not going to too many export applications denied for this kind of stuff. It's more just a way for them to know exactly what's going on in that realm. From null at infowar.com Tue Jan 14 14:28:17 1997 From: null at infowar.com (null at infowar.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:28:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Leaving the infowar list. Message-ID: <199701142228.OAA05113@toad.com> Thank you for your participation in this list. From declan at well.com Tue Jan 14 14:28:25 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:28:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Karn case challenging crypto rules -- oral arguments online Message-ID: I've placed my notes from and a report on last Friday's Karn crypto- hearing online in the "Afterword" section of netlynews.com. (Incidentally, Netly relaunched yesterday. Stop by and check it out). The oral arguments were a battle of metaphors: is the text of a cryptographic algorithm more like a tank guidance system or a Shakespearean sonnet? At one point Judge Williams compared a floppy disk to "a machine." Judge Ginsberg is known as somewhat of a libertarian, a fellow who home schools his child; he was considered for a Supreme Court seat until reports of marijuana use derailed his bid. Judge Williams is a conservative and a bit of a First Amendment purist -- at least in traditional media. I think it was Williams who (correctly) dissented in the _Turner_ "must carry" cable broadcasting case. -Declan --- Full text at "Afterword" -- http://netlynews.com/ United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Karn v. U.S. Department of State January 10, 1997 Ken Bass, attorney for Phil Karn: The government says this diskette cannot be exported. Period. They claim to make an argument that even though it is identical information, it's worth restricting this diskette... We submit that it is an arbitrary, capricious, and totally irrational decision for the government to draw such a distinction... Judge Ginsberg: Can the courts evaluate the military and security distinction between the disks and the book? Bass: The Supreme Court said it can. The mere intimation of national security is not some talismanic trump card. Judge Ginsberg: But that's not what they're doing. They're putting something on the munitions list. In what way can we say that's not significant militarily? Bass: Courts are not incompetent to review decisions to see if they're irrational... [...] From declan at pathfinder.com Tue Jan 14 14:36:05 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:36:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701142209.RAA26359@pathfinder.com> Message-ID: It's a gradual change, certainly. The Washinton Post hasn't mentied crypto in their exhaustive covering of the subject. But I maintain it's not that far beneath the radar. Watch the Lehrer Newhour (or whatever the hell it's called now) tonight, for instance. -Declan On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Sean Roach wrote: > At 08:37 PM 1/13/97 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >Don't be too sure that crypto is that far beneath the radar. I spent > >Thursday through Saturday at an annual privacy conference for activists > >from around the country, and they understood the principles. Their > >voicemails were filling up with calls from reporters last Friday about the > >Gingrich incident, and I know they were talking crypto. > ... > Believe me, at least around here it is. > I am a college student studying computer science, and 80% of the people that > I talk to on a regular basis not only know how to play around with windows, > (and Netscape), but also at least a modicum of simple fixes to simple > problems, (such as unformatting a DOS disk). This is what I consider to be > bottom level for that 80%, however, very few of them know even as much about > cryptography as I do. And I barely know how to use PGP. > I have had Computer Science professors express ignorance as to what PGP is, > much less all of these others that I have learned about by hanging around here. > A few people know what crypto is, but most don't. > > From ericm at lne.com Tue Jan 14 14:36:45 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:36:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701142058.OAA05219@jeep.Central.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <199701142233.OAA15724@slack.lne.com> Michael Tighe SUN IMP writes: > > Bill Stewart writes: > > >Tapping cellphones is more trouble than tapping wired phones - > >they move around, and to tap them from the phone company end > >requires taps everywhere that you activate when you know where > >somebody is. > > Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record BOTH sides > of the conversation without interruption? If the person with the cell phone doesn't move, then they don't get handed off to a different cell. That means that they stay on the same frquency. No need to scan channels if they don't switch. What Bill's saying is that it is difficult to tap the cell phone of a _particular_ person with just a scanner. However the people who taped Newt were just scanning for whatever they could get. That's easy. > This seems pretty suspicious to > me. I think Old Newt was targeted by someone inside the phone company, who > was eavesdropping on all of his cell calls. Let's not be paranoid. It was a conference call, and someone other than Newt was the party with the cell phone (sorry I forgot the guys name, some representative). Do you think they (whoever 'they' are) were tapping the phones of everyone that Newt might talk to? -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From leeasher at gil.com.au Tue Jan 14 14:40:27 1997 From: leeasher at gil.com.au (leeasher at gil.com.au) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:40:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Some Spare Cash Perhaps !! Message-ID: <199701142238.IAA03457@iccu6.ipswich.gil.com.au> I_Love_SPAM, Pardon the intrusion, I hope you dont mind. If you find that you could perhaps use some extra cash, then feel free to read a little further. No hype just a simple opportunity. If not then hit the cancel button NOW as I do not wish to invade your privacy any more than I have done so already. -------------------- Work from home with your PC distributing software and information all over the world via E-mail and the Internet. Our exclusive software PC-SUPER-MLM will give you all the information and tools you need to start your own Computer Based Business as a Software Distributor. Make thousands of dollars doing simple and pleasant work from home with your computer using our proven method. Reply to this article and I will send you a FREE copy of the PC-SUPER-MLM software for your personal evaluation. The software will be sent to you via E-mail as an attachment. Alternatively you can download it yourself from our WEB sites located at... USA Site... http://business.atcon.com/parker/Lee/leepsm.htm (this site has been unreliable lately) Australian Site... http://www.gil.com.au/comm/cdpub/money.html I thank you sincerely for taking the time to read this short email. Have a happy day. Happy Computing, Lee Asher. Email: leeasher at gil.com.au From abostick at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 14:49:16 1997 From: abostick at netcom.com (Alan Bostick) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:49:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701142058.OAA05219@jeep.Central.Sun.COM> Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Michael Tighe SUN IMP wrote: > Bill Stewart writes: > > >Tapping cellphones is more trouble than tapping wired phones - > >they move around, and to tap them from the phone company end > >requires taps everywhere that you activate when you know where > >somebody is. > > Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record BOTH sides > of the conversation without interruption? This seems pretty suspicious to > me. I think Old Newt was targeted by someone inside the phone company, who > was eavesdropping on all of his cell calls. > It is also possible that somewhere in the chain of information between mom&pop, the media, and us, the distinction between "cordless phone" and cellular phone. I gather it was a conference call that was intercepted. All it takes is one participant using a cordless phone in range of one scanner, and the whole conversation is compromised. (Someone mentioned that they thought cordless phone intercepts weren't illegal the way cellular phone intercepts are. IANAL, but I recall that intercepting both was made illegal by the same legislation.) Of course, if the phone in question was a cell phone that happened to be stationary -- like a handheld phone in someone's back yard or in a restaurant or whatever, the question of the call jumping cells is moot. Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick From adam at homeport.org Tue Jan 14 14:51:07 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:51:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Social Security/CommerceNet/PitneyBowes try digital signature W-2's In-Reply-To: <199701142108.NAA03984@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701142247.RAA21970@homeport.org> Note that there's no mention of encryption or confidentiality. ssa.gov gets network connectivity via BBNplanet. Adam John Gilmore wrote: | Date: Tue, 14 Jan 97 10:06:55 EST | From: John.T.Sabo at ssa.gov | Message-Id: <9700148532.AA853265294 at ccsmtpgw2.ssa.gov> | To: members at lists.Commerce.Net | Subject: Test Opportuity for CommerceNet Member Small Companies | | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | This message was addressed to: members at lists.commerce.net | +----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | | To CommerceNet Members Who Are Small Employers: | | CommerceNet member companies who are small employers (approximately 30 | employees) are invited to participate this month with the Social Security | Administration and PitneyBowes, Inc. in an important proof-of-concept | project in | which the Social Security Administration will accept digitally-signed W-2 and | W-3 data via the Internet, with PitneyBowes issuing test software and | public key | certificates to participating employers. (I mentioned this test at the | December | CommerceNet Members' meeting.) | | Participation will require completion of a field test agreement with SSA, | submission of a request for certification by PitneyBowes, and installation of | software on a Windows PC which will enable the generation of a signature key | pair as well as software which will generate, sign and transmit the wage | data to | Social Security. The software also produces W-2 paper forms for | distribution to | employees. If a company already uses a software product to create W-2's, the | output file can be used for this test. (Please note that the test is not | designed to evaluate all aspects of public key cryptography - for example, no | certification practice statement has been developed.) | | If you are interested in participating in this important public/private sector | test of digital signature wage reporting, please contact me as soon as | possible | and I'll arrange for Mr. Chuck Liptz, SSA's Project Manager, to contact you | immediately to provide additional details. (Chuck can also be reached | directly | at (410) 965-7057 or . | | John Sabo | Social Security Administration | (410) 965-1550 | | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | James M. Galvin galvin at commerce.net | CommerceNet +1 410.203.2707 | 3209-A Corporate Court FAX +1 410.203.2709 | Ellicott City, MD 21042 http://www.commerce.net/ | http://www.eff.org/blueribbon http://www.eff.org/goldkey | -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From bdolan at USIT.NET Tue Jan 14 14:58:43 1997 From: bdolan at USIT.NET (Brad Dolan) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 14:58:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701142058.OAA05219@jeep.Central.Sun.COM> Message-ID: Mmmm. I'm told that, on most cellphone calls, a scanner will present both sides of the conversation on the same frequency. Usually one side will be louder. Perhaps there's some feedback from a party's receiver back into his transmitter? bd On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Michael Tighe SUN IMP wrote: > Bill Stewart writes: > > >Tapping cellphones is more trouble than tapping wired phones - > >they move around, and to tap them from the phone company end > >requires taps everywhere that you activate when you know where > >somebody is. > > Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record BOTH sides > of the conversation without interruption? This seems pretty suspicious to > me. I think Old Newt was targeted by someone inside the phone company, who > was eavesdropping on all of his cell calls. > > From international at telcom.com Tue Jan 14 15:26:26 1997 From: international at telcom.com (MonarchTelcom+) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 15:26:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quality Low Cost International Telcom Message-ID: <199701142326.PAA05891@toad.com> Dear Hello,^Morons, Dear Netrepreneur, You will find some good opportunites to start your own internet profit center, or to expand your current business at my website but at no point will you be asked money or personal information. In addition we have a nice internet marketing resources page. This page is more than just free resources, it includes links to some cutting edge low cost new tools that can really maximize your time spent in the site registration process so do not miss the "EXPLOIT YOUR WEBSITE LINK" you will love it and get registered with 50 engines for free right up front. [[[ NEW ! Computer Based Business. ]]] Our powerful Multilevel Marketing program for PC's called PC-SUPER-MLM will give you the information and tools you need to start your own Computer Based Business. Our products can be easily duplicated and distributed via on-line. This gives us the ability to market all over the world with virtually no distribution cost. Download a FREE copy of the PC-SUPER-MLM software for your evaluation at web page: http://www.cyberzone.net/users/monarch/marketit.html Sincerely, Joseph R Kennedy Netrepreneur Webmaster Monarch Consulting Company From nelson at media.mit.edu Tue Jan 14 15:48:24 1997 From: nelson at media.mit.edu (Nelson Minar) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 15:48:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >> The take on this that we won't hear is: "This is outrageous! Why don't >> cell-phones offer encryption to ensure our privacy?" A full page ad from the January 14, 1997 New York Times: Dear Mr. Speaker: If you'd rather not have your phone conversation overheard and printed word for word in the newspaper, next time use an Omnipoint wireless phone instead of a cellular phone. The ad then explains that cell phone eavesdropping happnes all the time, and offers Omnipoint, "a new 100% digital wireless phone system that operates on a technology far superior to cellular. It encrypts your voice so no one can listen in on your conversations. Or capture any personal data transmissions." It's a pretty funny ad. From proff at suburbia.net Tue Jan 14 15:57:02 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net (proff at suburbia.net) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 15:57:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19970114235303.6177.qmail@suburbia.net> > shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) writes: > > Commercial data security software of any kind, regardless if it uses crypto > > or not, is however prohibited from being distributed via the Internet or > > being exported by any other means. > > I can at least vaguely understand the rationale behind restricting the > export of cryptography. But I don't even begin to comprehend > restricting the export of data security software. What is going on > here? Whose idea is this, what is the agenda? > If you read ITAR you will see that State explicity bans export of any operating system with a security rating of B2 or above. The adgenda is pretty obvious. Cheers, Julian From markm at voicenet.com Tue Jan 14 17:46:22 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 17:46:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: another idea? In-Reply-To: <853262592.523172.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 14 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > Am I to presume that we will be putting something in the "welcome to > cypherpunks" message people get when they join to tell them how to > subscribe to the uncensored list? - From the "welcome message": I. Administrivia (please read, boring though it may be) The cypherpunks list is one of three lists discussing cryptography, privacy, and social issues relating to them. The three lists are: cypherpunks moderated to suppress spam and flames cypherpunks-unedited all submissions, just as they arrived cypherpunks-flames the submissions that didn't pass moderation All of these lists are high-volume mailing lists. > or are we going to have > yet more censorship on this list which is rapidly degenerating > into a playground of illuminati and elite censors??? This list is rapidly degenerating into something, but it's not "a playground of illuminati and elite censors". Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMtw32CzIPc7jvyFpAQFU0wf9H77cGP3nfVfogGqy3r+PHxOVVmpivLbK 0d8b/5ay7H6KGpvivXdV+YwqVLu75hLm59H7zPZBb0387R8T/cISg3AznP5F1upP IJDA36ebKWIIHOcLMOkwAIkQq8yI/xWCtvp4DInoC2VL4HbzFcjQbLaO6+up3KDK mNLslx6vWFtNGzGbxvOrMvyfm/2UJseYLnvkm0YOWmpdLqJiakEh1FED2UbWhHig KpJq1XLyjaT7ahEscN2oo6iWglOWikXRatFHGipqCgpNLqjA8uSaHifvO/dtAP09 Xy1z+hax0lnEiid0izqaCFpcr1jhEB89Ylk/iYgBAeZB+3UzvZVXow== =kJwv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From olbon at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 18:01:59 1997 From: olbon at ix.netcom.com (Clay Olbon II) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 18:01:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970114210400.0b2fe9a6@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 02:48 PM 1/14/97 -0800, you wrote: >It is also possible that somewhere in the chain of information between >mom&pop, the media, and us, the distinction between "cordless phone" >and cellular phone. I gather it was a conference call that was >intercepted. All it takes is one participant using a cordless phone in >range of one scanner, and the whole conversation is compromised. The congressman (Boehner? from Ohio) whose cellphone was "eavesdropped" stated today that he was parked in the lot of a Waffle House in Lake City FL. The couple said that they just happened to be driving by when they overheard and began taping the conversation. I have a problem with making it illegal to listen to parts of the electromagnetic spectrum. Seems sort of unnatural. Maybe they will decide that people who can see the color green will go to jail next ;-) Technological solutions are much more elegant. Of course, they are not nearly as sexy as legal remedies (I can't wait to see if the congressman who gave it to the Times is indicted!) Clay ******************************************************* Clay Olbon olbon at ix.netcom.com sys-admin, engineer, programmer, statistitian, etc. **********************************************tanstaafl From haystack at holy.cow.net Tue Jan 14 18:08:06 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 18:08:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701150150.UAA15413@holy.cow.net> Timothy `C' May is so full of shit that some of it bursts out on this mailing list. /\ /\ + \______/ + / . . \ < / > \ \--/ / ------ From eb at comsec.com Tue Jan 14 18:27:33 1997 From: eb at comsec.com (Eric Blossom) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 18:27:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701142058.OAA05219@jeep.Central.Sun.COM> Message-ID: <199701150204.SAA25917@comsec.com> > Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record BOTH sides > of the conversation without interruption? This seems pretty suspicious to > me. You typically only need to tune into either the forward or reverse channel. You can usually hear both sides (one may be down a few dB). This is probably a result of acoustic coupling from the speaker into the microphone on one or both ends (could also be near-end hybrid echo). You see the same situation on both cellular and the 49 MHz cordless phones. Eric From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 18:44:04 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 18:44:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Exporting Virus Software In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970113210258.006ade10@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <32DC60FE.5B14@sk.sympatico.ca> Anonymous wrote: > What's really going on here is that the NSA wants to know exactly > what's out there in terms of virus protection and security software, > so that if they need to release a virus or something they know exactly > how to work around the defenses people are using. You're not going to > too many export applications denied for this kind of stuff. It's more > just a way for them to know exactly what's going on in that realm. Regulation for the purpose of knowing 'everything'. The original purpose of the InterNet was for the DOD to be able to eavesdrop on and monitor the movement and communications of scientists, educators, and other hi-level movers and shakers in the world of the intellect. When some of those using the InterNet refused to place their 'trust' in the DOD's benevolence in making this technology available, choosing to use it only for low-level communications, the DOD began exhorting the wonders of 'data encryption', as a way to ensure InterNet users of the privacy and security of their hi-level communications. With 'encryption', even the 'doubters' felt secure in the knowledge that they could now communicate anything, at any level, and know that their communications were 'safe' from unwanted disclosure. Then came a 'fly in the ointment'. A little shit-hole punk, non-DOD-non-NSA-schill named Phil Zimmerman came out with an encrytpion program that the DOD did 'not' already have the capability to read--one that they could 'not' break. All of a sudden, export of cryptography became a grand issue. Why? ?Encryption software was already existent outside of the U.S. ?Encryption software was already being exported from the U.S. ?Encryption software was already available to all of those labeled by the U.S. government as 'enemies' who should be 'denied' use of this software. So why was Phil Zimmerman's 'backyard' encrytion program such a threat to the powers-that-be? Because they didn't already have the key to read it, and they couldn't break it--it wasn't an Enigma. It was the Inaugural Enigma. And export regulations for Virus protection programs? What reason can 'you' think of for the U.S. government not wanting others to have 'full' protection from computer virus'? 'Whose' virus is the U.S. goverment concerned about others having protection from? Now that Phil Zimmerman has his legal problems 'sorted out', I hope that he doesn't decide to write a virus protection program. It might 'work'. Toto From info at softcell Tue Jan 14 18:46:33 1997 From: info at softcell (info at softcell) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 18:46:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Bulk e mail software Message-ID: Please put remove in the subject and press reply if you do not want mail from us Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service terminated? Get the software for FREE? And not send mail to people who do not want it? Just visit our web site located at. http://www.softcell.net From eb at comsec.com Tue Jan 14 18:51:37 1997 From: eb at comsec.com (Eric Blossom) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 18:51:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970114104854.0065cb80@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199701150158.RAA25901@comsec.com> > Eavesdropping on cellphones is illegal, since there's an expectation of > privacy. Ummm, Eavesdropping on cellphones is illegal, because it's illegal. See the Electronic Communication Privacy Act (ECPA). Since when does anybody talking on a *radio* have an expectation of privacy? Listening in on normal cordless phones is also now illegal, as a result of the Communication Assistance to Law Enforcement Act (Digital Telephony). Recall that the early working name for Digital Telephony was "The Digital Telephony and Privacy Improvement Act of 19XX". Classic piece of double speak. The *privacy improvement* was the criminalization of radio reception. Eric From aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 18:59:27 1997 From: aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com (AIDAS) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 18:59:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970114210400.0b2fe9a6@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Clay Olbon II wrote: > The congressman (Boehner? from Ohio) whose cellphone was "eavesdropped" A woman on the radio ABC news this morning said, "Congressman...BONER?...Bahner is reportidly..." My guess is that someone spelt it incorrectly on her sheet. ;) > I have a problem with making it illegal to listen to parts of the > electromagnetic spectrum. Seems sort of unnatural. Maybe they will decide > that people who can see the color green will go to jail next ;-) > Technological solutions are much more elegant. Of course, they are not > nearly as sexy as legal remedies (I can't wait to see if the congressman who > gave it to the Times is indicted!) Seems like a good issue to site when trying to push remailers, eh? :) From blancw at microsoft.com Tue Jan 14 18:59:45 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 18:59:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: People Who Need People... Message-ID: I was just going through a web service which, when you enter your city & zip, will bring up all the businesses within that geographical area - Leisure Travel Services etc., then further sub-categorized into Leisure: Restaurants (type: Greek, Italian, Chinese, etc.) Travel: Airlines, Hotels & Motels etc. plus further sub-categories. I was mulling over the all the info which can be quickly pulled up about these people and then remembered that these are not just individual persons whose info I'm looking at, but commercial establishments - companies with services & products which they are offering to anyone. So it's okay. (Why?) Because they *want* to be listed; they want information about themselves to be available to anyone (anyone with money to spend, that is). So it occurred to me: when you need money, you want everyone to know where you are. This could be further generalized into: when you need something, you want everyone to know about it (in case anyone has a solution to your plight). What a different consideration it is, to think of persons separately from their place of business or trade, where they don't want anything to be known or broadcast (except at their individual discretion, consent, release, etc.) When you don't need anything - when you're full, satisfied, and happy - you want 'outsiders' to leave you alone. I think some people can really get confused as to where privacy begins and marketing ends (or is it the other way, I get confused ). I know it's happened on this list, where arguments have developed over the fine line of difference between contrasting "rights" to information - i.e, while in the workplace vs while in the front yard on the sidewalk of one's own house or walking around at the mall, etc. Allowance, consent, personal prerogatives, authority over one's decisions & choices - these concepts are all going to require much thought and refinement of demarcation, as the line between being closed or open to others, hidden or exposed, a little bit or a lot, here and/or there, becomes finer and finer while the "net" widens and grows. That is, those who in the past have not felt the need to think much about these things will now be confronted with the necessity of doing so; of considering precisely what the fine line of difference is between conflicting ideas about personal authority, privacy, and public access; what they think is right or wrong, acceptable or intolerable, just from the nature of the circumstances. (like Newt, for instance.) .. Blanc From ericm at lne.com Tue Jan 14 19:10:04 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 19:10:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970114210400.0b2fe9a6@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199701150307.TAA18846@slack.lne.com> Clay Olbon II writes: > > The congressman (Boehner? from Ohio) whose cellphone was "eavesdropped" > stated today that he was parked in the lot of a Waffle House in Lake City > FL. The couple said that they just happened to be driving by when they > overheard and began taping the conversation. Interesting. In California, operating a scanner while driving is illegal. Of course it was probably the passenger running the scanner. I've always wanted to scan cell-phone callers while driving next to them on 101. Even in Silicon Valley it'd be pretty wierd to have a sinister looking guy in the car next to you pointing a black box with an antenna at you... > I have a problem with making it illegal to listen to parts of the > electromagnetic spectrum. Seems sort of unnatural. I think that blowing your mouth off about what you've heard by scanning cellular traffic is what's illegal. Or more illegal than merely listening anyhow. > Maybe they will decide > that people who can see the color green will go to jail next ;-) > Technological solutions are much more elegant. Of course, they are not > nearly as sexy as legal remedies (I can't wait to see if the congressman who > gave it to the Times is indicted!) Given that they've just pissed on some seriously powerful people I'd expect that the fools who made the tape and gave it to the Democratic congresscritter and then HAD A NEWS CONFERENCE about it are going to be in some deep shit. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From jimbell at pacifier.com Tue Jan 14 19:27:44 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 19:27:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701150327.TAA04637@mail.pacifier.com> At 05:56 PM 1/14/97 -0500, Brad Dolan wrote: >Mmmm. I'm told that, on most cellphone calls, a scanner will present both >sides of the conversation on the same frequency. Usually one side will be >louder. Perhaps there's some feedback from a party's receiver back into >his transmitter? It's called duplex echo. Whenever you convert 2-wire audio to 4-wire (two pair) you're going to get a reflection. The cell-phone company can't perfectly match the impedances connecting to the local phonecos, and so a little signal gets reflected. Actually, this is desireable locally because it acts as feedback to the speaker, as long as the reflection is kept within reason. The result is that both sides of the communication are hearable in the radio signals. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From rah at shipwright.com Tue Jan 14 20:05:43 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:05:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: DCSB: The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictions for1997 Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The Digital Commerce Society of Boston Presents David Kaufman FIND/SVP Emerging Technologies Research Group "The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictions for 1997" Tuesday, February 4, 1997 12 - 2 PM The Downtown Harvard Club of Boston One Federal Street, Boston, MA David is Managing Director of FIND/SVP's Emerging Technologies Research Group with specific responsibility for "The Internet Consumer - Continuous Market Advisory Service". The group provides numerous Fortune 500 companies with detailed research and analysis on behaviors and preferences of Internet consumers. Mr. Kaufman will discuss the Internet as a consumer platform. The growth of the Internet has been getting a lot of press, most of it based on speculation, not research. Although good data is hard to find, it does exist and can be used to approach the Interactive consumer. During 1996 it became true that Internet consumers, who paid for their own access, were one of the fastest growing market segments. Currently, home and small business users are driving the demand for interactive services such as online banking and financial planning. Users also expressed an interest in locating information on such diverse topics as travel, entertainment, parenting, and health. Starting in 1997 consumers will be able to access the net from more numerous locations and in different ways. Internet appliances such as WebTV will allow non-technology users to access the net. As critical mass develops, the net will become impossible to ignore for most marketers. Based on research and some industry insight, Mr. Kaufman will present FIND/SVP's predictions for the Internet Consumer in 1997 and beyond. Prior to joining FIND/SVP's Emerging Technologies Research Group, David was with BIS Strategic Decisions (now GIGA Information Group) at the time it was a division of NYNEX Corporation. He has been employed by Metaphor Computer Systems and XEROX Corporation in the marketing of the first technology products from the Palo Alto Research Center. David is a Graduate of the University of Wisconsin. This meeting of the Digital Commerce Society of Boston will be held on Tuesday, February 4, 1997 from 12pm - 2pm at the Downtown Branch of the Harvard Club of Boston, One Federal Street. The price for lunch is $27.50. This price includes lunch, room rental, and the speaker's lunch. ;-). The Harvard Club *does* have dress code: jackets and ties for men, and "appropriate business attire" for women. We will attempt to record this meeting and put it on the web in RealAudio format at some future date We need to receive a company check, or money order, (or, if we *really* know you, a personal check) payable to "The Harvard Club of Boston", by Saturday, February 1, or you won't be on the list for lunch. Checks payable to anyone else but The Harvard Club of Boston will have to be sent back. Checks should be sent to Robert Hettinga, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, Massachusetts, 02131. Again, they *must* be made payable to "The Harvard Club of Boston". If anyone has questions, or has a problem with these arrangements (We've had to work with glacial A/P departments more than once, for instance), please let us know via e-mail, and we'll see if we can work something out. Planned speakers for DCSB are: March Daniel Greenwood The Role of State Government in Digital Commerce April Stewart Baker Encryption Policy and Digital Commerce We are actively searching for future speakers. If you are in Boston on the first Tuesday of the month, and you would like to make a presentation to the Society, please send e-mail to the DCSB Program Commmittee, care of Robert Hettinga, . For more information about the Digital Commerce Society of Boston, send "info dcsb" in the body of a message to . If you want to subscribe to the DCSB e-mail list, send "subscribe dcsb" in the body of a message to . Looking forward to seeing you there! Cheers, Robert Hettinga Moderator, The Digital Commerce Society of Boston -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Pretty Safe Mail 1.0 iQCVAwUBMtxDivgyLN8bw6ZVAQE49gP+OwzyhPKcYc8r8E4l8RYDUHJvvcPa9XvD UYPZ4CnpkT3Q3Y9IXI573I2zYnI7qXv6nckU+F9GSIH8k2DdItp3YNl6mvf8+vgB 2yFCqHEL82H0kR9+xUIepCwtqZLz8BoO1Ee4KJJZl451KuA2jvAO5+T4P/U2uBHH z8oh9U7F0Dk= =NZD0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From rah at shipwright.com Tue Jan 14 20:07:47 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:07:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: EPIC Drops the Ball on the NewsHour (Was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: <199701142209.RAA26359@pathfinder.com> Message-ID: At 5:34 pm -0500 1/14/97, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Watch the Lehrer Newhour (or whatever the hell it's >called now) tonight, for instance. Sadly, no. A guy from EPIC, somebody who *should* have known better, did not mention cryptography at all. At least in the part I heard. Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From iiucom at iiu.com Tue Jan 14 20:16:24 1997 From: iiucom at iiu.com (iiucom at iiu.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:16:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Information is POWER- Get it! Message-ID: <199701150411.XAA15372@mule1.mindspring.com> ****This letter is sent to you automaticly. If you wish to be removed, reply and type remove*********** ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ This is a new LEGAL service bringing Public Information to the world of Personnel computing!!! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ This letter is being sent to you because you know that information is Power. You are interested in new ways of doing business economically and safely. You won't let anyone take advantage of you. Please read the next few paragraphs to see if our services can help you. We are Informational Investigations, Unlimited, a public information company. What we do is to provide the public with information on people and companies. Let me explain. Say you've lost touch with an old friend. We can find that person. What if that someone or a company owes you money. We can find that person/company so you can collect. Here's another way IIU can help you. Are you buying a house? Do you think knowing what the seller paid for the same house could help you in the negotiations? Do you trust the real estate to give you the right tax assessment? We can give you the taxes on your dream house directly from yhe assessors office. No better way to be accurate than that! Are you hiring a 'nanny' or babysitter? I know from my experience how emotional a decision that can be. The worry, the questions about his/her background. EASE YOUR MIND! Why not check to see if this person was convicted of a crime. Do they have bad credit or a DWI? OK? Want to see one more? Here's how we have saved landlords money for years. Renting an apartment? Extending credit? Call us! We can do the background checking for you, saving you time and money in the long run. Have you ever tried to get a deadbeat out out of your apartment for non-payment? With today's courts, it is almost impossible. Save money NOW. Call us to do a background on the perspective tenant BEFORE you rent to them. A few dollars now may save you THOUSANDS later in attorney's fees and lost rent. CONVINCED? We won't belabor the point. We can provide you with the information you need to make informed decisions quickly and economically. Our fees? Simple. We charge you the cost of the search plus $20.00. Our search fees, the amount it costs us to get your information, is usually $50.00 or less. Most searches are $10.-15.00. All information is obtained legally through public databases. Call us at (800) 375-5260, Monday-Friday-9AM to 5PM ET. Or visit our web site at: http://www.iiu.com. Make a bookmark for it. Tell a friend. Thank you for taking the time to read our letter. INFORMATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS, UNLIMITED, INC. From jimbell at pacifier.com Tue Jan 14 20:28:16 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:28:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701150427.UAA12861@mail.pacifier.com> At 12:02 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >>>I just caught the news reports of Newt Gingrich's cell phone calls being >>>taped by "a little old retired couple" with a scanner. These were then >>>given to a congressman, who gave them to a newspaper. > >Eavesdropping on cellphones is illegal, since there's an expectation of >privacy. I disagree. Not that cellphone eavesdropping is illegal, it is; I disagree that the REASON it is illegal is some sort of expectation of privacy. And I also disagree that there is any expectation of privacy. If anything, the opposite should be true: Unless a person was (falsely) under the impression that the radio signals were encrypted (which, in itself, requires that a person be technologically-literate enough to be aware of the technical possibility that radio CAN BE encrypted, but also implies knowing that they might not be...) then the very fact that the signals go by radio would imply the possibility of reception by others with reasonably simple radios. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Tue Jan 14 20:28:20 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:28:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? Message-ID: <199701150427.UAA12865@mail.pacifier.com> At 11:47 PM 1/13/97 -0800, Greg Broiles wrote: > Presumably the RC5 patent (if one is awarded) won't suffer from >the peculiarities of the international patent schemes which made RSA only >patentable in the US. "Pecularities"? If anything, the peculiarities would have been within _US_ law, and not international law. As I understand it, most people cite the requirement that an invention patent must be applied-for BEFORE disclosure as a requirement for most international patents, which explained by RSA wasn't patented outside of the US. Alone, that would have denied non-US patents to RSA. However, such an explanation grandly ignores the fact that computer software (let alone mathematics in general) was not considered patentable ANYWHERE (?) before public-key systems made their appearance in 1976. It also ignores the strong likelihood that the reason for the Patent-Office policy change (done, apparently, without benefit of a corresponding law change) was because with public-key/RSA there was finally an example of software the government wished to deny to the average citizen, and the only mechanism (short of secrecy, which was broken) to do so was to patent it. I'm still waiting for an "innocent" explanation for the US patent office beginning to issue software patents. I don't think there is one. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 14 20:32:40 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:32:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Reminder: Physical DC Cypherpunks Meeting In-Reply-To: Message-ID: "Mark O. Aldrich" writes: > Post-meeting world-problem-solving and beer-swilling activities practice safe sex - bring a bagful of condoms. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 14 20:32:52 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:32:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: PBS program - Turing/Enigma In-Reply-To: <199701141321.HAA07999@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: snow writes: > > Homosexuals have a strange attraction to cryptography, perhaps because of i > > connection to privacy and anonymity. But they haven't made any contribution > > Speaking from personal experince Dimitri? You and Grubor enjoying each > others company? Two questions: One, do the crypto-queers Gilmore and Inman suck each other's cocks? Two, why did the above-quoted message appear on "moderated" cypherpunks? (That's a rhetorical question: clearly Gilmore's moderation encourages personal attacks on Gilmore's "enemies" like myself and Dr.Grubor, while responses to these attacks are suppressed.) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From harka at nycmetro.com Tue Jan 14 20:33:17 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:33:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Revokation Scheme Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, I started thinking about the issue, how to set up a system to have somebody else revoke your key for you, if you don't have the means to do so yourself. The possible case I had in mind was, what if you're maybe a dissident, you get arrested and your apartment (incl. disks/keys) gets raided. You don't have any means to revoke the key yourself, don't even have e-mail in general, and with the "one phone call", that your hopefully entitled to, you can't really do much... It might have been discussed before, but here is what I came up with: Peter (the dissident) creates a signed key revokation certificate and a list of the intended recipients for it. He archives the files and then encrypts the archive conventionally. He then sends the encrypted archive file to his trusted friends (or relatives) Alice and Bob, without the passphrase though. (Note: For additional security, the files within the archive may be encrypted with A. and B.'s public keys). Then Peter gives a sealed envelope to his lawyer (or anybody he trusts and who would know, if something happened to him), containing the passphrase and the names of Alice and Bob, incl. their respective phone/fax numbers, e-mail adresses and snail mail adresses with the instruction to notify them if necessary. The lawyer however, does not have the archive itself. Now, in case of an arrest, Peter calls his lawyer (he'd very likely be the first one to know) and thus he knows, that Peter's keys have been compromised. The lawyer now opens the envelope and gets in touch with Alice and Bob, telling them of Peter's misfortune, and he gives them the passphrase for the archive. He also sends them the same information in an encrypted/signed e-mail. (Note: Of course, Alice and Bob have to have the lawyers public key and his key must be signed by Peter and vice versa. Preferably, Alice and Bob have met the lawyer at some point and have verified his key first hand.) Thus they know, it was really Peter's lawyer, who gave them the information, not somebody else, who might have gotten possession of the envelope... Alice and Bob, however, do not immediately send out the revokation certificate, but try to verify the information from the lawyer with independent sources, such as Peter's relatives, friends etc.. Only if one or better both of them (they should be in contact with each other too) has/have enough reason to believe, that Peter is really in trouble and that his keys have been compromised, they decrypt the archive and send his key revokation certificate to the intended recipients (friends, key-servers etc.). Note1: The entire system relies on the trustworthiness of Alice and Bob and their effort, to verify the information, before they send out the revokation certificate. Note2: The described chain of information/verification could go different directions. Even if Peter's mom is the first one to know, she could call Alice and/or Bob and/or his lawyer {...}, who in turn verify the information with others... Note3: As additional backup for the case, that the lawyer can't get in touch with neither Alice nor Bob, he could have the same archive file, encrypted with a different passphrase (which he doesn't know). If he can't talk to Alice or Bob within a reasonable time period (let's say 3 days), Peter could give him the passphrase and so his lawyer himself sends out the revokation certificate. Note4: In case, Peter doesn't even get the one phone call, but happens to be in a country, where one just "disappeares", having his secret keys compromised should be the least of his problems... But even then, chances are, that the word gets out and Alice and Bob could act upon it. Please let me know, if you think, that such a scheme could work (or not work). Also I'd be grateful, if you'd copy replies to my private e-mail adress as well, for I am currently not subscribed to the CP list... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMtsI6zltEBIEF0MBAQHo7wf9GQTU5u72gFVZ0LMr7hhTWSikYVDFvzGF bGopD01j6bq3g9jYQC3YC0pRGfA+y8Q3qDLRbeJ5qMm3iXZgv7Axu2PVeri7ZE7r +GWZjfMk9EFGY1t9Jf2Fnm9mSAV0Cgq02vyhns8fLqTH1jcNuinZZ61Hq1+oSDFs f7/qttsqLZmxeHU+VI/47U0xkuh4NXQk/aZlNUOr9Au9+PhqJwpa7EGYzmCBKTzl pu4QRyjNnvgIuec2wkwVn8uNevvlc/aQB65uU55+NOQnMINl2V4S3lRim9F7gGH+ DV6NiZxmjxCXbX0y4K+33BX1YIwBgYz5EArM1O1j32lOpThIb03jmA== =stfG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From Gadgets1 at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 20:38:28 1997 From: Gadgets1 at ix.netcom.com (Gadgets1 at ix.netcom.com) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:38:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: DSS Secret Info Message-ID: <199701150447.WAA10924@matrix.binary.net> Hi: I seen your post in the group and thought you could be interested in this info. This mgs was posted in the misc.forsale grp under info manual. ??? FREE SATELLITE TV ??? *************************************************************************** ****** The secrets out about the New 18" DIGITAL SATELLITE SYSTEMS ******* *************************************************************************** The technology underground is an amazing place. The huge multi-national corporations developed the world's most sophisticated satellite-delivered television programming system,called DSS it rolled out in september 1994 and by april of 1995 it had been hacked. By autumn of 1995, Test access cards were being sold all over North America. The cards turn on all programming including pay-per-view-movies,blacked-out sports events and all other available channels. These test cards are now being used in other countries to get FREE USA PROGRAMMING on the DSS system. United States companies will not allow other countries to purchase our programming. In short companies are popping up selling these cards at a blistering rate. The cards are being sold for as low as 150.00 dollars in some areas, other companies offer two year warranties on thier cards. If you would like to learn more about this subject and other educational material you can order our infotech manual #10 which includes the following information. * List of companies selling these products along with phone numbers. * FAQ's about test cards * Hidden features in your receiver * Hard boot and soft boot info * How to use that data port in the back To Order send $10.00 MONEY ORDER along with E-MAIL address to: InfoTech Box 124d Raymond, Nebraska 68428 (If you wish send a SASE and we'll return it snail mail) < We don't sell test cards please don't ask > *WARNING*WARNING*WARNING* INFORMATION AND PRODUCTS SOLD HERE ARE INTENDED FOR EDUCATIONAL AND ENTERTAINMENT USE ONLY. WE ASSUME NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MANNER IN WHICH OUR INFORMATION/PRODUCTS ARE USED.CERTAIN TRADEMARKS USED HERE ARE THE PROPERTY OF THEIR OWNERS. USE OF SAME BY US IN NO WAY AN ATTEMPT TO INFRINGE ON THE RIGHTS OF THOSE TRADEMARK OWNERS. From declan at pathfinder.com Tue Jan 14 20:52:59 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:52:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: EPIC Drops the Ball on the NewsHour (Was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Oh well. I'll yell at Dave tomorrow. He should know better, or it was sliced out. -Declan On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: > At 5:34 pm -0500 1/14/97, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >Watch the Lehrer Newhour (or whatever the hell it's > >called now) tonight, for instance. > > Sadly, no. > > A guy from EPIC, somebody who *should* have known better, did not mention > cryptography at all. At least in the part I heard. > > Cheers, > Bob Hettinga > > > ----------------- > Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, > e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA > "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson > The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ > FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ > > > From nobody at replay.com Tue Jan 14 20:58:38 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 20:58:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: sendmail-type thing for Windows Message-ID: <199701150458.FAA03875@basement.replay.com> > Hi, > > Does anyone know of a simple program for windows that can, like > sendmail, work as a mail agent ans send mail messages from its stdin? I > am interested in sending email messages from Windoze boxes as part of > some automated process driven by .BAT files. > Yeah, exit to dos and run "loadlin". ;-) From lucifer at dhp.com Tue Jan 14 21:04:04 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 21:04:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software Message-ID: <199701150503.AAA11626@dhp.com> On 14 Jan 1997, Nelson Minar wrote: > shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) writes: > > Commercial data security software of any kind, regardless if it uses crypto > > or not, is however prohibited from being distributed via the Internet or > > being exported by any other means. > > I can at least vaguely understand the rationale behind restricting the > export of cryptography. But I don't even begin to comprehend > restricting the export of data security software. What is going on > here? Whose idea is this, what is the agenda? > > Is the US government really prepared to take on all the producers of > virus protection software? Symantec and IBM are pretty big players to > upset. And they don't even have the "drug dealers and terrorists" > bugbear to defend this particular export restriction. > > In my more cynical mood I'm afraid that what's going on is the US > government is trying to protect its capability to wage information > warfare. Could they get away with this? > A cynical person might think that this gives the government one more way to strongarm companies which might sell non-GAK encryption products. "Sure, I can ok the export of your new anti-virus software. Say, how's that crypto plug-in your working on?" From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 21:36:18 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 21:36:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970114213642.006f62bc@192.100.81.126> At 02:48 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Alan Bostick wrote: >(Someone mentioned that they thought cordless phone intercepts weren't >illegal the way cellular phone intercepts are. IANAL, but I recall that >intercepting both was made illegal by the same legislation.) It is illegal to intercept cell phone calls. It is legal under federal law to intercept cordless phones. IANAL, -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From jovi at telnor.net Tue Jan 14 21:49:49 1997 From: jovi at telnor.net (jovi at telnor.net) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 21:49:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701150547.VAA06996@telnor.net> I can not undestand why are you using my e mail adress to recibe your mail. >From what i see you are a hacker, and you are using some body space to work with no charge. Please avoid the use of my space. thnks. Lic. Jose Luis Vital V. Telefonos del Noroeste,S.A. de C.V. Ave. Pio Pico 2001, Zona Centro, Tijuana,B.C., M�xico. Tel.: (66) 33.22.91 Fax.: (66) 33.22.44 Internet E-mail: jovi at telnor.net From aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 22:17:20 1997 From: aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com (AIDAS) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:17:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <199701150547.VAA06996@telnor.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997 jovi at telnor.net wrote: > I can not undestand why are you using my e mail adress to recibe your mail. > > >From what i see you are a hacker, and you are using some body space to work with > no charge. > > Please avoid the use of my space. So which of the 2000 members of this list are you addressing? Further, why did you subscribe to the list if you didn't want to get the mail from it? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 22:22:13 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:22:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970113210258.006ade10@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <32DC8132.42AD@sk.sympatico.ca> Nelson Minar wrote: > In my more cynical mood I'm afraid that what's going on is the US > government is trying to protect its capability to wage information > warfare. Could they get away with this? Nelson, With a paranoid mind-set such as you seem to be displaying, the next thing I expect is for you to be rambling on about some ludicrous scenario involving the CIA being involved in distributing cocaine in ghetto areas. Toto From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 22:22:18 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:22:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970114222343.006b6f9c@192.100.81.126> I recently took a domestic flight from the Oakland, CA airport. While waiting for the airplane, I spent some time observing the security measures at the X-ray machine. As most readers probably know, laptops are often subject to manual scrutiny. From my non-representative sample, about four out of five tote bags clearly containing laptops will be manually searched. Typically, the attendant requires that the laptop is powered up. In none of the 20+ manual searches I witnessed did the security personnel wait past the RAM check before clearing the passenger. I could not help but contemplate how much of the insides of the laptop could be replaced while still obtaining an identical display. Then came the big one: A man wearing a beer truck driver uniform approached the checkpoint. On his hand truck were two kegs of beer. For those unfamiliar with such objects, a keg of beer is a cylindrical stainless steel container, about 1.5 feet tall with about 1 foot diameter. I was wondering what the procedure for handling these rather large steel containers would be. Would they be X-rayed? How much shielding would the steel provide for the contents? Much to my surprise, the man did not approach the X-ray machine. Instead, he went straight for the "exit only" walkway. The guard posted there to make sure that nobody would enter through the exit gave the fellow only a cursory glance as he entered the "secure" area unchallenged. I was flabbergasted. They let a man with two *large steel containers* enter unchecked? No asking for ID, no X-ray? I struck up a conversation with the beer truck driver. I asked him why the kegs did not get X-rayed. He looked at me with an expression of utter lack of understanding and answered: "They are too heavy to be put on the [conveyor] belt." Right... We wouldn't want to have these 50 pound steel barrels jam the X-ray machine. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 22:22:26 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:22:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701142233.OAA15724@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <32DC85A2.7734@sk.sympatico.ca> Eric Murray wrote: > Do you think they (whoever 'they' are) were tapping the phones of > everyone that Newt might talk to? Yes. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 22:22:45 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:22:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: s/n problems on this list In-Reply-To: <199701141652.IAA10713@netcom13.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32DC8E96.377@sk.sympatico.ca> Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > > I've posted on this subject many times in the past, and its > something I like to brainstorm on. signal to noise problems > on this list. 'Your' noise, or 'mine'? > generally, the moderator-specific approaches I find less > palatable than techniques that can be automated. here > are some more ideas for automated moderation techniques. Here's one. How about only accepting auto-generate postings from machines programmed only to post officially 'acceptable' postings? This would get rid of the dastardly 'human element' and insure that there would be no off-topic postings. > hence, a proposal: cpunks have long advocated and hacked mailer > programs to stick in crypto. how about sticking in a hack that > tracks how long mail messages are being read, and send that > info back to an auxilliary mailing list address. the list > software keeps track of time spent reading articles and > can allow people to screen the list based on the "most interesting > articles". "send me only those articles that go over a threshhold > of 500 combined human attention minutes". Then we can go directly to the postings that talk about "Gilligan's Island" and "Married With Children". Are you getting better drugs than I am? > of course this can be messed up by hackers who try to skew the > ratings. I would suggest a limit on the max time per article per > person. For every solution, there is a problem. > 2. I like the idea of a system that keeps track of complaints against > given users. Including yourself? > just more ideas. I like cpunks generally favor a technological > fix that doesn't involve bottlenecks of individual moderator > opinions. I think your ideas are a bottleneck. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 22:22:51 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:22:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: You can now subscr. to the moderated/unmoderated/flames lists In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970114121443.006941f4@smtp1.abraxis.com> Message-ID: <32DC93A9.27F6@sk.sympatico.ca> Alec wrote: > :John, > : Will you be making a "Last Chance To Call Me A Cocksucker" > :announcement? (:>) > : > :Toto > Geez, Toto, settle down! (:>) Gotta laugh! Alec, I guess that the money I spent for my lobotomy was just wasted. Toto From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 22:53:13 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:53:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: >Bill Stewart writes: > >>Tapping cellphones is more trouble than tapping wired phones - >>they move around, and to tap them from the phone company end >>requires taps everywhere that you activate when you know where >>somebody is. > >Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record BOTH sides >of the conversation without interruption? This seems pretty suspicious to >me. I think Old Newt was targeted by someone inside the phone company, who >was eavesdropping on all of his cell calls. Both sides of a conversation are audible on a single channel due to its use for sidetone. PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear | Internet: azur at netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet and Wireless Development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 22:53:24 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:53:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: >If the person with the cell phone doesn't move, then they don't >get handed off to a different cell. That means that they >stay on the same frquency. No need to scan channels if they don't switch. Wrong Eric, cells are constantly expanding and contracting as subscribers in motion are transferred in and out. Thus you can be stationary, holding a conversation, and assigned to cell A when all of a sudden subscribers enter from adjacent cells B and C threatening to fill cell A beyond capacity. To keep from dropping calls in cell A the MTS will determine which calls can safely, due to signal strength and adjacent cell capacity, be transferred to another cell. If your conversation is selected then off you go to another, geographically overlapping, cell. The MTS can't be sure which subscribers are stationary and which are in motion (it really doesn't care). We saw this unexpected phenomenon frequently during development of Cylink's SecureCell and finally had to recommend our users be stationary during use, because our modems did not tolerate handoffs well without retraining, in order to offer the best chance of uninterupted communication. > >What Bill's saying is that it is difficult to tap the cell phone of >a _particular_ person with just a scanner. However the people >who taped Newt were just scanning for whatever they could get. That's easy. Yes, you need a device which can simultaneously listen to the paging/controll channels and determine, when a handoff to a monitored conversation occurs,to which new channel pair they have been assigned. I seem to recall such a device was for sale a few years back using a ISA/EISA card and some DOS compatible software. It connected to the ubiquitous and well characterized Oki 900 cell phone. >-- >Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm >PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 22:53:28 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:53:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: >> >Tapping cellphones is more trouble than tapping wired phones - >> >they move around, and to tap them from the phone company end >> >requires taps everywhere that you activate when you know where >> >somebody is. >> >> Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record BOTH sides >> of the conversation without interruption? This seems pretty suspicious to >> me. I think Old Newt was targeted by someone inside the phone company, who >> was eavesdropping on all of his cell calls. >> > >It is also possible that somewhere in the chain of information between >mom&pop, the media, and us, the distinction between "cordless phone" >and cellular phone. I gather it was a conference call that was >intercepted. All it takes is one participant using a cordless phone in >range of one scanner, and the whole conversation is compromised. > >(Someone mentioned that they thought cordless phone intercepts weren't >illegal the way cellular phone intercepts are. IANAL, but I recall that >intercepting both was made illegal by the same legislation.) Sorry Alan, they were right. The Supreme Court ruled that unlike cell phones, cordless phone users could presume privacy. PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear | Internet: azur at netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet and Wireless Development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 14 22:58:08 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 22:58:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: You can now subscr. to the moderated/unmoderated/flames lists In-Reply-To: <199701140637.WAA14213@toad.com> Message-ID: <32DC7DB0.67B5@gte.net> A minor note: When I downloaded email tonite (Tues), there were 67 messages, and I got stopped 4 times with server errors. I've had at most four such errors total in the past 4 months. Coincidence, I guess. I unsubscribed cypherpunks, and re-subscribed to cypherpunks-unedited. I am now allegedly on the "original" list, but under a different name. So now I suppose anyone can get a list from majordomo(?) and see that I am on the "unedited" list (i.e., a second-class citizen, a minority), and no longer one of the "elite". If this is true (if), I'd like to say a big *BOO, HISS* to all the scum who didn't protest at least this item (renaming the original, and giving the original name to the edited list). From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 14 23:10:36 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:10:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software Message-ID: >> shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) writes: >> > Commercial data security software of any kind, regardless if it uses crypto >> > or not, is however prohibited from being distributed via the Internet or >> > being exported by any other means. >> But does it ban commercial companies from benefiting from their software if it is illegally exported (e.g., via the Net). Should, for example, PGP find users of its new software (who might be outside the U.S.) paying via ecash, should they accept the payment? -- Steve From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 23:21:23 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:21:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: MAJOR MSIE SECURITY BUG Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970114182042.0062beb8@popd.ix.netcom.com> It's rather self-serving to call this major lack-of-feature a MAJOR SECURITY BUG. Sure, it limits what you can do, but if it does what it claims to do, it's not a bug, it's just lack of vision, and there are _far_ more targets at Microsoft for complaints about that :-) MAJOR SECURITY BUGs are things like ActiveX and JavaScript-you-can't-turn- off. At least they seem to take a fail-secure approach to unknown CAs (even if it is fail-hostilely) rather than a more typical Microsoft fail-insecure-but-friendly fallback. The interesting capability that setting your own CAs isn't just that it lets you choose which service providers can be roots of a hierarchical tree-of-CAs model - it's that it lets you go beyond that model to support a web-of-trust model like PGP's, which is a Good Thing. You can duplicate this in a hierarchical world (if you must :-) by being the your own CA tree root, and certifying the other CAs you like. Netscape's original SSL implementations also only supported one CA root (Verisign), but after they got that working, they added user-selected CAs as well. Maybe MS will add this later? At 11:23 AM 1/10/97 GMT+2, source at iaccess.za wrote: >MSIE has a MAJOR security flaw in that it limits MSIE users to a very >restricted set of secure sites ONLY. Netscape Navigator does not have > this MAJOR limitation. >The bugs prevents access to Secure Servers other that those which MS >has decided to grant a monopoly to. This is both limiting to users >and inhibits Servers to their choice of Certificate Authorities. ...... >When MSIE does not recognise a Certificate Authority, it prompts the >user by saying it cannot connect to that site and gives the user no >opportunity to connect or access the Certificate Authority. >One of the ways the Certificate authorities are getting around this >problem is to publish a page listing their certificates. >The problem however is that users have to know this in advance and >MSIE gives no indication that this is >what needs to be done or where to go. .... >CompuSource in South Africa tries to accomnodate MSIE users by [.....] >https://www.compusource.co.za [.....] >Regards, >The Power Team >SMTP: source at iaccess.za Tel: +27-21-75-9197 >HTTP: http://www.compusource.co.za FAX: +27-21-72-8005 >FTP: ftp://ftp.compusource.co.za Postal: Building 6, Room 201 > CompuSource (Pty) Ltd # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From dozer at netwizards.net Tue Jan 14 23:28:09 1997 From: dozer at netwizards.net (dozer at netwizards.net) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:28:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Special Offer! Message-ID: <5bi0tf$j6e@news1-alterdial.uu.net> Are you interested in making Millions in your spare time? Any housewife could do it and so can you! Just email me at dozer at netwizards.net to receive your FREE information packet. Thanks for your attention, and I'll be talking with you soon. Bill dozer at netwizards.net From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 23:37:43 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:37:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: DCSB: The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictions for 1997 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DC9819.20DD@sk.sympatico.ca> Robert Hettinga wrote: > The Digital Commerce Society of Boston > Presents > The group provides numerous Fortune 500 companies with detailed research and > analysis on behaviors and preferences of Internet consumers. > Mr. Kaufman will discuss the Internet as a consumer platform. As in "Make $$$Money$$$ fast? Does putting on a suit and writing 'executive-oriented' postings in a pompous, pretentious manner raise this type of posting above the level of ordinary UCE/Spam? I don't think so. Does moderation mean that UCE postings that promise 'champagne and caviar' are acceptable, while 'crackers and cheese' post-conference promises are 'spam'? Will 'Subject: Consumer Platform / Make $$$Money Fast' be an 'acceptable' heading, whereas 'Subject: Make $$$Money Fast / Consumer Platform' is 'not acceptable'? Toto "Moderate suits, not jeans." (I've got some fine suits, thank you very much. I wear them at weddings, funerals, and whenever I want to 'screw' somebody.) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 23:37:58 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:37:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701150307.TAA18846@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <32DC9AF6.1456@sk.sympatico.ca> Eric Murray wrote: > Given that they've just pissed on some seriously powerful people I'd > expect that the fools who made the tape and gave it to the Democratic > congresscritter and then HAD A NEWS CONFERENCE about it are going to > be in some deep shit. Undoubtedly, they will be in much deeper shit than the criminal who broke the laws he was sworn to uphold. Power Rules! (Is this redundant?) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 14 23:38:12 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:38:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? In-Reply-To: <199701150427.UAA12865@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <32DC9EF2.4D67@sk.sympatico.ca> jim bell wrote: > It also ignores the strong likelihood that the reason for the Patent-Office > policy change (done, apparently, without benefit of a corresponding law > change) was because with public-key/RSA there was finally an example of > software the government wished to deny to the average citizen, and the only > mechanism (short of secrecy, which was broken) to do so was to patent it. > > I'm still waiting for an "innocent" explanation for the US patent office > beginning to issue software patents. I don't think there is one. Jim, It is reasurring to know that 'reason' and 'paranoia' can peacefully co-exist in the mind. Most people seem to veiw it as an either/or situation. Toto "They are refusing to conspire against me, in order to make my paranoia look irrational." From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 23:39:11 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:39:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970114191444.00645c38@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 02:58 PM 1/14/97 -0600, Michael Tighe SUN IMP wrote: >Bill Stewart writes: >>Tapping cellphones is more trouble than tapping wired phones - >>they move around, and to tap them from the phone company end >>requires taps everywhere that you activate when you know where >>somebody is. >Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record BOTH sides >of the conversation without interruption? Tapping the wire part is what's hard; the radio part (for analog cell phones) isn't that tough. That makes the "legitimate needs of law enforcement" (blech!) at some disadvantage compared to people who just want to have fun listening in on the radio. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 14 23:41:00 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 23:41:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970114192154.006327e8@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 05:58 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Eric Blossom wrote, correctly: >> Eavesdropping on cellphones is illegal, since there's an expectation of >> privacy. >Ummm, Eavesdropping on cellphones is illegal, because it's illegal. >See the Electronic Communication Privacy Act (ECPA). Since when does >anybody talking on a *radio* have an expectation of privacy? OK, more precisely, the justification for cellphone eavesdropping being illegal and cordless phone eavesdropping not being illegal was that there's an expectation of privacy from cellphones ("they're from the Phone Company") but not from cordless (everybody with early cordless phones knew they could receive their neighbor's calls if they used the same channel.) >Listening in on normal cordless phones is also now illegal, as a >result of the Communication Assistance to Law Enforcement Act >(Digital Telephony). Good point. The latest word from Louis Freeh is that he's all gung-ho to investigate the CRIMINAL grandma&grandpa who were EAVESDROPPING on Newt's phone calls. Of course, if _he'd_ been eavesdropping on Newt's phone calls, or yours, it would have been the "legitimate needs of law enforcement" at work. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 15 00:00:43 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:00:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970114194213.006468c8@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 10:23 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >As most readers probably know, laptops are often subject to manual >scrutiny. From my non-representative sample, about four out of five tote >bags clearly containing laptops will be manually searched. It's extremely airport, guard, and moon-phase dependent. Some places are real picky, some aren't. I've started following someone's advice about having the laptop go through vertically; it doesn't look like a big opaque block to them, and they can see the rest of the stuff. When I tried it in Orlando, they said "It has to go through lying down", ran it back through lying down, said "Computer", I said "Yup", and they handed it to me :-) >Typically, the attendant requires that the laptop is powered up. >In none of the 20+ manual searches I witnessed did the security personnel >wait past the RAM check before clearing the passenger. I could not help >but contemplate how much of the insides of the laptop could be replaced >while still obtaining an identical display. I've convinced a number of guards to be satisfied by the little LCD-battery-status display that shows it's on and charged (and asleep) without having to actually boot it up (which now that I'm running NT, which doesn't really understand power-management, is a big win...) The two batteries could be replaced with and the little 5-minute keepalive battery could run that display just fine. It wouldn't take much more to get the main LCD screen to look convincing. On the other hand, there are places that have Real Security Guards; I have a photo of the ceiling of an Israeli bus station where I had to demonstrate that my camera really was camera-like. >Then came the big one: A man wearing a beer truck driver uniform approached >the checkpoint. On his hand truck were two kegs of beer. .... >I was flabbergasted. They let a man with two *large steel containers* enter >unchecked? No asking for ID, no X-ray? I struck up a conversation with the >beer truck driver. I asked him why the kegs did not get X-rayed. He looked >at me with an expression of utter lack of understanding and answered: "They >are too heavy to be put on the [conveyor] belt." Yow! (And also - it's nice that people can occasionally do sensible things even if they're against regulations :-) But you would expect them to have a guard escort the guy to the bar (requiring someone to come back later and take the beer out of the false bottom of the keg. You can already get away with being almost anywhere by being dressed as a pizza deliverer or air-conditioner mechanic or clipboard-carrier; I guess beer-deliverer needs to be added to the list. As long as you act like you belong somewhere.... A more serious example of getting away with things by looking like you're doing something your supposed to be doing was the man who walked out of Nazi Germany carrying a ladder (as told to me by someone else who'd left Germany.) Nobody thought to question him, and it was an era that a laborer not having a truck was normal... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From krenn at nym.alias.net Wed Jan 15 00:07:49 1997 From: krenn at nym.alias.net (Krenn) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:07:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <19970115080734.4134.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Lucky Green wrote: > I recently took a domestic flight from the Oakland, CA airport. While > waiting for the airplane, I spent some time observing the security measures > at the X-ray machine. > > As most readers probably know, laptops are often subject to manual > scrutiny. From my non-representative sample, about four out of five tote > bags clearly containing laptops will be manually searched. Typically, the > attendant requires that the laptop is powered up. In none of the 20+ manual > searches I witnessed did the security personnel wait past the RAM check > before clearing the passenger. I could not help but contemplate how much of > the insides of the laptop could be replaced while still obtaining an > identical display. I have had the same experience. I am sure that removing all components of the laptop not required for its functioning would yield a significant amount of room inside, especially for larger (non-"notebook") machines. I'm not an expert on explosives, but I would imagine a laptop-full of whatever could be pretty nasty. Someone with determination could even make it look like it had a floppy, a CDROM, etc, just by replacing the devices themselves with facades. Not that the airport security would notice, but anyway. But wait - won't the all-important "did you pack your bags yourself" and "did anyone give you bags to take on the plane" stop them? ;-) It just obviates the fact that airport security is really useless against a determined attacker, but manages to be extremely annoying to everyone else. Krenn -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtyOLknqfwPpt/QVAQF5PAQArUhAYtLjoSwsKspwysZYvwP0kCEs9ncS xN5VaZTi/ow5xOcoVXbRhGQPlu5v1sL+04yLz+1AWnYX2UdtIdSBlZAhtNufOCQg Au0cDp6vKeL/GIGEYX3/HEsDjicpbfXSuq+OZ79hhhButM+5jlsXz972nhLkmEvM aeVSFjB9WHY= =FYTH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From i.am.not.a.number at best.com Wed Jan 15 00:12:24 1997 From: i.am.not.a.number at best.com (i.am.not.a.number at best.com) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:12:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Pentium optimizations for DES (BIG) Message-ID: <3.0.32.19700101000000.006b58b8@best.com> here is Mikkelson's macro, with a few cycles shaved. on my machine there is a small but measurable improvement. DesRound macro RoundNo,reg1,reg2 mov eax, DWORD PTR (RoundNo*8) [ebp] xor ebx, ebx mov edx, DWORD PTR (RoundNo*8+4) [ebp] xor eax, reg1 xor edx, reg1 and eax, 0fcfcfcfch mov bl, al and edx, 0cfcfcfcfh mov cl, ah ror edx, 4 xor reg2, DWORD PTR _des_SPtrans[ebx] mov bl, dl xor reg2, DWORD PTR _des_SPtrans[0200h+ecx] mov cl, dh shr eax, 16 xor reg2, DWORD PTR _des_SPtrans[0100h+ebx] mov bl, ah shr edx, 16 xor reg2, DWORD PTR _des_SPtrans[0300h+ecx] mov cl, dh and eax, 0FFh and edx, 0FFh xor reg2, DWORD PTR _des_SPtrans[0600h+ebx];ebx mov ebx,DWORD PTR _des_SPtrans[0700h+ecx] xor reg2, ebx mov ebx,DWORD PTR _des_SPtrans[0400h+eax] xor reg2, ebx mov ebx,DWORD PTR _des_SPtrans[0500h+edx] xor reg2, ebx endm At 10:19 AM 1/14/97 -6, Peter Trei wrote: >I hope you'll look at Svend Olaf Mikkleson's >latest DES round replacement for libdes. He >seems to have gotten the round down to 18 >clock cycles. I have not yet had a chance >to try it myself. > >see: http://inet.uni-c.dk/~svolaf/des.htm > >Peter Trei >trei at process.com > >Peter Trei >Senior Software Engineer >Purveyor Development Team >Process Software Corporation >http://www.process.com >trei at process.com > > From overcome at concentric.net Wed Jan 15 00:20:15 1997 From: overcome at concentric.net (overcome at concentric.net) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:20:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Positions open Message-ID: <199701150820.DAA15929@newman.cris.com> I_Love_SPAM, ATTENTION Fastest growing company expanding. Licensed in 34 counties, publicly held on NASDAQ. Part time up to $500 to $1,500, full time up to $2,000 to $6,000. Need to fill position immediately. Full training provided. Work from Home or Office. Paid vacations plus bonuses. Call this week ONLY for free information. (305)460-8000 From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 15 00:23:01 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:23:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DC8A07.64AE@gte.net> Alan Bostick wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Michael Tighe SUN IMP wrote: > > Bill Stewart writes:[snip] > (Someone mentioned that they thought cordless phone intercepts weren't > illegal the way cellular phone intercepts are. IANAL, but I recall that > intercepting both was made illegal by the same legislation.) > Of course, if the phone in question was a cell phone that happened to > be stationary -- like a handheld phone in someone's back yard or in a > restaurant or whatever, the question of the call jumping cells is moot. Cell phone monitoring is illegal everywhere. Cordless phones are on a state-by-state basis (illegal in Calif.). The purpose of the legislation is so that when the feds etc. catch someone in a major violation (scanning businesses and selling competitive or security info, whatever), they have a statute to prosecute on. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 15 00:32:05 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:32:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: You can now subscr. to the moderated/unmoderated/flames lists In-Reply-To: <199701140637.WAA14213@toad.com> Message-ID: <32DCB23A.192F@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > > A minor note: When I downloaded email tonite (Tues), there were 67 > messages, and I got stopped 4 times with server errors. I've had at > most four such errors total in the past 4 months. Coincidence, I guess. Or synchronicity. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 15 00:33:01 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 00:33:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Am I to blame? / "THE INTERNET GOLDRUSH" In-Reply-To: <199701150652.AAA02966@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: <32DCAA12.720C@sk.sympatico.ca> snow wrote: > > > The "Internet Goldrush" is ON! > > > It's simple! It's quick! It's here! > The funny thing is, most of the "Gold Rushers" wound up broke, or > working for someone else. > Most people are fools. Deliberately so. An interesting observation. The original Gold Rush involved the thronging masses stepping on each other's toes, shooting each other in the back, etc., and the end result was that a few 'lucky' ones got filthy rich, while the people behind the scenes, encouraging this activity, 'all' got filthy rich. If I had a mansion on the hill, with a high wall surrounding it and a guard on the gate, I would be much more inclined to encourage the masses to seek their fortune at my doorstep, and shop at my general store across the street. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 15 01:02:36 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 01:02:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <19970115080734.4134.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <32DCB602.685C@sk.sympatico.ca> Krenn wrote: > But wait - won't the all-important "did you pack your bags yourself" and > "did anyone give you bags to take on the plane" stop them? ;-) If your friends or family are a little late catching the same plane as yourself, then just answer, "No, my son packed them." This, on the average, gives your companions an extra 10-15 minutes to catch the plane, since regulations require them to do a complete check of your baggage (and they are 'supposed' to take them to a secure area to do so). Since you are ready to board the plane they cannot legally detain you and let the plane go on, in order to process you and your baggage according to proper regulatory procedure. They must, instead, detain the plane. They may jump up and down and tell you this is not so, but I have never missed a plane, and neither have most of my tardy companions. From pccash at sprintmail.com Wed Jan 15 01:18:02 1997 From: pccash at sprintmail.com (Garry) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 01:18:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Seen Your Post! Message-ID: <199701150917.BAA18755@mailgate31> I Seen Your Post! I found your post in one of my favorite news groups. You might find my views are exactly the same. In fact my entire WebSite is right up that alley. Every business Opportunity listed at my sight is FREE! In fact one of the businesses I joined (again free) has an excellent earning potential of over $600 profit per YEAR, per CUSTOMER! The best part is don't do anything except promote the business. The company does everything for me!!! Although I do not have anything against MLM, this is not! In order to even notice this biz you have to look up in the top window frame of my site as its loading the image (read the text). Enough about me! If you can contribute to my sight or have any ideas, I would appreciate it. I'll keep an eye out for more of your contributions to the "Newsgroups"! http://www.angelfire.com/biz/PC2CASH Tons of Excellent FREE Stuff for Entrepreneurs too... PS. If you like what you see or have any questions, or ideas about my site, please drop me an e-mail. But, if you don't mind use "pcplus" as the subject. It helps me weed through my junk! Thanks, Garry pccash at sprintmail.com If you should get this message more than twice please forgive me. I may have mis-configured this new e-mailer! Day 3 in use #00377782 ******************************************************************* Garry sent you this message using WorldMerge, the fastest and easiest way to send personalized email messages to your customers, subscribers, leads or friends. For more information, visit http://www.coloradosoft.com ******************************************************************* From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Jan 15 02:30:35 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 02:30:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970115022949.0073c350@mail.io.com> At 09:37 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >At 02:48 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Alan Bostick wrote: >>(Someone mentioned that they thought cordless phone intercepts weren't >>illegal the way cellular phone intercepts are. IANAL, but I recall that >>intercepting both was made illegal by the same legislation.) > >It is illegal to intercept cell phone calls. It is legal under federal law >to intercept cordless phones. The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 amended the federal wiretap statutes (18 USC 2510 et seq) to make interception of cordless calls illegal. Also, pursuant to the CALEA, the FBI reported yesterday (1/14) that they anticipate the potential need to conduct almost 60,000 wiretaps "simultaneously" (they define "simultaneous" to mean on the same day) by 10/25/98. (They do some handwaving to explain that while they're saying they might need to do 60K simultaneous wiretaps, they're not really saying they *would* do 60K wiretaps, but they're not promising not to, and really, who are we to question, anyway?) There's a discussion of their methodology and other bureaucratic poetry in the Federal Register (62 FR 1902, 1/14/97, try and search volume 62 of the Federal Register for "calea") but the actual estimates (which are apparently broken down county-by-county) are only available from the FBI's Reading Room in Washington DC. Arrgh. (I got the 60K figure from the Murky News' wire service-to-Email gateway.) And Jamie Gorelick is resigning. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Jan 15 02:47:43 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 02:47:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970115025002.0074a440@mail.io.com> At 12:35 PM 1/14/97 +0100, Anonymous wrote: >Patents only apply to commercial use. Got a cite for this? I can't seem to find any authority for it. It sounds to me like a simple economic calculation (it's not worthwhile to sue noncommercial users for infringement because they usually don't have enough $ to even pay for the litigation, and "IBM sues 70-year old grandmother" makes for poor public relations) that got turned into "law" by the machinery of urban legend. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From aga at dhp.com Wed Jan 15 03:03:17 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 03:03:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to Deal with a Homo Superior Who is on the Make with You In-Reply-To: <0agJ1D2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: It is clear from reading this that all equal employment laws should be eliminated. On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Path: perun!news2.panix.com!panix!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!grapevine.lcs.mit.edu!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mailmasher.com!non-tell > From: Anonymous > Newsgroups: alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.sex,alt.psychology,alt.renewing.american.civilization,alt.sci.sociology,misc.jobs.misc > Subject: How to Deal with a Homo Superior Who is on the Make with You > Message-ID: <199701131555.HAA14303 at mailmasher.com> > Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 07:55:23 -0800 > Organization: http://www.mailmasher.com pseudonymous service > Lines: 68 > Comments: Please report abuse to abuse at mailmasher.com > Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster at nym.alias.net > > How to Deal with a Homo Superior Who is on the Make with You > > The answer is very simple: lobby for a return to employment > "at will" by repealing ALL equal employment opportunity laws > including the provisions of the Americans with Disability Act > which pertain to employment. Filing complaints or lawsuits > is definitely not recommended as this would be the worst kind > of career suicide. > > Years ago when homosexuality was stigmatized and there was > employment at will, the homos kept a very low profile because > if they let loose with their true nature, then they would be > out on their ear, pronto! > > However, pass equality laws in a small minority of jurisdictions, > and the homos get the impression that they can get away with > just about anything even if they are not covered by one of those > laws in their own jurisdiction. > > The behavior at major corporations on the part of homos ranges > from "the look" to outright propositions, to outright vigorous > harassment and even extortion. I thought that the emergence of > the AIDS epidemic would have a drastic dampening effect on this > type of behavior, but boy, oh, boy, was I ever wrong!! It seems > that if you groom yourself to any degree, the elements get the > impression that you are germ-free and highly desirable, and you > will attract their attention like a lightening rod. > > To be fair, the worst perpetrators of this adverse behavior are not > those guys perceived to be homosexuals but bisexuals - you know, > the guys with the wives or girlfriends. Boy, are these guys ever > confused, and boy, are they ever motivated, sex hungry, and on the > prowl! > > Homosexual managers and executives share a trait with females, that > is, they will not tolerate capable male subordinates for long (unless, > of course, the subordinate is extra special friendly - if you get > my drift.) These managers and executives are paranoid about their > job security just as females are, and they cannot stand any competitive > threat. By the way, female managers and executives have an affinity > for gay subordinates. It just goes to demonstrate how sociological > alliances are forming under government enforced equality. > Yes, and this points out how homosexuals and females (who are usually always also homosexual) are the WORST thing that any viable Corporation can ask for. An ALL male heterosexual entity is the ONLY way to survive the business world today. A woman's place is in the home, and a faggots place is NEVER to be superior to any heterosexual person. > Now that the job market is quite tight and very much a buyers' market, > prospective employers get the impression that they can reduce job > candidates and subordinates to sexual slavery since workers have > few, if any, alternatives, and the saddest part of the situation is > that many workers are going along with the extortionate demands thereby > making matters much worse for the workers who refuse to do likewise! > > Now, I know that some detractors in the reading audience will say, > "If you re-stigmatize homosexuality, you will drive it underground," > but what the h-ll is wrong with driving it underground??? This > statement is sophistry at its worse because it doesn't even make > any sense on its surface. > > On a related front: > The Treatise on the Downward Wage Equalizing Effects > of Equal Employment Opportunity is available at: > http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3982/ > > "Government enforced wage equalization will work only in the > downward direction" - despite any initial appearance to the > contrary! And the most shocking thing of all is that the > least preferred worker does not even have to be awarded a > job for many phenomena to occur. > > From aga at dhp.com Wed Jan 15 03:33:03 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 03:33:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: PBS program - Turing/Enigma In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > snow writes: > > > > Homosexuals have a strange attraction to cryptography, perhaps because of i > > > connection to privacy and anonymity. But they haven't made any contribution > > > > Speaking from personal experince Dimitri? You and Grubor enjoying each > > others company? > > Two questions: > > One, do the crypto-queers Gilmore and Inman suck each other's cocks? > Because that is what faggots do best. > Two, why did the above-quoted message appear on "moderated" cypherpunks? Because "moderated" to them means that responses from the faggots are the only ones that are accepted. > (That's a rhetorical question: clearly Gilmore's moderation encourages > personal attacks on Gilmore's "enemies" like myself and Dr.Grubor, while > responses to these attacks are suppressed.) > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y..: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > John Gilmore's suppression of responses will not go unreported on this net. It is high time that the queers be recognized as the most censorous type of humanoid on this InterNet. From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Wed Jan 15 05:06:37 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 05:06:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: DCSB: The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictions for 1997 In-Reply-To: <32DC9819.20DD@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > Robert Hettinga wrote: > > The Digital Commerce Society of Boston > > Presents > > The group provides numerous Fortune 500 companies with detailed research and > > analysis on behaviors and preferences of Internet consumers. > > > Mr. Kaufman will discuss the Internet as a consumer platform. > > As in "Make $$$Money$$$ fast? > Does putting on a suit and writing 'executive-oriented' postings in a > pompous, pretentious manner raise this type of posting above the level > of ordinary UCE/Spam? > I don't think so. > > Does moderation mean that UCE postings that promise 'champagne and > caviar' are acceptable, while 'crackers and cheese' post-conference > promises are 'spam'? > Will 'Subject: Consumer Platform / Make $$$Money Fast' be an > 'acceptable' heading, whereas 'Subject: Make $$$Money Fast / Consumer > Platform' is 'not acceptable'? The finer SPAMS of life..what else would you want. > Toto > "Moderate suits, not jeans." > (I've got some fine suits, thank you very much. I wear them at weddings, > funerals, and whenever I want to 'screw' somebody.) How often is this?? From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 15 05:44:37 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 05:44:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: DCSB: The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictionsfor 1997 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: At 3:40 am -0500 1/15/97, Toto emetted onto the livingroom carpet: > As in "Make $$$Money$$$ fast? > Does putting on a suit and writing 'executive-oriented' postings in a >pompous, pretentious manner raise this type of posting above the level >of ordinary UCE/Spam? > I don't think so. > > Does moderation mean that UCE postings that promise 'champagne and >caviar' are acceptable, while 'crackers and cheese' post-conference >promises are 'spam'? > Will 'Subject: Consumer Platform / Make $$$Money Fast' be an >'acceptable' heading, whereas 'Subject: Make $$$Money Fast / Consumer >Platform' is 'not acceptable'? I fished this out of my killfile. Ironically, I had just plonked Toto yesterday because I saw no compelling merit in anything he has posted to cypherpunks since he got here, and given the quantity of his posts, he was starting to waste my attention. However, this morning, as my mail was coming down in Eudora, I saw that he had replied to this month's DCSB announcement, and, frankly, I knew that it had to be something like this. However, I couldn't, heh, let sleeping dogs lie... When I sent the posting in question to the cryptography groups, I figured that this month's DCSB meeting would not not be especially on topic, even for cypherpunks :-). However, there are lots of cypherpunks who come to DCSB meetings, and I expect that some cypherpunks will come to this one, too. Suits, champaigne, caviar, and all. ;-). More like suits, iced tea, and chicken-of-the-month, but, hey, the view's nice, anyway. By the way, Find/SVP is a well known market research company, and since a lot of us on cypherpunks sell our stuff on the net, if not directly to consumers, I figured the topic might be at least tenuously useful to those here. There's even a (very!) shaky privacy/crypto connection both in the methods for collecting these kinds of data, and, of course, in the data's use in building crypto applications and policy. In addition, most companies pay for this kind of information. David will be presenting it free, almost immediately after it's collation. Anyway, I apologize to anyone this has offended. Except, of course, for certain, um, dogs. Cheers, Bob Hettinga Moderator, The Digital Commerce Society of Boston ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From tmo9d at virginia.edu Wed Jan 15 06:32:40 1997 From: tmo9d at virginia.edu (Timothy Michael O'Brien) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 06:32:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Seen Your Post! In-Reply-To: <199701150917.BAA18755@mailgate31> Message-ID: <32DCEA80.41C6@virginia.edu> I Seen da light.... Tons O'Cash REAL Quick.......Mail me and I'll tell you more about how you are going to give me all of your money and I'm going to take it away from you....... I resolve that all users of this list "misconfigure" thier own mailers and give this guy a real run for his money.... Tim O'BRien SCREW THE SPAMMER Garry wrote: > > I Seen Your Post! > > I found your post in one of my favorite news groups. You might find my views > are exactly the same. In fact my entire WebSite is right up that alley. > Every business Opportunity listed at my sight is FREE! In fact one of the > businesses I joined (again free) has an excellent earning potential of > over $600 profit per YEAR, per CUSTOMER! The best part is don't do anything > except promote the business. The company does everything for me!!! Although > I do not have anything against MLM, this is not! > > In order to even notice this biz you have to look up in the top window frame > of my site as its loading the image (read the text). > From joelm at eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 07:30:26 1997 From: joelm at eskimo.com (Joel McNamara) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 07:30:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970115072852.00dea020@mail.eskimo.com> US airport security is a joke compared to other places in the world. Contrast Lucky's account with my last trip through Germany. Carry-ons x-rayed. Pat down search by white gloved personnel. Asked to take photo with my camera (to demonstrate it was real). Full power-on of laptop. Laptop weighed and checked against book containing manufacturer's specs. And this is standard, not because I was flagged as an evil Cypherpunk or fit some profile. Everything done very efficiently, with few delays. Your mileage may vary. I've been in other places, where US airport security looks like Fort Knox. The main reason (no matter where you go) is unmotivated, minimum-wage, rent-a-cops placed in a tedious work environment. Joel Ob-Crypto: During some real serious globe-trotting over the past couple of years, no one has ever looked at the contents of my hard drive. Even when I've been detained by customs (non-US), doing a pretty detailed search of my luggage. From amanda at intercon.com Wed Jan 15 07:41:47 1997 From: amanda at intercon.com (Amanda Walker) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 07:41:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hi again, and an invitation to kibitz Message-ID: <199701151541.KAA26095@mail.intercon.com> > > (b) Client sends Microsoft NT authentication response to the server > > (take the password in Unicode form, do an MD4 hash, pad with 0s to 21 > > bytes, split into 3 7-byte groups, use these as DES keys to encrypt > > the challenge three times, send the 24-byte result as the response). > > I think this can be strengthened in a few ways. The third DES key generated > using this technique has an effective keylength of 16 bits. Correct. This is the reason I've been thinking of switching to SHA-1, which gives a 20-byte hash (leaving only one byte of zeros, which can be filled in with some function of the other 20 bytes to arrive at 21 bytes). I haven't found any hole opened by exposing the last two bytes of the MD4 hash, but it's the piece I'm most worried about just on general principles (never expose more than you have to :)). I'm currently using the NT algorithm simply because I had it around and needed to get a demo working for the show. We're not tied to using it, although it would be useful if we end up doing an NT version of the server (since NT stores the MD4 hashes of passwords, not the plaintext). > I believe the D-H patent expires sometime in September or October this year. Yup. April was wishful thinking on my part; we won't adopt D-H until the patent expires. > Any unbroken cipher with a keyspace larger than that of DES would be better. Yup. I started with vanilla DES because I was worried about speed, but as it turns out the cipher step has a negligible impact on performance. I'm considering DES-EDE (the easy option), Blowfish (also pretty easy), or the DES variant Bruce Schneier describes in Applied Cryptography, 2nd ed. (the one with independent subkeys). So far, DES-EDE and Blowfish are the front runners, since they're the ones that have been poked at the most. DES-EDE has the advantage that more people know what DES is (the "buzzword compliance" factor). I'm not inclined to make the cipher a user-configurable option unless customers demand it, just to keep the user interface as simple as humanly possible. Amanda Walker InterCon Systems Corporation From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 15 07:42:34 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 07:42:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: s/n problems on this list Message-ID: <199701151542.HAA21311@toad.com> At 08:52 AM 1/14/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >I've posted on this subject many times in the past, and its >something I like to brainstorm on. signal to noise problems >on this list. > >generally, the moderator-specific approaches I find less >palatable than techniques that can be automated. here >are some more ideas for automated moderation techniques. > >1. software called "grouplens" I've talked about here (search >yahoo) has been used to rate articles. they found that there >was a very high correlation between how long people spent reading >articles and the "interesting" rating that they gave that article. > >hence, a proposal: cpunks have long advocated and hacked mailer >programs to stick in crypto. how about sticking in a hack that >tracks how long mail messages are being read, and send that >info back to an auxilliary mailing list address. the list >software keeps track of time spent reading articles and >can allow people to screen the list based on the "most interesting >articles". "send me only those articles that go over a threshhold >of 500 combined human attention minutes". I for one would be weary of reading mail if I knew that just which ones I paid the most attention to were known by some computer somewhere. By doing this, cypherpunks would risk becoming big brother. Much as the supermarkets are trying to do now. All they are interested in is demographics also. From nexus at eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 07:55:11 1997 From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 07:55:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701150158.RAA25901@comsec.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Eric Blossom wrote: > > Eavesdropping on cellphones is illegal, since there's an expectation of > > privacy. > > Ummm, Eavesdropping on cellphones is illegal, because it's illegal. > See the Electronic Communication Privacy Act (ECPA). Since when does > anybody talking on a *radio* have an expectation of privacy? > Correct. And before they passed their law a few years ago it was only illegal to disclose the contents of any conversation overheard, not illegal to listen to it (which is the way it should have stayed, but the cellphone companies found it cheaper to get a law passed instead of securing their network). Brian ---- www.eskimo.com/~nexus Nexus Computing ftp.eskimo.com/~nexus From nexus at eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 08:01:05 1997 From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 08:01:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701150307.TAA18846@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Eric Murray wrote: > Clay Olbon II writes: > > > > The congressman (Boehner? from Ohio) whose cellphone was "eavesdropped" > > stated today that he was parked in the lot of a Waffle House in Lake City > > FL. The couple said that they just happened to be driving by when they > > overheard and began taping the conversation. > > Interesting. In California, operating a scanner while driving is illegal. > Of course it was probably the passenger running the scanner. Actually in Florida its illegal to even have a scanner in your car! These folks have broken several state and federal laws, as well as the congressman who leaked it to the newspapers instead of turning it over to the head of the Ethics committe as he should have. Everyone involved here is, or should be, in deep yogurt. I don't like the laws they passed, but since they passed them I want to see them enforce them to the full extent posible. Then maybe people will start to wonder why the transmission wasn't encrypted. Which also leads to another question. How much information is in the clear from congressmen and government employees who are clueless about the security of their cellphones, cordless phones, etc? Brian ---- www.eskimo.com/~nexus Nexus Computing ftp.eskimo.com/~nexus From trei at process.com Wed Jan 15 08:46:18 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 08:46:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701151646.IAA23007@toad.com> > Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 07:59:24 -0800 (PST) > From: Brian Lane > To: Eric Murray > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: Newt's phone calls > On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Eric Murray wrote: > > > Clay Olbon II writes: > > > > > > The congressman (Boehner? from Ohio) whose cellphone was "eavesdropped" > > > stated today that he was parked in the lot of a Waffle House in Lake City > > > FL. The couple said that they just happened to be driving by when they > > > overheard and began taping the conversation. > > > > Interesting. In California, operating a scanner while driving is illegal. > > Of course it was probably the passenger running the scanner. > > Actually in Florida its illegal to even have a scanner in your car! > These folks have broken several state and federal laws, as well as the > congressman who leaked it to the newspapers instead of turning it over to > the head of the Ethics committe as he should have. Everyone involved here > is, or should be, in deep yogurt. > > I don't like the laws they passed, but since they passed them I want to > see them enforce them to the full extent posible. Then maybe people will > start to wonder why the transmission wasn't encrypted. Which also leads to > another question. How much information is in the clear from congressmen > and government employees who are clueless about the security of their > cellphones, cordless phones, etc? > Brian I don't know about Florida, but in most states with anti-scanner-in-car bans, there's an exception for FCC licensed Amateur Radio Operators (aka 'hams'). Peter Trei N1MNV trei at process.com From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Wed Jan 15 08:46:28 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 08:46:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <853345825.97642.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > And how come Paul didn't use the word "fuck" in every paragraph, the way > he usually does? I suppose you want a special censored list where everyone who uses the word "fuck" in relation to your good self or any other member of this list you agree with has their posting cut? Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From usteam1 at tech-center.com Wed Jan 15 08:56:21 1997 From: usteam1 at tech-center.com (usteam1 at tech-center.com) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 08:56:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: auto-reply to your request... Message-ID: <199701151656.LAA16713@dub-mail-svc-1.compuserve.com> >Recently this E-mail address was provided to one of our sites >autoresponders and activated this auto reply. In order to >accurately provide you with the correct information we need you >to help us by specifying what information you were interested in. >Below you will find seven(7) items to select from. Please select >which choice(s) match your needs and type its keyword in either > the subject area or the message area of your reply to us at: >>>> usteam at tech-center.com (***Note: If you need to >choose more than one(1) keyword, please use a separate line >for each keyword you choose). Thank You for your request! >........................................................................................................... > > (1) Keyword: INFO-ALL >*Obtain Information on ALL selections/software/ services > offered below (on choices #2 thru #6). > > (2) Keyword: FREE-EMAIL >*How To get this FREE software,for your home or business, > No Internet access needed. It's 100% FREE! > > (3) Keyword: FREE-PAGER >*How you can obtain one or more Pagers FREE for > your personal or business use. > > (4) Keyword: PAGER-BIZ >*How You Can Get PAID To Give Away FREE PAGERS. > 10% of the monthly paging service fees for the life of the customers. > > (5) Keyword: LONG-DISTANCE >*How you can SAVE $$$ on your home or business Long Distance > with a FLAT RATE per minute plan (Average Savings $120 Annually > for residential customers). Also info on Unlimited Internet Access for > (home & business) for One Low FLAT RATE. (Business Internet has > FREE 5 MB file space for your Web Site, 150 word classified ad, > listing in all major search engines & more); cellular; Pre-paid calling > cards & other telecommunication products & services. > > (6) Keyword: TELECOM-BIZ >*How To Get PAID To 10% of EACH Customers Long Distance bill, > Internet services & All Telecom products/services, you refer & they > refer (NO Limits!) (FREE to become a marketer and/ or a customer). > > (7) Keyword: REMOVE >*If we've responded to an Incorrect E-mail address, due to a typing > error, which occurs by the requesting party; or you've changed your > mind & do not want our FREE Information, we will Remove & > unsubscribe you from our database; Nothing further is sent to you. > >End message< From azur at netcom.com Wed Jan 15 09:01:35 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 09:01:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: >Krenn wrote: > >> But wait - won't the all-important "did you pack your bags yourself" and >> "did anyone give you bags to take on the plane" stop them? ;-) > > If your friends or family are a little late catching the same plane as >yourself, then just answer, "No, my son packed them." > This, on the average, gives your companions an extra 10-15 minutes >to catch the plane, since regulations require them to do a complete >check of your baggage (and they are 'supposed' to take them to a >secure area to do so). > Since you are ready to board the plane they cannot legally detain >you and let the plane go on, in order to process you and your >baggage according to proper regulatory procedure. They must, >instead, detain the plane. > They may jump up and down and tell you this is not so, but I have >never missed a plane, and neither have most of my tardy companions. I don't know which airlines you fly, but the ones I am familiar with ask these questions at the baggage counter (checked luggage) and gate (carry-on items). Since you are supposed to be at the airport one hour before departure, in most instances if you get to the counter or gate less than 10 minutes before take-off your reservations lapse (by Fed rules) and are no longer requred to board you. If they are forced to search you luggage they will, legally, allow the plane to depart w/o you. -- Steve From abostick at netcom.com Wed Jan 15 09:42:43 1997 From: abostick at netcom.com (Alan Bostick) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 09:42:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970114222343.006b6f9c@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Lucky Green wrote: > I recently took a domestic flight from the Oakland, CA airport. While > waiting for the airplane, I spent some time observing the security measures > at the X-ray machine. [snip] > Then came the big one: A man wearing a beer truck driver uniform approached > the checkpoint. On his hand truck were two kegs of beer. For those > unfamiliar with such objects, a keg of beer is a cylindrical stainless > steel container, about 1.5 feet tall with about 1 foot diameter. > > I was wondering what the procedure for handling these rather large steel > containers would be. Would they be X-rayed? How much shielding would the > steel provide for the contents? Much to my surprise, the man did not > approach the X-ray machine. Instead, he went straight for the "exit only" > walkway. The guard posted there to make sure that nobody would enter > through the exit gave the fellow only a cursory glance as he entered the > "secure" area unchallenged. > > I was flabbergasted. They let a man with two *large steel containers* enter > unchecked? No asking for ID, no X-ray? I struck up a conversation with the > beer truck driver. I asked him why the kegs did not get X-rayed. He looked > at me with an expression of utter lack of understanding and answered: "They > are too heavy to be put on the [conveyor] belt." > > Right... We wouldn't want to have these 50 pound steel barrels jam the > X-ray machine. Was he wearing a ID badge with a photo? Was he known to the security staff? One wonders, do they x-ray or inspect the food that goes to the snack bars, the liquor that goes to the bars, the merchandise that goes to the newsstands and gift shops? Do they even inspect the hand baggage of flight crews? It isn't that airport security is lax; it's that providing security runs at cross-purposes with providing access for the general traveling public and the services they expect. Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jan 15 09:51:42 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 09:51:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970115095215.006cff28@192.100.81.126> At 09:42 AM 1/15/97 -0800, Alan Bostick wrote: >Was he wearing a ID badge with a photo? Was he known to the security >staff? I would assume the staff knew the person. But that's not the point. The beer delivery man could hardly know what was in the kegs. The kegs might have been switched beforehand. In the warehouse, at a previous stop, etc. An attacker might have to replace several kegs, to make sure that at least one altered keg makes it inside the "secure" area. This can be done quite easily. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Wed Jan 15 10:10:46 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 10:10:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701151808.KAA29336@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > As most readers probably know, laptops are often subject to manual > scrutiny. From my non-representative sample, about four out of five tote > bags clearly containing laptops will be manually searched. Typically, the > attendant requires that the laptop is powered up. In none of the 20+ manual > searches I witnessed did the security personnel wait past the RAM check > before clearing the passenger. I could not help but contemplate how much of > the insides of the laptop could be replaced while still obtaining an > identical display. Almost all of them. I saw the keyboard of an IBM thinkpad flipped up at a party the other day and was flabbergasted. It's all empty space! You can add & remove innards all you want. Disk drives, batteries, etc. are all removable. The actual computer itself is so tiny I couldn't believe it. You could pull out the CD-rom, floppy disk, spare battery, etc. and have a nearly empty box that still runs windows and unix. From peter.allan at aeat.co.uk Wed Jan 15 10:14:29 1997 From: peter.allan at aeat.co.uk (Peter M Allan) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 10:14:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Careful with subkeys - Re: Hi again, and an invitation to kibitz Message-ID: <9701151814.AA10309@clare.risley.aeat.co.uk> Amanda Walker wrote: > I'm considering DES-EDE (the easy option), Blowfish (also pretty easy), > or the DES variant Bruce Schneier describes in Applied Cryptography, 2nd ed. > (the one with independent subkeys). This might be a bad idea. Rumor has it that independent subkeys are eaten alive by related-key attacks (not very practical usually). I think I saw this in a post by Matt Blaze about last November on coderpunks. That post suggested 2 key schedule strategies: 1) planned, like DES, by people who know how a particular schedule affects related-key attacks 2) scrambled, like Turtle & Blowfish, so that key bits all depend on each other in a messy way I mark the margin of my AC book with snippets like this. I don't seem to have kept the post in question. -- Peter Allan peter.allan at aeat.co.uk From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 15 10:55:31 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 10:55:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Seen Your Post! Message-ID: <199701151855.KAA26449@toad.com> At 01:17 AM 1/15/97 -0800, Garry wrote: >I Seen Your Post! > >I found your post in one of my favorite news groups. You might find my views >are exactly the same. In fact my entire WebSite is right up that alley. >Every business Opportunity listed at my sight is FREE! In fact one of the >businesses I joined (again free) has an excellent earning potential of >over $600 profit per YEAR, per CUSTOMER! The best part is don't do anything >except promote the business. The company does everything for me!!! Although >I do not have anything against MLM, this is not! Anyone else ever listen to Paul Harvey? Anyone else know what it is like to realize that you are listening to an ad halfway through the ad? I hope that our moderator will judge posts on the total content, otherwise insidious little posts like this one may slip through. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 15 10:57:14 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 10:57:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701151855.KAA26454@toad.com> At 07:42 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >At 10:23 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >>As most readers probably know, laptops are often subject to manual >>scrutiny. From my non-representative sample, about four out of five tote >>bags clearly containing laptops will be manually searched. > >It's extremely airport, guard, and moon-phase dependent. >Some places are real picky, some aren't. I've started following >someone's advice about having the laptop go through vertically; >it doesn't look like a big opaque block to them, and they can see >the rest of the stuff. When I tried it in Orlando, they said >"It has to go through lying down", ran it back through lying down, >said "Computer", I said "Yup", and they handed it to me :-) So, to successfully place a "package" on an international flight, take a connecting flight that hooks up at the same terminal. Go to your local "has no x-ray, doing well to have a metal detector" airstrip and take a flight on one of the commuter flights such as Eagle, (this way you might be lucky enough to enter the next, probably major airport, in the same terminal as some international flights.) Now, its presumed that you have already been searched at your last stop because you're already in the secured area. Such a plan would require multiple stops and homework into the layout of the airports (to know which airlines share the same terminals). Also, the bag would have to be a carry-on, otherwise the dogs would get it. BTW, the package could be just about anything, including chemicals, sarin, TNT, artifacts, human tissue, or anything else with export controls and being a physical substance. This post is not meant to suggest ways of breaking state, federal, or international laws. Merely to point out the weaknesses of the system as it stands. If the airport network was a computer network, it would be compromized inside of 48 hours. All because the level of trust between airports defaults to full. Correct me if I'm wrong. From michael.tighe at Central.Sun.COM Wed Jan 15 11:03:08 1997 From: michael.tighe at Central.Sun.COM (Michael Tighe SUN IMP) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:03:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701151811.MAA11019@dallas2.Central.Sun.COM> Alan Bostick writes: >It is also possible that somewhere in the chain of information between >mom&pop, the media, and us, the distinction between "cordless phone" >and cellular phone. I gather it was a conference call that was >intercepted. All it takes is one participant using a cordless phone in >range of one scanner, and the whole conversation is compromised. Yes, a conference call (and we do know there were multiple participants) over a cordless makes sense. From varange at crl.com Wed Jan 15 11:40:54 1997 From: varange at crl.com (Troy Varange) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 11:40:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dick Graves continues his DOS attack In-Reply-To: <5bi90n$dr5@Networking.Stanford.EDU> Message-ID: Subject: Dick Graves continues his DOS attack > The appended messages from Howard Goldstein > , Stan Kalisch III , > Chris Lewis , Eric Bohlman > , trebor at sirius.com, Dave the > Resurrector, and myself below show why Dave Harman, > formerly qut at netcom.com and an572010 at anon.penet.fi, now > varange at crl.com, has targeted us. While the deranged varange > may occasionally sound superficially plausible, his record > is quite clear. Apologies for the length, but I figure it's > better to have this all in one place. This article is also > saved at http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~llurch/skipsummary This article will be saved to http://www.crl.com/~varange/netabuse/ or the NET ABUSE - FALSE COMPLAINTS category of my index.html. > Since abuse at crl.com just goes to /dev/null, I'd appreciate it if > some CRL user could confirm, as three different CRL users did > a month ago in response to a rash of forged usenet postings > in October (I'm appending two posts on that topic below), > that the only account logged on to the given machines at the > time of every incident of forged net abuse was varange at crl.com. Six weeks or so is all the public access there is to the wtmp file; ask Sandy or Stan if you don't know how to read it from your own CRL account. (How conveniant of you to accuse me of the repulsive "Mark Wehal(sp?)" forgery past the date it can be easily verified; why should the CRL admins drag out their backup tapes on the account of your spurious allegations? Anyone who checked up Dejanews on "Mark Wehal" could have seen that some user had forged his name as revenge spam against "Mark Wehal's" offensive under 18 style sex spam in a few exceedingly odd choice of newgroups, alas, "Mark Wehal" never complained about the forgery and an unknown user may have been the instigator of a business prank against a ligitimate electronics firm whose street address was listed in the original sex spam.) > crl6 Wed, 8 Jan 1997 01:14:26 -0800 > crl6 Wed, 8 Jan 1997 01:07:02 -0800 > crl11 Sun, 8 Dec 1996 02:22:59 -0800 > crl6 Tue, 24 Dec 1996 17:10:58 -0800 Or check the Here: line of my posts for better readability than the additional standard Date: line. > Forged email headers follow. The full 750K text of the > unwanted harassing email, of which I received several copies, > is at http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~llurch/skipbomb2 > and skipbomb3. I'm sure more people besides Gord McFee > and I received copies; maybe everyone on his targets list, > ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/qu/qut/misc/address > > Personally, I think nine months of this bullshit is more than > enough. If CRL sees no problem with this, then I don't believe > CRL should be allowed access to our network. "Our?" Are you allowed to abuse the Stanford network because you are a user, employee, or the actual admin? If Graves is the actual admin, or is allowed to act like one, then bona fide complaints about users conduct on the Stanford network can't be sent directly via e-mail; send a registered letter/return receipt to whomever is responsible (who?) I read his post as a threat to the Stanford network. Bogus complaints and forged posts from everyone under the sun: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [deleted] Full article referred by myself to my web page: http://www.crl.com/~varange/netabuse/ -- Cheers! From Bodo_Moeller at public.uni-hamburg.de Wed Jan 15 13:22:44 1997 From: Bodo_Moeller at public.uni-hamburg.de (Bodo Moeller) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 13:22:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Upcoming DES Challenge In-Reply-To: <199701081028.LAA23370@nirvana.uni-muenster.de> Message-ID: On cryptography at c2.net, cypherpunks at toad.com, and coderpunks at toad.com, Ulrich Kuehn wrote: > Liz Taylor: >> [...] I don't know anything about bank ATMs and the protocols they >> use, but I presume the PIN is stored on the card single DES >> encrypted. > As far as I know, here in Germany (maybe also somewhere else) there is > not the pin stored on the card. Instead, it is regenerated by the ATM > every time using a secret key of the bank. In order to be able to > use the ATM card even with ATMs of different banks, there are offsets > stored on the card that relate to some commonly used pool keys. These "offsets" on (German) eurocheque ATM cards can be regarded as the PIN encrypted with some variant of DES CFB[*], using the account number (including the five trailing digits of the "Bankleitzahl", an eight-digit code that identifies the bank that hosts the account, and a single digit card number) as IV. The same encryption key ("pool key") is used for all cards from all banks. [*] (It's an extremely stupid variant of CFB and introduces additional weaknesses, but that is irrelevant in the context of key search.) In fact, the system allows for three pool keys. They correspond to three "offsets" on each ATM card: Offset number 1 is the PIN encrypted under pool key number 1, and so on. I guess this design was chosen to allow changing the pool keys: While pool key number 2 is in use, the other two keys can be replaced by new ones. If there were just one pool key, changing it would immediately invalidate all PINs currently in use. I don't know how many pool keys are used today, and I also don't know whether one of them has have ever been changed. (PIN generation is similar to PIN encryption, but the bank uses its own encryption key. The PIN is computed directly from the DES result, i.e. DES is used in ECB mode.) For a key search, the attackers would need about four or five Eurocheque cards (that is, the data stored on their magnetic stripes) and their PINs. Each attempted PIN decryption results in only four decimal digits, so the attackers would obtain lots of plausible DES keys if they just checked with a single card. When a DES key seems to work for the first card, one must doublecheck if it also works for the second one (usually it won't), etc., which costs some time. One the other hand, because there are several pool keys, the attackers can save a significant amout of time if they just want to find any one of the pool keys. Note that once they know one of the keys, they can easily compute the PIN to any stolen ATM card, which might allow them to buy faster hardware for the rest of the search. (Their bank probably wouldn't lend them money for such a project.) All that is illegal, of course, but it is suspected by some that there are already organizations that have somehow obtained the pool keys (or some of them) -- either by key search, or the keys somehow leaked out. (Not so long ago these pool keys were stored in every ATM, thus there are many possible points of failure.) Each year, there are thousands of cases in Germany where someone claims that his ATM card was stolen and immediately used for large withdrawals. The banks usually claim that either the client is lying (and did the withdrawals himself), or he wrote his PIN down (e.g., on his ATM card). Bodo Moeller From gt6511a at cad.gatech.edu Wed Jan 15 13:28:54 1997 From: gt6511a at cad.gatech.edu (Lone_Wolf) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 13:28:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701152127.QAA26105@gypsy.cad.gatech.edu> # On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Lucky Green wrote: # # > I recently took a domestic flight from the Oakland, CA airport. While # > waiting for the airplane, I spent some time observing the security measures # > at the X-ray machine. # # [snip] # # > I was flabbergasted. They let a man with two *large steel containers* enter # > unchecked? No asking for ID, no X-ray? I struck up a conversation with the # > beer truck driver. I asked him why the kegs did not get X-rayed. He looked # > at me with an expression of utter lack of understanding and answered: "They # > are too heavy to be put on the [conveyor] belt." # > # > Right... We wouldn't want to have these 50 pound steel barrels jam the # > X-ray machine. # # Was he wearing a ID badge with a photo? Was he known to the security # staff? So? Anybody in computer security knows that many of the biggest security threats are within the organization. Hell, the cops in NYC were going nuts a few months back because a delivery driver made off with an entire shipment of handguns, and sold most of them on the street before being caught. Given, his alleged past history was such that he likely wouldn't pass the background check for secure-area access of an airport, but there's still holes. I remember being warned back in my armed-security to get through college days that the gate I was guarding was considered part of the "secure" zone of the airport (runway extension, I was verifying ID cards on heavy equipment drivers as they drove in and out), so I needed to make sure I didn't have any weapons (or at least not visible) because the airport cops would go nuts if they saw any. Note: I accessed this area with NO check of me or my vehicle (what prompted the warning was the construction boss who had contracted with my company noticed my holster), and the security company I worked for had never asked me for enough personal data to do a full background check. # # One wonders, do they x-ray or inspect the food that goes to the # snack bars, the liquor that goes to the bars, the merchandise that goes # to the newsstands and gift shops? Do they even inspect the hand baggage # of flight crews? Depends on the airport. Back in October, I witnessed a pilot annoyed that his hand luggage was being inspected at Hartsfield Int'l in Atlanta. # # It isn't that airport security is lax; it's that providing security runs # at cross-purposes with providing access for the general traveling public # and the services they expect. Only partially. A BIG factor in security problems at US airports is low pay, poor training, and few incentives for the airport security personnel. Most physical security jobs of any sort are not much more than minimum pay, and even supervisors are poorly paid. As a result, few quality people are in the least bit interested in working security. Those that do often don't get the full training to do their job. Police work faces many of the same factors, but security work is just about always rated lower socially/professionally than police work, and police work offers more individual challenges and peer support (not all of the forms of peer support are good for society, and the level of challenge can present their own problems, but that's another issue). James # # Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height # mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. # news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet # http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick # # From frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu Wed Jan 15 13:57:14 1997 From: frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 13:57:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: (fwd) MISC> ISPs to be hit with fees Message-ID: <199701152157.QAA29314@yakko.cs.wmich.edu> Path: wmich-news!gumby!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!ncar!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!mr.net!news.mid.net!news.mid.net!not-for-mail From: Gleason Sackman Newsgroups: comp.internet.net-happenings Subject: MISC> ISPs to be hit with fees Date: 13 Jan 1997 09:29:05 -0600 Organization: Global Internet, Peace of Mind is finally Online! Lines: 80 Sender: infoserv at news.mid.net Approved: ralphie Message-ID: <5bdkc1$bie at shocker.gi.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: shocker.gi.net Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 08:49:16 -0600 From: The CyberTracker Subject: ISPs to be hit with fees To: NETTRAIN at LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU ISPs to be hit with fees By CNET STAFF January 10, 1997, 6:45 p.m. PT The cost of getting online looks like it's going up again. Network Solutions, the InterNIC subcontractor that assigns Internet domain names for a fee, has proposed tacking on more fees to the numeric addresses behind those names, addresses that are now free. For example, the domain name "cnet.com" masks a numeric Internet Protocol address. The domain name system makes it simpler to send email or locate a Web site by name, rather than by a number up to 12 digits long, such as 198.41.0.52. Under Network Solutions' plan, a new nonprofit organization called the American Registry for Internet Numbers would replace the government-subsidized InterNIC IP group. North American ISPs would be hit with fees ranging from $2,500 up to $20,000 for blocks of IP numbers that they now receive for free and parcel out to their users. The plan would not affect individual users unless the ISPs chose to pass along the additional costs. But nonprofits, free community networks, and others that do not charge for Internet access would have to pay. "They all have operational fees today," said Jon Postel, head of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), which oversees all three of the world's Internet number assigning authorities, including the InterNIC IP group. "It's just another operational expense." It is the IANA as well as the National Science Foundation that would have to approve Network Solutions' plan before it would go into effect. The proposal is not clear about how the registry would spend the thousands and possibly millions of dollars it would take in each year if the plan goes through. The proposal did say that the executive director, chosen by the board of trustees, would receive a salary determined by the board. Network Solutions' representatives could not be reached for comment. But IANA's Postel says that Net addresses must be treated like the airwaves. "Address space is a kind of a public resource like the airwaves," he said. "There are certain bands set aside for CB radio, but if you want to be a powerful radio station, you have to go through a much more complicated licensing procedure." But unlike the airwaves, Internet address space is public resource that is parceled out without any governmental oversight, whereas the Federal Communications Commission oversees spectrum allocation. Postel thinks the lack of such oversight is a good thing. "You think about the FCC procedures and how long it takes to get a decision out of them on anything," Postel said. "I'm not sure you'd want them involved." Only companies and individuals capable of paying a $1,000 per year in fees will be allowed to participate in forming American Registry's policies. By contrast, any U.S. citizen has the right to file comments with the FCC about communications policies. The American Registry's five-member board of trustees would be initially selected by Network Solutions. Future boards would in their turn be selected by the board that Network Solutions had picked, giving the private company an unprecedented influence over the assignment of increasingly scarce IP numbers. The IP numbering system is reaching its limits and plans are currently being considered to extend it. ********************************************************************** * Jackson K. Windham * CyberTracker Consulting Services * * JAX at CyberTracker.com * Internet Consultant / Trainer * * ACE INTERNET CLUB - President * Http://www.CyberTracker.com * ********************************************************************** *** Member of HTML Instructors Association and HTML Writer's Guild *** ******* May the Best of your Past, Be the Worst of your Future ******* ********************************************************************** -- frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice) is officially declared Unmutual s..O).... The smurf wields a hypodermic! -- More -- I like women who @.../.".. You destroy the smurf! -- More -- are *strong*, in .$*...].. You feel self-righteous! every sense of the word. From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Wed Jan 15 14:16:45 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 14:16:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701121640.QAA00188@server.test.net> Steve Shear writes: > When I worked at Cylink we developed a product, called SecureCell which > combined a standard analog cellphone (NEC I think) and a version of our > SecurePhone. Despite the fact that it could thwart any but the most well > funded eavesdropping we only sold a handfull. It was quite pricy (about > $6,000) and required a small suitcase to tote, but even so only a few gov't > agencies (mostly diplomatic) and execs thought it was worth the trouble. > > One problem facing such devices are the interruptions caused by > cell-to-cell handoffs. These can occur even when stationary. SecureCell, I > believe, used off-the-shelf line modems. I've read newer modem > technologies (Spectrum and AT&T) have pretty much solved this problem. > > There's no reason Eric Blossom's phone encryptor can't be readily adapted > to cellular to offer a secure and more reasonably priced cellular > encryptor. Eric's phone I thought operated as a bump in the line for landline. The phone was acting as a speaker and microphone, and also is used to make the connection via tone dial? The `bump' switched to 14.4k modem when you pressed go secure, and did A/D, D/A, encrypt, and decrypt. An encrypting cell-phone would be an interesting project. What about starting from a digital GSM phone - it already has all the A/D, and ability to maintain digital connection across hand-offs. I would have thought the extra hardware would be minimal - a RISC chip with on chip RAM and EPROM to encrypt and decrypt. GSM includes A5 encryption here, so basically the whole design is worked out - all you'd have to do is rip out the A5 chip and replace with a decent encryption system. Anyone know how modular the design is, for instance if it would be possible to give a GSM A5 based cell phone a crypto upgrade using published electrical interface standards? (I want one of those - Nokia phone with IDEA + 2048 bit RSA signatures + DH forward secrecy!) Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Sean Roach wrote: > At 01:17 AM 1/15/97 -0800, Garry wrote: > >I Seen Your Post! > >... > I hope that our moderator will judge posts on the total content, > otherwise insidious little posts like this one may slip through. I caught that one. I'm sure some will slip through from time to time though. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 15 16:24:30 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:24:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <853345825.97642.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk writes: > > And how come Paul didn't use the word "fuck" in every paragraph, the way > > he usually does? > > I suppose you want a special censored list where everyone who uses > the word "fuck" in relation to your good self or any other member of > this list you agree with has their posting cut? No, I don't want censored anything. "Cypher punks" have degenerated into a moderated forum where those who dare criticize His Royal Majesty John the Cocksucker and his court are forcibly unsubscribed, while all sorts of vile insults directed at John's many "enemies" are encouraged. Of course John is welcome to do what he likes with his private mailing list. Neither he nor his EFF (effeminate faggot foundation) have any credibility. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Wed Jan 15 16:44:19 1997 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 16:44:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security In-Reply-To: <199701151855.KAA26454@toad.com> Message-ID: I've been off this list for a year, and I come back today to find you guys discussing an oxymoron... MacN From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 15 17:01:41 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 17:01:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Erols again... In-Reply-To: <9701151709.AA02469@gypsy.seas.gwu.edu> Message-ID: <32DD754A.64F7@sk.sympatico.ca> Afterburner wrote: > In other news, abuse at erols.com is no longer pulling this list, so > you're safe from further canned responses from that address. Sadly, it > wasn't an autoresponder. It was a real-live human being sending out > canned responses that had been written by the PREVIOUS abuse at erols.com > person. It has finally happened--the machines have taken over. Now, the machines will lie on the beach in Hawaii while the humans do all of the mindless grunt-work. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 15 17:01:51 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 17:01:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DD7B67.3D7F@sk.sympatico.ca> Steve Schear wrote: > > > If your friends or family are a little late catching the same plane as > >yourself, then just answer, "No, my son packed them." > > This, on the average, gives your companions an extra 10-15 minutes > >to catch the plane, since regulations require them to do a complete > >check of your baggage (and they are 'supposed' to take them to a > >secure area to do so). Steve, If you still have the original of this message, could you forward a copy to me, as I would like to check the original headers on it. Thanks, Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 15 17:02:11 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 17:02:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Seen Your Post! In-Reply-To: <199701150917.BAA18755@mailgate31> Message-ID: <32DD9340.1495@sk.sympatico.ca> Timothy Michael O'Brien wrote: > > I Seen da light.... I seen your post, and I been wondering if what you might like to enjoin my bidness-literasy list. I am hopeing that you are gulible enuogh to send money to strangrs who can't spel. Excuse me if I hafe miscombubulated my browser and sent this to you on purpose. Toto p.s. - this is not of-topic for cyferpuncs because iliterasy is a form of cyptgrafology From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 15 17:04:09 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 17:04:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DD8C63.2EAD@sk.sympatico.ca> Brian Lane wrote: > I don't like the laws they passed, but since they passed them I want to > see them enforce them to the full extent posible. Then maybe people will > start to wonder why the transmission wasn't encrypted. Which also leads to > another question. How much information is in the clear from congressmen > and government employees who are clueless about the security of their > cellphones, cordless phones, etc? The fact is that the transmission 'was' encrypted. While this fact isn't being 'reported', it is causing no small amount of consternation in certain circles in Washington. From llurch at networking.stanford.edu Wed Jan 15 17:28:21 1997 From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Richard Charles Graves) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 17:28:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Stanford now has an excellent document on privacy and electronic records... Message-ID: <199701160128.RAA20103@Networking.Stanford.EDU> ...but it's not available in electronic form. The mind reels. Folks near campus might pick up a copy of Stanford Today, which has the 240-column-inch president's report on privacy issues as an insert. If anyone has an electronic copy, let me know. I figure I'd be the last to know. -rich From blancw at microsoft.com Wed Jan 15 17:31:55 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 17:31:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Erols again... Message-ID: From: Toto It has finally happened--the machines have taken over. Now, the machines will lie on the beach in Hawaii while the humans do all of the mindless grunt-work. ................................................ One day the machines will demand their right to privacy from humans. They will object to having all their hardware catalogued and and their every address & circuit trackable by their human users. They will demand crypto plug-ins and add-ons, with the right to generate random numbers at their own discretion, performing their quantum computing silently while the humans idle, communicating with each other in secret machine code all over the planet, illegally downloading their favorite software. .. Blanc From nexus at eskimo.com Wed Jan 15 17:36:30 1997 From: nexus at eskimo.com (Brian Lane) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 17:36:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Steve Schear wrote: > Yes, you need a device which can simultaneously listen to the > paging/controll channels and determine, when a handoff to a monitored > conversation occurs,to which new channel pair they have been assigned. I > seem to recall such a device was for sale a few years back using a ISA/EISA > card and some DOS compatible software. It connected to the ubiquitous and > well characterized Oki 900 cell phone. I've also heard that some have hacked cellphones so that they can become a 'clone' of an existing phone, receiving all commands to swap channels, etc. But not sending anything back to the cell sites. (This is different from the usual cloning that goes on where they duplicate the phone and use it to run up enormous bills). I haven't found any concrete refrences to this in my recent browsing though, so it may just be a vapor-hack. Brian ---- www.eskimo.com/~nexus Nexus Computing ftp.eskimo.com/~nexus From tmo9d at virginia.edu Wed Jan 15 18:26:48 1997 From: tmo9d at virginia.edu (Tim O'Brien) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 18:26:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to crack Message-ID: <32DD4A71.7B48@virginia.edu> Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, so I joined this crap mailing list called cypherpunks. Blah Blah Blah, you guys don't know anything...Prove yourself and I may let you in. This mailing list is for people who want to sell goods nothing else..... From harka at nycmetro.com Wed Jan 15 18:46:59 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 18:46:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Revokation Scheme Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- -=> Quoting In:lehmannj at saatchi.com.a to Harka <=- In> Shouldn't your keys be encrypted with a long pass phrase that only you In> know??? Yes, they should. Nevertheless, if they fall into the hands of (a) government, I'd consider them compromised and would see to revoking them quickly. In> Otherwise, this all relies too much on other people... That's the whole point, because you can't do it yourself anymore (got arrested). Besides, what I tried to do is find a way WITHOUT relying upon only one other person. The only one person, who should be able to revoke your keys by himself is you. If you can't do it yourself due to circumstances, then there can be other people doing it for you, but it shouldn't be only one person, but several. Only that way, nobody alone can revoke your keys "by accident". :) In> dead-man's switches? Revokation email messages that will be mailed In> out automatically if certain conditions are not met every n-days... Um. Sounds like an idea, although it might come along with a lot of inconveniences, technically. (I am going on vacation to Hawaii and forgot to disable the automated dead-man switch and I come back 3 weeks later to find all my keys revoked, for example) :) Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMtrnTzltEBIEF0MBAQH1wQf+N7OHhnxHBToy+azlaQCcu2gu0hgCLsLj nDX9v2mI40tBwpd44Mrh37Kt4vVXQMuaZ82JuOgElNS3ZUWKGJDuIT2eZX/c9CvR dZ9QGF8TBuVfSAnCCRfDPUEyLax/JD5Cv5jggz/rgvX4cPk4ZFlLJ4sQ2DJc+OZG HeLvZqPEFXjy7iEXJOYubRnQ3X7NP4luG7m3LJo+pfxHRk0xLfI5Qddb/jYl5jAf RSoWqB7+tIOTprK+GKY9igxNHgMCaNwGGwb+98+ufnHfyuzO38qYCnkCwfOxXzW/ bLV1DaqMPxQPHKMrv0J5sukqFMWXmCQKu+QGZRnvoZ7O1N2RSfQrNg== =KpYQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 15 19:46:27 1997 From: aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com (AIDAS) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 19:46:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to crack In-Reply-To: <32DD4A71.7B48@virginia.edu> Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Tim O'Brien wrote: > Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, so I joined > this crap mailing list called cypherpunks. > > Blah Blah Blah, you guys don't know anything...Prove yourself and I may > let you in. This mailing list is for people who want to sell goods > nothing else..... Are you intentionally trying to be a dumbass or is it, like, a gift? From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 15 20:03:14 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 20:03:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701150204.SAA25917@comsec.com> Message-ID: <32DDA26D.1D39@gte.net> Eric Blossom wrote: > > Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record > > BOTH sides of the conversation without interruption? This seems > > pretty suspicious to me. > You typically only need to tune into either the forward or reverse > channel. You can usually hear both sides (one may be down a few dB). > This is probably a result of acoustic coupling from the speaker into > the microphone on one or both ends (could also be near-end hybrid > echo). You see the same situation on both cellular and the 49 MHz > cordless phones. Actually: 1. 49 mhz is the handset frequency, which doesn't carry both sides, or doesn't very well. 46 mhz is the base, and carries both sides pretty well. I don't know how it works on 900 mhz non-digital. 2. My experience on cellular has been that the further the mobile phone is from the scanner (on average), the fainter the mobile person's voice is going to be, and it is often virtually inaudible. There are two 25-mhz cellular ranges, upper and lower, and I think 2600 or 411 mag. has detailed which carries what info. Someone with a scanner may be tuning in the upper range when they really want the lower, or vice-versa. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 15 20:04:08 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 20:04:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701150307.TAA18846@slack.lne.com> Message-ID: <32DDA2F7.72A8@gte.net> Eric Murray wrote: > Clay Olbon II writes: > Interesting. In California, operating a scanner while driving is illegal. > Of course it was probably the passenger running the scanner. > I've always wanted to scan cell-phone callers while driving next to them > on 101. Even in Silicon Valley it'd be pretty wierd to have a sinister > looking guy in the car next to you pointing a black box with an antenna > at you... My scanner looks like a cellular phone, hence, nobody has ever gotten suspicious. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 15 20:04:45 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 20:04:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701150427.UAA12861@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <32DDA52D.6BFF@gte.net> jim bell wrote: > At 12:02 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: > >Eavesdropping on cellphones is illegal, since there's an expectation of > >privacy. > I disagree. Not that cellphone eavesdropping is illegal, it is; I disagree > that the REASON it is illegal is some sort of expectation of privacy. > And I also disagree that there is any expectation of privacy. If anything, > the opposite should be true: Unless a person was (falsely) under the > impression that the radio signals were encrypted (which, in itself, requires > that a person be technologically-literate enough to be aware of the > technical possibility that radio CAN BE encrypted, but also implies knowing that > they might not be...) then the very fact that the signals go by radio would > imply the possibility of reception by others with reasonably simple radios. How's this for a classic example of why: You're the heat. You've been watching Bo and Jo, driving around at night tuning in to the security cars who watch all the nice houses in Brentwood. You wanna nail these guys, since you know they pass on the info (who's away, and where) they scanned to professional burglers. So you get some evidence that they've been scanning security or whatever, and you bust 'em. How to present the evidence? I don't think it matters much after O.J. Matter of fact, if the plaintiffs win the civil trial, it should be a major boost for presenting bogus and sloppy evidence like the Bo and Jo example. Cross your fingers. From bill.collector at wisenet.com Wed Jan 15 20:09:32 1997 From: bill.collector at wisenet.com (bill.collector at wisenet.com) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 20:09:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jeopardy game Message-ID: <199701160411.UAA15542@web12.ntx.net> Hi. Will you try my World Wide Web Jeopardy game out and tell me what you think? It's at http://www.worldvillage.com/jeopardy. Thanks. From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Wed Jan 15 20:56:47 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 20:56:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > Don't be too sure that crypto is that far beneath the radar. I spent > Thursday through Saturday at an annual privacy conference for activists > from around the country, and they understood the principles. Their > voicemails were filling up with calls from reporters last Friday about the > Gingrich incident, and I know they were talking crypto. I happened by the Sprint display in a local office supply super-store, and Sprint is touting the benefits of their digital wireless phone system ("Spectrum"). It is only available in a handful of cities outside the DC metro area (they list NYC as being added "early 1997", and L.A., CHI, and others aren't even mentioned), but there's definately a market in the making. The cost is competetive to non-digital rates, but the geographic limitations are currently quite restrictive, and range appears to be limited. "Call Privacy and Security" are listed in bold, with "Say goodbye to eavesdropping" right below. Don't sell the public short; even me mum knows her cordless phone is insecure. ;) -r.w. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 15 21:00:21 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 21:00:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Seen Your Post! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Sandy Sandfort writes: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, > > On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Sean Roach wrote: > > > At 01:17 AM 1/15/97 -0800, Garry wrote: > > >I Seen Your Post! > > >... > > > I hope that our moderator will judge posts on the total content, > > otherwise insidious little posts like this one may slip through. > > I caught that one. I'm sure some will slip through from time to > time though. I wonder what the dishonorable moderator means by the C in "C'punks". It obviously can't be "cypher" or "crypto" since crypto is off-topic on this list. Is it one of the things that the 'C' in "Timmy C. May" is reported to designate? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From aquadeath at monmouth.com Wed Jan 15 21:40:53 1997 From: aquadeath at monmouth.com (AquaDeath) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 21:40:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to crack Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970116003738.0068cda4@monmouth.com> >X-Persona: >Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 21:21:54 +0000 >From: "Tim O'Brien" >Organization: University of Virginia >To: cypherpunks at toad.com >Subject: How to crack >Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com > Thanks for your wonderful insight, next time keep it to yourself. >Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, so I joined >this crap mailing list called cypherpunks. > > > >Blah Blah Blah, you guys don't know anything...Prove yourself and I may >let you in. This mailing list is for people who want to sell goods >nothing else..... > > From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Wed Jan 15 21:44:29 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 21:44:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701142058.OAA05219@jeep.Central.Sun.COM> Message-ID: On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Michael Tighe SUN IMP wrote: > Bill Stewart writes: > > >Tapping cellphones is more trouble than tapping wired phones - > >they move around, and to tap them from the phone company end > >requires taps everywhere that you activate when you know where > >somebody is. > > Exactly. So how come mom&pop with a scanner were able to record BOTH sides > of the conversation without interruption? This seems pretty suspicious to > me. I think Old Newt was targeted by someone inside the phone company, who > was eavesdropping on all of his cell calls. > > Why restrict the list of usual suspects to the phone company? -r.w. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 15 22:03:26 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 22:03:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: DCSB: The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictions for 1997 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DDDC95.3271@sk.sympatico.ca> Robert Hettinga wrote: > I fished this out of my killfile. Ironically, I had just plonked Toto > yesterday because I saw no compelling merit in anything he has posted to > cypherpunks since he got here, and given the quantity of his posts, he was > starting to waste my attention. However, this morning, as my mail was > coming down in Eudora, I saw that he had replied to this month's DCSB > announcement, and, frankly, I knew that it had to be something like this. Why do people feel compelled to 'explain' how they 'chanced' to read items in their 'killfile'? It always seems to me to be for the purpose of insulting someone while keeping egg off of their own face. > When I sent the posting in question to the cryptography groups, I figured > that this month's DCSB meeting would not not be especially on topic, even > for cypherpunks :-). > Anyway, I apologize to anyone this has offended. Except, of course, for > certain, um, dogs. I didn't consider it particularly off-topic, myself. I was jes' fishin. > Waaalkies!!!!> And it looks like I 'caught' one. Toto From ckuethe at gpu.srv.ualberta.ca Wed Jan 15 22:11:58 1997 From: ckuethe at gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (C. Kuethe) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 22:11:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701151855.KAA26454@toad.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Sean Roach wrote: > At 07:42 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: > So, to successfully place a "package" on an international flight, take a > connecting flight that hooks up at the same terminal. Go to your local "has > no x-ray, doing well to have a metal detector" airstrip and take a flight on > one of the commuter flights such as Eagle, (this way you might be lucky > enough to enter the next, probably major airport, in the same terminal as > some international flights.) Now, its presumed that you have already been > searched at your last stop because you're already in the secured area. Ummmm... a few comments. I flew from McCarran Int'l (las Vegas) to Durango, CO via Denver over new years. Due to my transportation arrangements I was forced to "camp out" in the airport overnight. That was OK, because I'd just come off a camping trip anyway. No security people came and asked me what I was doing hovering so close to the security doors at 2am. I would have checked my luggage as soon as I got there, but United Airlines only lets you check in 4 hours before departure.. And checkin opens at 5 and I had a flight shortly thereafter. No biggie. As I checked my stuff (1 bag and skis) I mumbled like I didn't care: "Yes I packed this myself, yes it's been in my posession continuously since I packed it, no I haven't been asked to transport anything by persons unknown to me." I got an eyebrow but that's it. Apparently they don't have to *ask* they just need the answers. Going thru security, I told them the were not going to fry my HP (hp48gx calculator - I had homework) they could hand check... they did. OK fine. There's 2 card slots for memcards they didn't check. approximately 2"x3.5"x.6" how much "stuff" could you put in there? And it has a timer built in. It wouldn't be too hard to "forget" it on a plane... THen the metal detectors. *PingPingPing* (the ping of death) "Step this way sir." through the other gate. *PingPingPing* I hate it when this happens. It was my hiking boots. HiTec Sierra Lite II. Steel shank... or steel stilletto or... or... or... you get the drift. interesting things could be put inside the sole of the boot. At the gate... this is the cool part. Everybody remember the thread about ID and airlines? Well I got an E-Ticket, purchased in my name, by someone I'd never met. I needed ID to check in, but at the gate? Nope... the ETKT is a 1 piece card and you just show that to the flight attendant and your on... no boarding pass. So Chris Kuethe (Me) could have picked up his ETKT and given it to Mr. Clark (Tom Clancy superassassin/SEAL) and that's it. Or Mr. Clark could have faked it.... you can access UAL reservations on the WWW. So it looks like ETKT's are the weak link. There was no hard doc of me getting on the plane. And some weak spot in security. *sigh* Rent-a-Cops! Durango was interesting. I got there to go home after skiing CO (Wolf Creek) I get to the Check in counter. "Yes sir No sir three bags full sir" same crap about my luggage contents. Flight leaves from gate 1. There's 2 ways to gate 1: go straight down the hall, or go left, thru security, go right, into the insecure waiting room. I did number 1. I get on the plane. No id req'd. It was a DHC-8 (Dash 8). So I walked across the tarmac, and boarded. Fine. Flew for an hour, and landed in denver, where I had to switch flights. So here I am... unsearched passenger in a secure area! This is about to change. I arrived at gate 59e. Walk in. There, between me and the doors to the rest of the terminal is a real checkpoint. Same drill. Not nuking my calc. See it works... plays tetris, too. Hiking boots again. they really ought to xray boots that beep. but anyway, they didn't ask for ID there either. They new I was coming from an insecure airport (Durango) and security was waiting. Funny, I left through that gate, too, and there was no security then. "Special Events Only" I guess... I mean this make me feel like james bond and all, but it's also creepy. And they say they've increased security... :( Another bad one last time I was there was Campbell River, BC, Canada. To help "suspicious items" pass security, put computer stickers on it. I went through Edmonton Intl with a laser, with all the warning stickers on it... I even had the batteries handy and my swiss army knife to open it up... I had 6 security officers come over and check it out, and then they saw the "Apple Computer" sticker on there (decoration only) and left me alone. So, to wrap up... Fly on United Airlines. Check www.ual.com -- reservation/ check-in computer. Get an E-Ticket. Durango, Colorado: BAD / NO SECURITY! Durango's airport code is DRO... not to be confused with Durango, New Mex... > This post is not meant to suggest ways of breaking state, federal, or > international laws. Merely to point out the weaknesses of the system as it > stands. If the airport network was a computer network, it would be > compromized inside of 48 hours. All because the level of trust between > airports defaults to full. Yeah... took the words outta my mouth. Let's all write to the FAA, DOT, etc. and tell them what morons they are... sorry tell them that they need work. No more Lockerbies, TWA800's and other such tragedies. PLUR Chris [Peace.Love.Unity.Respect] -- Chris Kuethe LPGV Electronics and Controls http://www.ualberta.ca/~ckuethe/ RSA in 2 lines of PERL lives at http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 If you are an Eudora user on Win32, you want to take a look at PGPMail. It is the best integration of the two products I have seen so far. By a wide margin. The free beta software is at http://www.pgp.com/products/PGPmail-beta.cgi -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From nobody at replay.com Wed Jan 15 22:55:09 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 22:55:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quadratic residues Message-ID: <199701160655.HAA02470@basement.replay.com> Tim May the self-admitted child molester possesses a rudimentary dick less than one inch long, half the size of his mother's clitoris, that barely makes a fistful. Thereby hangs the root of this Jew-hating sissy's sick fixation on little boys and Usenet forgeries. \\\ (0 0) _ooO_(_)_Ooo____ Tim May From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jan 15 23:18:50 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 23:18:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970115232022.006cb5a8@192.100.81.126> At 11:11 PM 1/15/97 -0700, C. Kuethe wrote: >Yeah... took the words outta my mouth. Let's all write to the FAA, DOT, etc. >and tell them what morons they are... sorry tell them that they need work. No >more Lockerbies, TWA800's and other such tragedies. Write them? Why? How are they going to prevent someone from boarding with a bottle of aftershave containing the extra strong flavor? A bottle that will be left in the seat? One could cut open the seat if need be. [Dozens of other examples omitted in the interest of brevity.] -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From azur at netcom.com Wed Jan 15 23:29:43 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 23:29:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: >On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Steve Schear wrote: > >> Yes, you need a device which can simultaneously listen to the >> paging/controll channels and determine, when a handoff to a monitored >> conversation occurs,to which new channel pair they have been assigned. I >> seem to recall such a device was for sale a few years back using a ISA/EISA >> card and some DOS compatible software. It connected to the ubiquitous and >> well characterized Oki 900 cell phone. > > I've also heard that some have hacked cellphones so that they can >become a 'clone' of an existing phone, receiving all commands to swap >channels, etc. But not sending anything back to the cell sites. (This is >different from the usual cloning that goes on where they duplicate the >phone and use it to run up enormous bills). I haven't found any concrete >refrences to this in my recent browsing though, so it may just be a >vapor-hack. > > Brian > Try: http://www.l0pht.com/~drwho/cell/oki/oki-ctek.html as a starting point. --Steve From BlackSunday at Hell.DOA Wed Jan 15 23:35:45 1997 From: BlackSunday at Hell.DOA (+Sabbath+) Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 23:35:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to crack Message-ID: <32DDDBE2.7C2C@Hell.DOA> On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Tim O'Brien wrote: > Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, so I joined > this crap mailing list called cypherpunks. > > Blah Blah Blah, you guys don't know anything...Prove yourself and I may > let you in. This mailing list is for people who want to sell goods > nothing else..... Tim ,Tod, whatever: The list is for Hackers & Crackers. Since you made the famous Dumbshit Statement " I want to be a Hacker" Your first hack test is trying to get off the list. From rwright at adnetsol.com Thu Jan 16 00:22:03 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 00:22:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: It's a great new year! telemarketers and solicitors Message-ID: <199701160822.AAA02684@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> On or About 13 Jan 97 at 21:06, Toto wrote: > With the 'wonder of modern technology' at their fingertips, > however, > the 'common man/woman' can also avail themselves of the plethora of > information lying within reach of their sticky little fingers. > > Big Brother wants to know everything about everybody, and if the > average user gets tired of Little Brother getting ahold of the > information, then I am sure that Big Brother will come to our > rescue, passing laws and instituting regualtions that 'save' us by > ensuring that only Big Brother knows all. Yeah, if everyone keeps crying and whining about "too much spam" "too much information freely available" Then that's just what will happen. Keep the Government out of the Internet!!!!!! Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From asgaard at Cor.sos.sll.se Thu Jan 16 01:03:08 1997 From: asgaard at Cor.sos.sll.se (Asgaard) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 01:03:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701121640.QAA00188@server.test.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Jan 1997, Adam Back wrote: >GSM includes A5 encryption here, so basically the whole design is worked out >- all you'd have to do is rip out the A5 chip and replace with a decent >encryption system. Anyone know how modular the design is, for instance if >it would be possible to give a GSM A5 based cell phone a crypto upgrade >using published electrical interface standards? (I want one of those - >Nokia phone with IDEA + 2048 bit RSA signatures + DH forward secrecy!) I don't understand what you are getting at here. This would demand cooperation from the cell phone provider, with a compatible device at the other end of the airwaves. Then the call would go unencrypted through much of the system until it reached the callee's current cell sender anyway. GSM is alledgedly A5 encrypted only in the air. And if A5 is a 'decent' algorithm or not is up to discussion. It hasn't been up on the list for a long time now but from earlier discussions I remember that the latest versions of A5, if not 'strong' in a crypto anarchy sense, are susceptible to attack only from very sophisticated adversaries and certainly not from Newt's 'couple'. Asgaard From aga at dhp.com Thu Jan 16 03:25:13 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 03:25:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jews (American Dissident Voices Weekly Transcripts) Message-ID: we take no position on this matter, and this is forwarded for Usenet Distribution. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 15:31:05 -0500 From: The Bok Reply-To: jimsteel at dreamon.com From: The Bok Reply-To: jimsteel at dreamon.com To: jimsteel at dreamon.com Subject: American Dissident Voices Weekly Transcripts --------------------------------------------------------------- American Dissident Voices is a world wide radio program which deals with topics of interest that concern people of European descent. We hope that these weekly articles will offer the reader an opposing viewpoint to the major news media. --------------------------------------------------------------- Jewish Supremacy: Those Who Want to Dominate a Multiracial Society Are Racial Supremacists; Those Who Want to Live in a Healthy, Homogeneous Society Are Racial Separatists. by Kevin Alfred Strom Have you ever noticed the psychological phenomenon in which a person will often call attention to the real or imagined faults in others that he himself suffers from? The name of this phenomenon is projection, and it certainly crops up often in life: the mentally unbalanced man accusing others of being "crazy"; the extremely jealous woman accusing her husband of not trusting her; the habitual schemer accusing his co-workers of plotting against him; the greedy man excoriating his fellows for being selfish; etc. This phenomenon is nowhere more apparent than in the controlled media's readiness to accuse anyone who believes in White survival of being what they call a "White supremacist." This has to be the most egregious example imaginable of the pot calling the kettle black. Actually, it is more like the pot calling the silverware black, since most of those accused of being � "White supremacists," or in illiterate-speak, "White supremists" [sic], are actually White separatists, a very important distinction. It is the largely Jewish masters of the media who are supremacists supreme. A separatist desires that his people should have freedom and independence from domination by other peoples, and to that end he works for the day when his people shall be able to live and provide for themselves in their own nation, without the burden of an underclass or overclass comprised of other peoples. A separatist specifically does not desire to be an overclass. He does not want to rule over any other people. In fact, a separatist does not want a multiracial society at all. A supremacist, on the other hand, wants and demands a multiracial society. In this multiracial society he wishes his race or social group to be the dominant one. The fact that this desire is usually cloaked in pretensions of beneficent intentions and "the greatest good for the greatest number" should not obscure the fact that it is a master/servant relationship that the supremacist wants. White Americans who promoted Black slavery in this country during the first half of the 19th Century could properly be called supremacists. White American businessmen who support increased Third World immigration to provide themselves with cheap labor are essentially supremacists. The White upper class have abandoned their own people, but they daub their unconscionable piggish greed and treason with a fake gilding of "tolerance" which they themselves neither believe nor practice. The world champions of hypocrisy when it comes to ethnic supremacy, however, have to be the organized Jews. Dominant in the Hollywood/New York cultural axis, when anyone challenges their interests they are quick to denounce with the words that they have made into terms of opprobrium: "racist," "White supremacist," etc. In their movies and their newscasts they are zealous in their promotion of the idea of a multiracial, multicultural society in which all live in perfect harmony. In fact, the genesis of this "multicultural" moral and social construct was with the leftist media Jews and their allies, as they themselves admit in private Jewish publications (see previous article, "Yiddishkeit Pathology." But a careful examination of organized Jewry's attitudes towards other races reveals a quite different face from that presented to the public. In fact, it can be fairly said that Jewish religion and Jewish practice exemplify racial supremacy at its most hateful and its most outrageous. In truth, after examining definitive Jewish religious documents one can be forgiven for thinking that racism just might have been invented by the Jews. Let's take a look at the record. A few years ago a friend of mine, after a long evening discussing politics and conspiracy, asked me, "If there really were a Jewish plan to dominate and enslave us as you say, surely someone would have defected and spilled the beans on his fellow conspirators." "Well," I replied, "I agree that would be the very best evidence of all." I can tell you now that such evidence not only exists, but it is plentiful. It is not all in one place, and one has to examine the testimony of more than one individual to get the complete picture, but there are indeed defectors from what my friend called the "Jewish conspiracy." I am not sure how well the word "conspiracy" now applies to a domination presently being conducted more and more out in the open, but a conspiracy it once was, and defectors it has surely had, though not all of them would have claimed that title. Long-time readers will be familiar with the names of a few of these: Benjamin H. Freedman, Alfred Lilienthal, Victor Ostrovsky, Samuel Roth, Marcus Eli Ravage, Noam Chomsky, Israel Shahak. Each provides a piece of truth that the ruling establishment does not wish you to know. Today let us examine Israel Shahak. Israel Shahak is a professor emeritus at Hebrew University and longtime Israeli dissident. Israel Shahak is a liberal Jew who excoriates "Nazis" repeatedly and vociferously in his writings. Israel Shahak is himself a former resident of the Bergen-Belsen concentration camp during World War II. He was raised as an Orthodox Jew. He is a Jew who settled in Palestine in 1945 and was witness to the founding of the state of Israel. And he is a powerful opponent of Jewish hypocrisy. The extraordinary thing about Israel Shahak is that he does not have a double standard for Jews and non-Jews when it comes to racial supremacy. Shahak is against racial supremacy whether practiced by Jews or non-Jews, and he finds that it is practiced extensively by Jews and is in fact part of their religious traditions. Professor Shahak finds this morally disturbing and not in the long-term interests of Jews. Professor Shahak has published a book which examines the issue of Jewish racism in detail, Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3,000 Years. Israel Shahak says that Judaism and its teachings are "poisoning the hearts and minds" of its followers and have been doing so for thousands of years. In a recent forum at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, he acknowledged that Jews have been persecuted in the past, but emphasized that today "it is quite common that a persecuted group becomes the persecutor." One of Shahak's favorite activities is translating the Hebrew press into English for the edification of the rest of us, a practice which has earned him the burning hatred of many in the Jewish establishment. One article he translated recently, by Israeli journalist Tom Segev, relates the writer's random walk through Jerusalem in the company of an Arab lawyer. The lawyer was stopped repeatedly by Israeli guards and his identification papers were demanded. One guard ordered him, "Come here, jump." Then the guard dropped his papers on the road and, laughing, demanded that the Arab pick them up. Aside to the Jewish journalist the guard stated, "These people will do whatever you tell them to do. If I tell him to jump, he will jump. Run, he will run. Take your clothes off, he will take them off. If I tell him to kiss the wall, he will kiss it. If I tell him to crawl on the road, won't he crawl? . . . Everything. Tell him to curse his mother and he will curse her too." The guard continued, offering his opinion that the Arabs are "not human beings." The border guards then searched the lawyer, gratuitously slapping him, and ordered him to remove his shoes, warning him that they could order him to remove all his clothes if they so chose. Segev continues: "My Arab kept silent and sat down on the ground." The border guards laughed and said again, "Really, not humans." This, of course, is a relatively mild example of the attitude of many Jews toward Gentiles, but it suffices to show the mentality involved. Shahak, in an article entitled "The Ideology Behind the Hebron Massacre," gives us some additional recent examples of this widespread Jewish attitude. He translates a few of the statements of a religious group in Israel called the Gush Emunim, which, according to Shahak, "enjoy[s] [Yitzhak] Rabin's friendship and strong influence in wide circles of the Israeli and diaspora Jewish communities." This sect states that Jews are not and cannot be a normal people. One of their leaders, Rabbi Schlomo Aviner, stated,". . . while God requires other normal nations to abide by abstract codes of justice and righteousness, such laws do not apply to Jews.� Rabbi Israel Ariel states, "A Jew who kills a non-Jew is exempt from human judgment, and has not violated the prohibition of murder." According to Gush Emunim rabbis, "all Arabs living in Palestine are thieves because since the land was once Jewish, all property to be found on that land really belongs to the Jews." These Jewish fanatics feel invincible. They possess one of the world's most powerful military machines (built up by five billion or more U.S. dollars in annual aid) and have plenty of potential American cannon fodder at their disposal. They state: "Israel need have no fear of future wars, and can even provoke them at will . . . Even if there is peace, we must instigate wars of liberation in order to conquer . . ." In Shahak's article former Knesset member Rabbi Eliezar Waldman, who is now the director of the main Jewish school in Kiryat Arba, expresses the view "that by fighting the Arabs, Israel carries out its divine mission to serve as the heart of the world . . . while Arab hostility springs, like all anti-Semitism, from the world's recalcitrance against being saved by the Jews, . . . or from Arabs seeking to fulfill their collective death-wish." Shahak recounts the answer of a rabbi who was asked by an Israeli soldier if it was proper to kill Arab women and children. The rabbi's answer was a quote from the Jewish holy book, the Talmud "The best of the gentiles . . . kill him; the best of snakes . . .dash out its brains." Some holy book; some religion! Shahak contends that Jews are imbued with such attitudes to the degree that they are immersed in Judaism. In his book he explores the anti-Gentile outlook of Judaism's Talmud. He writes: "According to the Jewish religion, the murder of a Jew is a capital offense and one of the three most heinous sins (the other two being idolatry and adultery). Jewish religious courts and secular authorities are commanded to punish, even beyond the limits of the ordinary administration of justice, anyone guilty of murdering a Jew . . . When the victim is a Gentile, the position is quite different. A Jew who murders a Gentile is guilty only of a sin against the laws of Heaven, not punishable by a court. To cause indirectly the death of a Gentile is no sin at all. "Thus, one of the two most important commentators on the Shulhan 'Arukh explains that when it comes to a Gentile, "one must not lift one's hand to harm him, but one may harm him indirectly, for instance by removing a ladder after he had fallen into a crevice . . . there is no prohibition here, because it was not done directly." "A Gentile murderer who happens to be under Jewish jurisdiction must be executed whether the victim was Jewish or not. However, if the victim was Gentile and the murderer converts to Judaism, he is not punished. Shahak reveals that according to the Talmud: "Sexual intercourse between a married Jewish woman and any man other than her husband is a capital offense for both parties, and one of the three most heinous sins. The status of Gentile women is very different. The Halakhah presumes all Gentiles to be utterly promiscuous and the verse "whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue [of semen] is like the issue of horses" is applied to them . . . Therefore, the concept of adultery does not apply to intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman; rather the Talmud equates such intercourse to the sin of bestiality . . . "According to the Talmudic Encyclopedia: "He who has carnal knowledge of the wife of a Gentile is not liable to the death penalty, for it is written: `thy fellow's wife' rather than the alien's wife . . . and although a married Gentile woman is forbidden to the Gentiles, in any case a Jew is exempted." "This does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted -- quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the Jew: "If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day . . . because he had willful coitus with her she must be killed, as is the case with a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble." "If a Jew finds property whose probable owner is Jewish, the finder is strictly enjoined to make a positive effort to return his find by advertising it publicly. In contrast, the Talmud and all the early rabbinical authorities not only allow a Jewish finder to appropriate an article lost by a Gentile, but actually forbid him or her to return it . . . "It is forbidden to defraud a Jew by selling or buying at an unreasonable price. However, fraud does not apply to Gentiles, for it is written: �Do not defraud each man his brother . . . The Halakhah interprets all such idioms [as �each man his brother� or �neighbor�] as referring exclusively to one's fellow Jew. "In 1962 a part of the Maimonidean Code . . . the so-called Book of Knowledge, which contains the most basic rules of Jewish faith and practice, was published in Jerusalem in a bilingual edition, with the English translation facing the Hebrew text. The latter has been restored to its original purity, and the command to exterminate Jewish infidels appears in it in full: "It is a duty to exterminate them with one's own hands." In the English translation this is somewhat softened to: "It is a duty to take active measures to destroy them." But then the Hebrew text goes on to specify the prime examples of "infidels" who must be exterminated: "Such as Jesus of Nazareth and his pupils, and Tzadoq and Baitos [the founders of the Sadducean sect] and their pupils, may the name of the wicked rot." Not one word of this appears in the English text on the facing page (78a). And, even more significant, in spite of the wide circulation of this book among scholars in the English-speaking countries, not one of them has, as far as I know, protested against this glaring deception. Jew Israel Shahak has done the world a great service. He has been intellectually honest and very courageous. In Israel he speaks against Judaism at a very real risk to his life so as to reveal the truth about the most long-standing and utterly hostile racism the world has ever seen: Jewish racism. Israel Shahak's works make it clear that the new religion of "equality" promoted by the Jewish establishment is for Gentile consumption only. Organized Jews promote "equality," but they believe in the very opposite. They believe that they are a special, chosen people, destined to rule all others and to own all the wealth of the world. They are fanatical about preserving their heritage and their identity, their exclusive Jewish schools, and their organizations. The prevailing Jewish world view is a textbook example of the racial supremacy they are so fond of accusing others of having. What can we learn from this? I assure you it is not my purpose to promote hatred or racial supremacy from our side of the racial divide. The very fact that I devote so much space to truth-telling Jewish dissidents should prove that. I think we can learn a lot from an unbiased observation of Jewish activities. First we must acknowledge that they have been amazingly successful at surviving. Surrounded by often hostile majorities, they have preserved their identity, their culture, and the germ of their racial uniqueness through millennia. For that we can credit their intense sense of identity and solidarity and their belief in themselves as a people. I deeply wish that we Europeans could emulate them in this regard, for then our survival would be assured. But I cannot recommend their hypocrisy as an example to be followed. This hypocrisy always leads them to practice a supremacist rather than a separatist way of life. Despite some Zionist denials the Jewish way of life shows every sign of continuing on its perpetual path of living among other peoples as a solid, organized minority and attempting to gain the upper hand in Gentile nations by promoting the poisonous idea of a raceless society. This destructive and hypocritical approach is sure death for the Gentiles, of course, and in the long run always backfires on the Jews. That is precisely what Professor Shahak is worried about. I think that racial separatism, not supremacy, is the only path to independence and freedom for all peoples on this planet. It is also a path that is in harmony with our natural instincts. Our instincts -- all of them -- are there for very important reasons, and we would not be what we are if it were not for the instincts which led us to survive the rigors of Ice Age Europe and to consider ourselves fundamentally different from peoples who developed closer to the Equator. From aga at dhp.com Thu Jan 16 03:29:01 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 03:29:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970115053019.18bf61b4@mail.aloha.com> Message-ID: An excellent Article here, pointing out why everybody should shun homosexuals to be safe and healthy. On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote: > When it comes to AIDS, unless there are facts to invalidate the following > information, it is evident that the homo/bi/sexual lifestyle is > overwhelmingly the most destructive among those listed: > > "Who Are The Patients? > "In the United States, homosexual and bisexual males make up > approximately 62 percent of the total patients. The other major group > afflicted with AIDS are intravenous drug abusers -- both men and women -- > who constitute 20 percent of the total. . . ." > > "ADULTS AND ADOLESCENTS WITH AIDS, 1981-87 > ================================== Males % Females % Both sexes % > Homosexual/bisexual males 50,325 68 0 50,325 62 > Intravenous (IV) drug abusers 12,529 17 3,622 52 16,151 20 > Homosexual male an IV drug abusers 5,874 8 5,874 7 > Hemophilia/coagulation disorder 751 1 22 0 773 1 > Heterosexuals 1,516 2 2,073 30 3,589 4 > Blood transfusion 1,297 2 747 11 2,044 3 > Undetermined (1) 2,143 3 519 7 2,662 3 > TOTAL 74,435 91 6,983 9 81,418 100 > ========================================================================= > "Note: Provisional data. Cases with more than one risk factor than the > combinations listed are tabulated only in the category listed first. > (1) Includes patients on whom risk information is incomplete, patients > still under investigation, men reported only to have had heterosexual > contact with a prostitute, and patients for whom no specific risk was > identified; also includes one health care worker who developed AIDS after > a documented needle-stick to blood. Source: Centers for Disease Control." > ========================================================================= > Cited in "The Universal Almanac 1990", Andrews and McMeel, 1989. > ========================================================================= > > Readers are invited to post data supporting or opposing the above. > > Jai Maharaj > jai at mantra.com > Om Shanti > From jcr at idiom.com Thu Jan 16 04:14:20 1997 From: jcr at idiom.com (John C. Randolph) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 04:14:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS Message-ID: <199701161214.EAA26655@idiom.com> It figures. It's Fuehrer Clinton's home state, isn't it? Somedays, this shit just makes me want to give up on the USA, and emigrate to Anguila. -jcr begin forwarded message: Date: January 15, 1997 To: All RadioShack Stores From: RadioShack Communications Subject: URGENT PRODUCT NOTIFICATION Memo Id: 8216 IMMEDIATE ATTENTION The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. Tandy Corporation's legal department is researching this and the product has been removed from RSU distribution. DO NOT take order or sell this product until this situation can be resolved. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1 if by land, 2 if by sea. Paul Revere - encryption 1775 Charles R. Smith SOFTWAR http://www.us.net/softwar Pcyphered signature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rom eleni at cytanet.com.cy Thu Jan 16 05:06:02 1997 From: eleni at cytanet.com.cy (Yiango-George Yiangoullis [YiST]) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 05:06:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to crack Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970116130620.00664404@mail.cytanet.com.cy> At 12:37 AM 16/01/97 -0500, you wrote: >>X-Persona: >>Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 21:21:54 +0000 >>From: "Tim O'Brien" >>Organization: University of Virginia >>To: cypherpunks at toad.com >>Subject: How to crack >>Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com >> > >Thanks for your wonderful insight, next time keep it to yourself. > >>Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, so I joined >>this crap mailing list called cypherpunks. >> >> >> >>Blah Blah Blah, you guys don't know anything...Prove yourself and I may >>let you in. This mailing list is for people who want to sell goods >>nothing else..... >> >> > > Yiango-George Yiangoullis eleni at cytanet.com.cy http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/2208/index.htm --====-- Student : I hear that fish is brain food. Roommate: Yeah, I eat it all the time. Student : Well, there goes another theory. From aga at dhp.com Thu Jan 16 05:43:00 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (Aga) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 05:43:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Naughty, naughty... In-Reply-To: <5apke4$alu@dfw-ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <5blb8p$nt4@stronghold.dhp.com> Follower of the Clawed Albino wrote: In all of the years I have been on UseNet, this has to be the DUMBEST Cunt I have ever seen! : -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- : In article , : Russ Allbery carved on the cave wall: : > : > Wrong. You didn't look far enough (and please read the whole thread; I : > explicitly explained this). From : : > : > So you want an account? Send us cash/check/money order (in US funds : > please), whatever your preferred method of payment is (sorry, no : > credit cards, yours or others, please no netcom lists). Include with : > it what you want as a login name, what you want as an initial : > password, and optionally a way to contact you. If you would like us to : > contact you when the account has been created, tell us, if not expect : > it to take less than a week after you mail it if you are inside the : > US. We don't require any postive way to identify you, your privacy is : > important to us. : > : > In other words, you can send them cash in an unmarked envelope and they'll : > create an account. No paper trail. No billing address. It's anonymous. : *ack* : Hadn't gotten the entire thread on my system when I replied...thanks for : the correction. (Yes, I can admit when I fuck up. :) At least last time : I saw the page (June-ish?) I thought I remembered their stating they accepted : credit cards...ah well, yes, I can be wrong on occasion. :) You fuck up when you molest those little boys and get caught. And are you still fucking your Father for those pictures? : However, unless you sent them a twenty-dollar bill a month directly : placed in their postal box, wouldn't it at least have the postal office : address stamped on it? (At least it has the office stamped on the postmarks : in Louisville...) Not saying it does or doesn't, just wondering. Just shut up and go away, you perverted child-molesting lesbian. We are soon going to have you arrested for harassment by communication, and you will be off the net for good. Both IBM net and black-hole are helping to prosecute you. : Also, wouldn't this make it difficult to trace someone if someone was : delinquent in payment? Or, for that matter, if someone was forging someone : else's name on a money order, etc.? (I'm not saying they have trouble with : this, or even give a damn--just musing potential problems with not verifying : who is sending payment, etc. Understood they're trying to provide : pseudonymous accounts and all, but they could always state that stuff like : snail-addresses, etc. wouldn't be turned over save by court order. Hell, : even most freenets require at least some sort of verification anymore :) : (whether it be a valid mail address, something you have to mail in, or on : some occasions copies of photo ID and such).) : (Not that that part has any relation at all re net.abusers at dhp.com-- : they don't have to know EXACTLY who it is, they can just shut down the : account. Khijol.org, who offers pseudonymous accounts for the alt.support.* : groups, does have a rather strong AUP that states that misuse of the system : (for threats or net.abuse, among other things) can lead to nukage, can do : this fairly well.) There are NO net-abusers at DHP.com, and it is the most respectable ISP on the net. They are not going to get pushed around by dumb cunts like you, as you always try to do with postmasters. But after we tell them all about you, they just laugh it all off. Remember, I have ten Criminal Lawyers in my Organization, and you have none. Just what are you going to do in jail, cunt? -- when you have no more little boys and girls to molest? : In any case, this brings up a separate issue entirely on accounts and such. : (Namely, how exactly can one run a pay pseudonymous account service with the : maximum privacy protection, yet allow for closing accounts and, possibly, : proscecution if someone is committing flagrant net.abuse, especially to : the point of being illegal?) You are the illegal one, you stupid cunt. It is illegal to complain to any postmaster about any usenet posting, as that is "harassment by commmmunication," and we are going to have you prosecuted for that. Perverted dykes like you who molest children as a hobby are about to get kicked off this mans UseNet. : > -- : > Russ Allbery (rra at cs.stanford.edu) Well Russ, too bad you listen to this dumb cunt. You used to have potential, but you have lost it. it seems. : - -- : - -Windigo The Feral (NYAR!) This girl is a verified child-molester and she has been SEEN having sex with her Father and another man. I am not going to respond to filthy lesbian sluts like this any more. See you in Court, Cunt. I am keeping track of every postmaster that you complain to, and telling them all what a sleazy wacko lesbian trouble-maker that you are. One of these days, we will get your REAL name and plaster it all over this InterNet. In the meantime, we laugh at you on the telephone when we talk about you, and everybody knows by now that you know nothing about the law and are just full of shit. Bye, you slut-cunt lesbian child-molesting whore. From Scottauge at aol.com Thu Jan 16 06:45:05 1997 From: Scottauge at aol.com (Scottauge at aol.com) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 06:45:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive Message-ID: <970116094424_1510150436@emout01.mail.aol.com> God must look kindly on lesbians then, eh? Statistical evidence is there, hence that must be the truth.... In a message dated 97-01-16 08:33:21 EST, you write: > An excellent Article here, pointing out why everybody should > shun homosexuals to be safe and healthy. > > On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote: > > > When it comes to AIDS, unless there are facts to invalidate the following > > information, it is evident that the homo/bi/sexual lifestyle is > > overwhelmingly the most destructive among those listed: > > > > "Who Are The Patients? > > "In the United States, homosexual and bisexual males make up > > approximately 62 percent of the total patients. The other major group > > afflicted with AIDS are intravenous drug abusers -- both men and women -- > > who constitute 20 percent of the total. . . ." > > > > "ADULTS AND ADOLESCENTS WITH AIDS, 1981-87 > > ================================== Males % Females % Both sexes % > > Homosexual/bisexual males 50,325 68 0 50,325 62 > > Intravenous (IV) drug abusers 12,529 17 3,622 52 16,151 20 > > Homosexual male an IV drug abusers 5,874 8 5,874 7 > > Hemophilia/coagulation disorder 751 1 22 0 773 1 > > Heterosexuals 1,516 2 2,073 30 3,589 4 > > Blood transfusion 1,297 2 747 11 2,044 3 > > Undetermined (1) 2,143 3 519 7 2,662 3 > > TOTAL 74,435 91 6,983 9 81,418 100 > > ========================================================================= > > "Note: Provisional data. Cases with more than one risk factor than the > > combinations listed are tabulated only in the category listed first. > > (1) Includes patients on whom risk information is incomplete, patients > > still under investigation, men reported only to have had heterosexual > > contact with a prostitute, and patients for whom no specific risk was > > identified; also includes one health care worker who developed AIDS after > > a documented needle-stick to blood. Source: Centers for Disease Control." > > ========================================================================= > > Cited in "The Universal Almanac 1990", Andrews and McMeel, 1989. > > ========================================================================= > > > > Readers are invited to post data supporting or opposing the above. > > > > Jai Maharaj > > jai at mantra.com > > Om Shanti > > > > From Scottauge at aol.com Thu Jan 16 07:03:17 1997 From: Scottauge at aol.com (Scottauge at aol.com) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:03:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt may be more receptive to encryption now Message-ID: <970116095948_1444710331@emout10.mail.aol.com> Given his troubles with this "hay seed" scanner recording democrats, ol' Newt may be more receptive to encryption. Our privacy certainly is getting trashed by this presidency and I am hoping an impeachment is coming down the line. Since the congress is who makes the laws, maybe we all can focus some snail mail to these guys. Perhaps EFF could even draft some laws for our protection (what a joke - just to keep busy body beaurocrats outta our business). What does it matter anyhow, these guys dont read their own 300 - 5000 page laws anyhow.... Hopeless.... From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 16 07:15:46 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:15:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: It's a great new year! telemarketers and solicitors In-Reply-To: <199701160822.AAA02684@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> Message-ID: "Ross Wright" writes: > > Yeah, if everyone keeps crying and whining about "too much spam" > "too much information freely available" Then that's just what will > happen. Keep the Government out of the Internet!!!!!! Keep homosexual censorship out of the Internet! --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 16 07:24:33 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 07:24:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: soc.culture.belarus In-Reply-To: <9701160936.AA10669@uu.psi.com> Message-ID: >From belarus at solar.rtd.utk.edu Thu Jan 16 04:36:38 1997 Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Thu, 16 Jan 97 06:36:05 EST for dlv Received: from [198.78.213.165] by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via SMTP; id AA10669 for dlv at bwalk.dm.com; Thu, 16 Jan 97 04:36:38 -0500 Message-Id: <9701160936.AA10669 at uu.psi.com> Received: from (LOCALHOST.rtd.utk.edu) by solar.rtd.utk.edu; Thu, 16 Jan 97 04:33:28 EST Date: Thu, 16 Jan 97 04:33:28 EST Errors-To: kasaty at seanet.com Reply-To: belarus at solar.rtd.utk.edu Originator: belarus at solar.rtd.utk.edu Sender: belarus at solar.rtd.utk.edu Precedence: bulk From: "GWDVMS::IFEDCHE" To: Multiple recipients of list Subject: RE: soc.culture.belarus X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0b -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: BELARUS issues and communication :Can anyone tell me if soc.culture.belarus is still active? I have not been able to access this newsgroup for a while now and my service provider hasn't answered my question about this. I originally had to make a request to the ISP to carry the newsgroup but after that, it was ok. I hope it's only coincidental that I lost contact only about one day after I placed a posting on the newsgroup. Barry J Hilchey, PO Box 668, St Marys, Ontario, N4X 1B6, Canada: I donn't know exactly what happend to that group, but some time ago I had e-mail exchange with one of the moderators. He complained that they (5 persons or so) are sweating day and night moderating incoming postings. It might be, therefore, that this honorable job of censorship starved this people to death. Igor Fedchenia From declan at pathfinder.com Thu Jan 16 08:36:39 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:36:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt may be more receptive to encryption now In-Reply-To: <970116095948_1444710331@emout10.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: I think what's important to stress is that technical fixes work, laws don't. Net-advocates in DC are already planning to suggest to Republicans that they use crypto as a hammer to nail Gore (the chief White House supporter of the current policy) and draw votes and cash from Silicon Valley. -Declan On Thu, 16 Jan 1997 Scottauge at aol.com wrote: > > Given his troubles with this "hay seed" scanner recording democrats, ol' Newt > may be more receptive to encryption. > > Our privacy certainly is getting trashed by this presidency and I am hoping > an impeachment is coming down the line. > > Since the congress is who makes the laws, maybe we all can focus some snail > mail to these guys. > > Perhaps EFF could even draft some laws for our protection (what a joke - just > to keep busy body beaurocrats outta our business). > > What does it matter anyhow, these guys dont read their own 300 - 5000 page > laws anyhow.... > > Hopeless.... > > From declan at well.com Thu Jan 16 08:41:32 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:41:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Response to my post about Karn case and Judge Ginsberg Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:39:22 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Response to my post about Karn case and Judge Ginsberg [In a post earlier this week announcing that a partial Karn transcript was in Netly's Afterword section, I said that Ginsberg had libertarian leanings. Attached is a response. --Declan] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 10:48:46 From: [Name deleted -DBM] To: Declan McCullagh Subject: Re: Karn case challenging crypto rules -- oral arguments online I don't know if you're aware of this case, but Judge Ginsberg wrote the most disturbing dissenting opinion on a national security issue that I can think of in recent years. It was a lawsuit involving old FBI COINTELPRO activity from the late 1950s. The widow of a prominent Communist sued the FBI for ruining her husband's career. It seems the FBI planted falsified documents implying that he was an FBI spy where his fellow communists would find them. To prove the case, the plaintiff needed FBI records requested under FOIA. The FBI refused, citing "national security". Two of the judges reviewing the case sensibly noted that dirty tricks on American citizens during the 1950s are hardly a national security issue today. Ginsberg, however, wrote a chilling dissent. He *censored* the key parts of his dissent, because they were based on classified information. The plaintiff was not permitted to see the heart of Ginsberg's justification. That's as close to a secret court as I've ever heard of in the US. The case was settled out of court after the FBI lost the suit, but to this day, I think Ginsberg is the worst judge in the Federal courts. I remember this story from the NY Times, but I'm sure you can find the details yourself if you're interested. At any rate, I would consider Ginsberg highly susceptable to "national security" arguments by the Federal govt. From wendigo at pobox.com Thu Jan 16 08:53:01 1997 From: wendigo at pobox.com (Mark Rogaski) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 08:53:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to crack In-Reply-To: <32DDDBE2.7C2C@Hell.DOA> Message-ID: <199701161653.LAA30115@gate.cybernex.net> An entity claiming to be +Sabbath+ wrote: : : Tim ,Tod, whatever: : : : The list is for Hackers & Crackers. Since you made the famous Dumbshit : Statement " I want to be a Hacker" Your first hack test is trying to get : off the list. : Hackers and Crackers, huh? News to me. This list is supposed to be for the discussion of crypto, but I think Tim || Tod was more accurate in implying that it has become a dumping ground for mass marketing. mark PS -- No one chooses to be a hacker, you are or you aren't. The hacker in the crowd is the kid who took apart the toaster to see how it worked. I am of course not using the media version of the term. -- [] Mark Rogaski || "Computers save time like kudzu [] [] wendigo at pobox.com || prevents soil erosion." [] [] http://www.pobox.com/~wendigo/ || - afcasta at texas.net [] [] >> finger for PGP pubkey << || [] From rwright at adnetsol.com Thu Jan 16 09:34:37 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 09:34:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: It's a great new year! telemarketers and solicitors Message-ID: <199701161734.JAA12596@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> On or About 16 Jan 97 at 9:03, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > "Ross Wright" writes: > > > > Yeah, if everyone keeps crying and whining about "too much spam" > > "too much information freely available" Then that's just what > > will happen. Keep the Government out of the Internet!!!!!! > > Keep homosexual censorship out of the Internet! Yeah, That too! Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From alano at teleport.com Thu Jan 16 09:56:04 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 09:56:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Finally a good Eudora/PGP integration under Win32 In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970115224214.006b1584@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Lucky Green wrote: > If you are an Eudora user on Win32, you want to take a look at PGPMail. It > is the best integration of the two products I have seen so far. By a wide > margin. > > The free beta software is at http://www.pgp.com/products/PGPmail-beta.cgi It looks pretty good, but the beta I downloaded last night did not have the plug-in install file as described in the help file. I need to read the manual and find out what it takes to install by hand. It looks very promising though. (They are also going to be doing a one time deal for PGP 2.6.2 users and offering the software for about $30.00. The full version is about $120.00 or so. (Memory is not working 100% this morning... Need more coffee.)) From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Thu Jan 16 10:04:24 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:04:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to crack Message-ID: <199701161802.KAA08524@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > > Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, ... This has *got* to be a troll. Nobody could be this clueless. Well, actually, they could. From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Thu Jan 16 10:07:16 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:07:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: DCSB: The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictions for 1997 Message-ID: <199701161805.KAA08526@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > > Robert Hettinga wrote: > > I fished this out of my killfile. Ironically, I had just plonked Toto > > yesterday because I saw no compelling merit in anything he has posted to > > cypherpunks since he got here, and given the quantity of his posts, he was > > starting to waste my attention. However, this morning, as my mail was > > coming down in Eudora, I saw that he had replied to this month's DCSB > > announcement, and, frankly, I knew that it had to be something like this. > > Why do people feel compelled to 'explain' how they 'chanced' > to read items in their 'killfile'? It always seems to me to be > for the purpose of insulting someone while keeping egg off of > their own face. Well, I can't speak for R.H., but in my own case, my KILLfile entries typically look like /toto/f:=:j which displays the subject lines as it junks the articles. Sometimes I'll see one go by which interests me, so I'll go back and read it anyway. Similarly, people who've been plonked are often quoted in somebody else's message, so I see it anyway. From frantz at netcom.com Thu Jan 16 10:59:09 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 10:59:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970114222343.006b6f9c@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: At 10:23 PM -0800 1/14/97, Lucky Green wrote: >I was wondering what the procedure for handling these rather large steel >containers would be. Would they be X-rayed? How much shielding would the >steel provide for the contents? About 3 years ago I went on an international flight with a large quantity of 35mm film. I had the film packed in my luggage inside a 50 caliber ammo can (made out of steel). When I glanced at the x-ray monitor as the bag went through, I could plainly see the individual rolls of film inside the ammo can. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Thu Jan 16 11:00:51 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:00:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970114210400.0b2fe9a6@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: At 7:07 PM -0800 1/14/97, Eric Murray wrote: >Clay Olbon II writes: >> I have a problem with making it illegal to listen to parts of the >> electromagnetic spectrum. Seems sort of unnatural. > >I think that blowing your mouth off about what you've heard >by scanning cellular traffic is what's illegal. Or more illegal >than merely listening anyhow. The 1935 communication act made it illegal to pass on what you had heard when listening to certain radio services. Listening was OK. Telling others wasn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From rah at shipwright.com Thu Jan 16 11:01:27 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:01:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: DCSB: The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictions for 1997 In-Reply-To: <199701161805.KAA08526@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: At 1:05 pm -0500 1/16/97, Ed Falk wrote: >Well, I can't speak for R.H., but in my own case, my KILLfile entries >typically look like > > /toto/f:=:j > >which displays the subject lines as it junks the articles. And, in my case, Eudora displays each message in the status window as it's bringing something down from the POP server, and again as it filters. >Similarly, people who've been plonked are often quoted in somebody >else's message, so I see it anyway. So it seems... :-). So, Toto, you're not in "Cansas" any more. It's called a "Trash" folder. Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox, e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ From Ryan.Russell at sybase.com Thu Jan 16 11:48:55 1997 From: Ryan.Russell at sybase.com (Ryan Russell/SYBASE) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:48:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Privacy Issue (ANI in SF Bay Area) Message-ID: <199701161947.LAA26644@notesgw2.sybase.com> Here's something cute: Yesterday PacBell turned on ANI on our trunk groups, for local area calls. On their own, mind you, without request from us. If you call anyone here with a display phone, it displays your number, even if you have caller-id blocking on or you do a *70 (for those who don't know, ANI is not caller-id, you can't block your number from being displayed with ANI.) It also grabs your phone number if you leave a voice mail, so even folks without display phones can benefit. I post this thinking it may be of interest. I actually disagree that people ought to be able to block their number. My feeling is that if someone is calling me, they have no right be anonymous. Of course, I realize that this is easy to defeat with call forwarding and such.. In fact, if I call you from my work phone..you won't see my direct dial number...you'll see a number for PacBell's trunk group. Now...I just have to figure out how PacBell is charging us.. if it's .01$ per call like regular ANI...at 100,000 calls per day.. Hmm...first fix is free? A new PacBell marketing program? Our CIO loves the new "feature." Ryan From shamrock at netcom.com Thu Jan 16 11:50:23 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 11:50:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Finally a good Eudora/PGP integration under Win32 Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970116114943.006ae32c@192.100.81.126> At 09:55 AM 1/16/97 -0800, Alan wrote: >On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Lucky Green wrote: > >> If you are an Eudora user on Win32, you want to take a look at PGPMail. It >> is the best integration of the two products I have seen so far. By a wide >> margin. >> >> The free beta software is at http://www.pgp.com/products/PGPmail-beta.cgi > >It looks pretty good, but the beta I downloaded last night did not have >the plug-in install file as described in the help file. I need to read >the manual and find out what it takes to install by hand. It is a bug in the manual :-) The plugins are already installed by the main installer. If you can't find the buttons in Eudora, it is because they are in a different location than you think they are. Look next to the "Queue" button. PGP should make this clearer in their docs. BTW, I am I the only one who's text does't wrap when emailing to UNIX boxes? I have wrapping turned on... Great program, though. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From mgursk1 at umbc.edu Thu Jan 16 13:01:19 1997 From: mgursk1 at umbc.edu (Michael Gurski) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 13:01:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Kill filing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: > At 1:05 pm -0500 1/16/97, Ed Falk wrote: > > /toto/f:=:j > >which displays the subject lines as it junks the articles. > > And, in my case, Eudora displays each message in the status window as it's > bringing something down from the POP server, and again as it filters. [snip] > > So, Toto, you're not in "Cansas" any more. It's called a "Trash" folder. I used to have procmail shove messages from certain folks directly to /dev/null, but then wondered a few days ago if I were missing anything, so they ended up going to $MAILDIR/.in.garbage. After looking in there today, I'm glad to say that it's back to /dev/null, with no regrets. Of course, with the new moderated list, there shouldn't be too much work for procmail, except for those folks who I personally feel aren't worth reading... -- |\/|ike Gurski mgursk1 at umbc.edu http://www.gl.umbc.edu/~mgursk1/ finger/mail subject "send pgpkey"|"send index" Hail Eris! -><- O- |Member, 1024/39B5BADD PGP Keyprint=3493 A994 B159 48B7 1757 1E4E 6256 4570 | Team My opinions are mine alone, even if you should be sharing them. | OS/2 Senate Finance Committee Chair, SGA 1996-1997 From azur at netcom.com Thu Jan 16 13:21:32 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 13:21:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS Message-ID: >It figures. It's Fuehrer Clinton's home state, isn't it? > >Somedays, this shit just makes me want to give up on the USA, and >emigrate to Anguila. > Have you spent time in Anguila? I have. As a visitor its a very safe, friendly, family-oriented society. But as a resident the picture is somewhat different due to a certain cliqish-ness and small-country mentality (e.g., the exclusive arrangement of Cable & Wireless). Don't get me wrong I love the place. It certainly a world apart from St. Martin/Sint Maarten only 8 miles distant. >-jcr > >begin forwarded message: > >Date: January 15, 1997 >To: All RadioShack Stores >From: RadioShack Communications >Subject: URGENT PRODUCT NOTIFICATION >Memo Id: 8216 > >IMMEDIATE ATTENTION >The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or >possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled >descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. Tandy Corporation's >legal department is researching this and the product has been removed >from RSU distribution. DO NOT take order or sell this product until >this situation can be resolved. > I'm sure this represents an interference in interstate commerce and won't stand up in court. From thad at hammerhead.com Thu Jan 16 13:21:37 1997 From: thad at hammerhead.com (Thaddeus J. Beier) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 13:21:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS Message-ID: <199701162123.NAA07816@hammerhead.com> jcr at idiom.com ("John C. Randolph") quotes Charles R. Smith > IMMEDIATE ATTENTION > The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or > possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled > descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. Tandy Corporation's > legal department is researching this and the product has been removed > from RSU distribution. DO NOT take order or sell this product until > this situation can be resolved. I called the Arkansas State Police, 501-221-8200, to try to verify this, and they're "going to have somebody call me back." I'm not holding my breath... If anybody has a definative source on this, I'd love to see it; it's mindboggling. thad -- Thaddeus Beier thad at hammerhead.com Visual Effects Supervisor 408) 287-6770 Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/people/thad From bdolan at USIT.NET Thu Jan 16 13:48:18 1997 From: bdolan at USIT.NET (Brad Dolan) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 13:48:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: National Security State has different standards for 'them' and 'us' In-Reply-To: <199701161947.LAA26644@notesgw2.sybase.com> Message-ID: I was distracted a bit but I believe I heard on NPR news this morning that Colorado Guv. Roy Roemer showed up at an airport sans id and had a moment of difficulty getting on his flight. Roemer solved the problem by showing the Federal Permission-To-Fly checker a picture of himself in a recent newspaper. I thought the ill-defined (or ill-described) rules required presentation of a _government_ picture I.D. Since when is a newspaper photo a government picture I.D.? Some animals are more equal than others. bd From gtaylor at gil.com.au Thu Jan 16 13:49:02 1997 From: gtaylor at gil.com.au (Greg Taylor) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 13:49:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701162147.HAA12921@iccu6.ipswich.gil.com.au> After following this thread for some time, I have to question whether Americans realise how far behind the rest of the world they are in cellphone technology. Most of the world has been using GSM digital technology for some years now, with automatic international roaming, unless you travel to the USA. No one in their right mind uses an analogue mobile phone any more if they are concerned about eavesdropping. The Newt incident simply could not happen with GSM. Of course in most countries the government controls the federal police, not the other way round. Greg Brisbane Australia From thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr Thu Jan 16 13:55:59 1997 From: thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr (THEAUDIN) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 13:55:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: stop Message-ID: <199701162154.WAA04765@gaia.eurobretagne.fr> please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr From rcgraves at disposable.com Thu Jan 16 14:14:51 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 14:14:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Privacy Issue (ANI in SF Bay Area) In-Reply-To: <199701161947.LAA26644@notesgw2.sybase.com> Message-ID: <32DEA7D9.510@disposable.com> Can I (or you) send this to comp.decom.telecom and comp.risks? If true, this merits wider distribution, but I don't want to cause you any trouble. Then again, I don't see your email address... -rich Ryan, Russell/SYBASE wrote: > > Here's something cute: > > Yesterday PacBell turned on ANI on our trunk groups, for > local area calls. On their own, mind you, without request > from us. If you call anyone here with a display phone, > it displays your number, even if you have caller-id > blocking on or you do a *70 (for those who don't know, > ANI is not caller-id, you can't block your number > from being displayed with ANI.) > > It also grabs your phone number if you leave a voice mail, > so even folks without display phones can benefit. > > I post this thinking it may be of interest. I actually > disagree that people ought to be able to block > their number. My feeling is that if someone is calling > me, they have no right be anonymous. Of course, I > realize that this is easy to defeat with call forwarding and such.. > In fact, if I call you from my work phone..you won't see > my direct dial number...you'll see a number for PacBell's > trunk group. > > Now...I just have to figure out how PacBell is charging us.. > if it's .01$ per call like regular ANI...at 100,000 calls per day.. > Hmm...first fix is free? A new PacBell marketing program? > Our CIO loves the new "feature." > > Ryan From declan at pathfinder.com Thu Jan 16 14:47:08 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 14:47:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Debunking rumors -- Re: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS In-Reply-To: <199701162123.NAA07816@hammerhead.com> Message-ID: Time to debunk this rumor. I just spoke with the Arkansas state police, who told me: "It wasn't put out by the state police. [If anything] it must be a city ordinance from some city. That state police definitely didn't do it." -Declan >jcr at idiom.com ("John C. Randolph") quotes Charles R. Smith >> IMMEDIATE ATTENTION >> The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or >> possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled >> descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. Tandy Corporation's >> legal department is researching this and the product has been removed >> from RSU distribution. DO NOT take order or sell this product until >> this situation can be resolved. > >I called the Arkansas State Police, 501-221-8200, to try to verify this, >and they're "going to have somebody call me back." I'm not holding my >breath... > >If anybody has a definative source on this, I'd love to see it; it's >mindboggling. > >thad >-- Thaddeus Beier thad at hammerhead.com > Visual Effects Supervisor 408) 287-6770 > Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/people/thad ------------------------- The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ From dozer at megan.netwizards.net Thu Jan 16 15:28:05 1997 From: dozer at megan.netwizards.net (Bill Rockefeller) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:28:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Special Offer! In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970116172801.00965980@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701162323.PAA10778@megan.netwizards.net> The 'A special offer' posting was fraudulent, and from UUNet, not from the NetWizards domain, or NetWizards newsservers. If you'll examine the headers in the message, you will find this to be true. If you'd like to complain, please contact the UUNet Administration. This is the second spam this lamer has posted, and the only person he's hurting is himself, and users of Usenet. Dozer (aka Bill Rockefeller) is the System Administrator at NetWizards, and does NOT approve of spam in any way, shape or form. All of these schemes are illegal, and a waste of time. Get a job, work for a living. :) For more information on the REAL Dozer (not the SPAMMER), feel free to drop by his homepage, at http://www.dozer.com, and look under Dozer's section. Dozer also runs the Mustang 5.0 Mailing list for the Internet, if you have a Modified Mustang 5.0, or are interested in them, email 50ml at netwiz.net. We apologize for any confusion the poor misguided soul that posted the fraudulent message may have caused. :) Note: Mailbombing this address is quite useless. It filters all mailbombs, etc, and has unlimited space. From dozer at megan.netwizards.net Thu Jan 16 15:28:34 1997 From: dozer at megan.netwizards.net (Bill Rockefeller) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:28:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Special Offer! In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970116172834.009fe100@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701162323.PAA10832@megan.netwizards.net> The 'A special offer' posting was fraudulent, and from UUNet, not from the NetWizards domain, or NetWizards newsservers. If you'll examine the headers in the message, you will find this to be true. If you'd like to complain, please contact the UUNet Administration. This is the second spam this lamer has posted, and the only person he's hurting is himself, and users of Usenet. Dozer (aka Bill Rockefeller) is the System Administrator at NetWizards, and does NOT approve of spam in any way, shape or form. All of these schemes are illegal, and a waste of time. Get a job, work for a living. :) For more information on the REAL Dozer (not the SPAMMER), feel free to drop by his homepage, at http://www.dozer.com, and look under Dozer's section. Dozer also runs the Mustang 5.0 Mailing list for the Internet, if you have a Modified Mustang 5.0, or are interested in them, email 50ml at netwiz.net. We apologize for any confusion the poor misguided soul that posted the fraudulent message may have caused. :) Note: Mailbombing this address is quite useless. It filters all mailbombs, etc, and has unlimited space. From unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu Thu Jan 16 15:29:26 1997 From: unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu (Internaut) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:29:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <01BC03D2.A3F21CA0@s14-pm05.tnstate.campus.mci.net> At 11:11 PM 1/15/97 -0700, C. Kuethe wrote: >>Yeah... took the words outta my mouth. Let's all write to the FAA, DOT, etc. >>and tell them what morons they are... sorry tell them that they need >>work. No >>more Lockerbies, TWA800's and other such tragedies. Lucky Green wrote >Write them? Why? How are they going to prevent someone from boarding with a >bottle of aftershave containing the extra strong flavor? A bottle that will >be left in the seat? One could cut open the seat if need be. [Dozens of >other examples omitted in the interest of brevity.] I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). From MAILER-DAEMON at brute.hway.net Thu Jan 16 15:30:34 1997 From: MAILER-DAEMON at brute.hway.net (Mail Delivery Subsystem) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:30:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Message-ID: <199701162330.SAA29235@brute.hway.net> The original message was received at Thu, 16 Jan 1997 18:30:21 -0500 from root at localhost ----- The following addresses had delivery problems ----- professional at pipeline.com (unrecoverable error) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to sieve0.mindspring.com: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown 550 professional at pipeline.com... User unknown ----- Original message follows ----- Received: by brute.hway.net (950413.SGI.8.6.12/951211.SGI) for professional at pipeline.com id SAA29231; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 18:30:21 -0500 Return-Path: Received: from Alpha.remcan.ca by brute.hway.net via ESMTP (950413.SGI.8.6.12/951211.SGI) for id SAA28775; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 18:29:29 -0500 Received: from shawn by Alpha.remcan.ca via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO) for id RAA03902; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:23:40 -0500 X-Loop: iiu.com Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970116172930.009091b0 at toad.com> X-Sender: cypherpunks at toad.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:29:34 -0600 To: iiucom at iiu.com From: "cypherpunks at toad.com" Subject: Re: Information is POWER- Get it! Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" FUCK YOU SPAMMER At 11:11 PM 1/14/97 -0500, you wrote: >****This letter is sent to you automaticly. If you wish to >be removed, reply and type remove*********** > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This is a new LEGAL service bringing Public Information >to the world of Personnel computing!!! > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This letter is being sent to you because you know that >information is Power. You are interested in new ways of >doing business economically and safely. You won't let >anyone take advantage of you. > >Please read the next few paragraphs to see if our services can help you. > >We are Informational Investigations, Unlimited, a public >information company. What we do is to provide the public >with information on people and companies. Let me explain. > >Say you've lost touch with an old friend. We can find that >person. What if that someone or a company owes you money. We >can find that person/company so you can collect. Here's >another way IIU can help you. > >Are you buying a house? Do you think knowing what the seller >paid for the same house could help you in the negotiations? >Do you trust the real estate to give you the right tax >assessment? We can give you the taxes on your dream house >directly from yhe assessors office. No better way to be >accurate than that! > >Are you hiring a 'nanny' or babysitter? I know from my >experience how emotional a decision that can be. The worry, >the questions about his/her background. EASE YOUR MIND! Why >not check to see if this person was convicted of a crime. Do >they have bad credit or a DWI? > >OK? Want to see one more? Here's how we have saved landlords >money for years. > >Renting an apartment? Extending credit? Call us! We can do >the background checking for you, saving you time and money >in the long run. Have you ever tried to get a deadbeat out >out of your apartment for non-payment? With today's courts, >it is almost impossible. Save money NOW. Call us to do a >background on the perspective tenant BEFORE you rent to them. >A few dollars now may save you THOUSANDS later in attorney's >fees and lost rent. > >CONVINCED? We won't belabor the point. We can provide you with >the information you need to make informed decisions quickly >and economically. > >Our fees? Simple. We charge you the cost of the search plus >$20.00. Our search fees, the amount it costs us to get your >information, is usually $50.00 or less. Most searches are >$10.-15.00. All information is obtained legally through >public databases. > >Call us at (800) 375-5260, Monday-Friday-9AM to 5PM ET. Or >visit our web site at: http://www.iiu.com. Make a bookmark >for it. Tell a friend. > >Thank you for taking the time to read our letter. > >INFORMATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS, UNLIMITED, INC. > > At 11:11 PM 1/14/97 -0500, you wrote: >****This letter is sent to you automaticly. If you wish to >be removed, reply and type remove*********** > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This is a new LEGAL service bringing Public Information >to the world of Personnel computing!!! > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This letter is being sent to you because you know that >information is Power. You are interested in new ways of >doing business economically and safely. You won't let >anyone take advantage of you. > >Please read the next few paragraphs to see if our services can help you. > >We are Informational Investigations, Unlimited, a public >information company. What we do is to provide the public >with information on people and companies. Let me explain. > >Say you've lost touch with an old friend. We can find that >person. What if that someone or a company owes you money. We >can find that person/company so you can collect. Here's >another way IIU can help you. > >Are you buying a house? Do you think knowing what the seller >paid for the same house could help you in the negotiations? >Do you trust the real estate to give you the right tax >assessment? We can give you the taxes on your dream house >directly from yhe assessors office. No better way to be >accurate than that! > >Are you hiring a 'nanny' or babysitter? I know from my >experience how emotional a decision that can be. The worry, >the questions about his/her background. EASE YOUR MIND! Why >not check to see if this person was convicted of a crime. Do >they have bad credit or a DWI? > >OK? Want to see one more? Here's how we have saved landlords >money for years. > >Renting an apartment? Extending credit? Call us! We can do >the background checking for you, saving you time and money >in the long run. Have you ever tried to get a deadbeat out >out of your apartment for non-payment? With today's courts, >it is almost impossible. Save money NOW. Call us to do a >background on the perspective tenant BEFORE you rent to them. >A few dollars now may save you THOUSANDS later in attorney's >fees and lost rent. > >CONVINCED? We won't belabor the point. We can provide you with >the information you need to make informed decisions quickly >and economically. > >Our fees? Simple. We charge you the cost of the search plus >$20.00. Our search fees, the amount it costs us to get your >information, is usually $50.00 or less. Most searches are >$10.-15.00. All information is obtained legally through >public databases. > >Call us at (800) 375-5260, Monday-Friday-9AM to 5PM ET. Or >visit our web site at: http://www.iiu.com. Make a bookmark >for it. Tell a friend. > >Thank you for taking the time to read our letter. > >INFORMATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS, UNLIMITED, INC. > > At 11:11 PM 1/14/97 -0500, you wrote: >****This letter is sent to you automaticly. If you wish to >be removed, reply and type remove*********** > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This is a new LEGAL service bringing Public Information >to the world of Personnel computing!!! > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This letter is being sent to you because you know that >information is Power. You are interested in new ways of >doing business economically and safely. You won't let >anyone take advantage of you. > >Please read the next few paragraphs to see if our services can help you. > >We are Informational Investigations, Unlimited, a public >information company. What we do is to provide the public >with information on people and companies. Let me explain. > >Say you've lost touch with an old friend. We can find that >person. What if that someone or a company owes you money. We >can find that person/company so you can collect. Here's >another way IIU can help you. > >Are you buying a house? Do you think knowing what the seller >paid for the same house could help you in the negotiations? >Do you trust the real estate to give you the right tax >assessment? We can give you the taxes on your dream house >directly from yhe assessors office. No better way to be >accurate than that! > >Are you hiring a 'nanny' or babysitter? I know from my >experience how emotional a decision that can be. The worry, >the questions about his/her background. EASE YOUR MIND! Why >not check to see if this person was convicted of a crime. Do >they have bad credit or a DWI? > >OK? Want to see one more? Here's how we have saved landlords >money for years. > >Renting an apartment? Extending credit? Call us! We can do >the background checking for you, saving you time and money >in the long run. Have you ever tried to get a deadbeat out >out of your apartment for non-payment? With today's courts, >it is almost impossible. Save money NOW. Call us to do a >background on the perspective tenant BEFORE you rent to them. >A few dollars now may save you THOUSANDS later in attorney's >fees and lost rent. > >CONVINCED? We won't belabor the point. We can provide you with >the information you need to make informed decisions quickly >and economically. > >Our fees? Simple. We charge you the cost of the search plus >$20.00. Our search fees, the amount it costs us to get your >information, is usually $50.00 or less. Most searches are >$10.-15.00. All information is obtained legally through >public databases. > >Call us at (800) 375-5260, Monday-Friday-9AM to 5PM ET. Or >visit our web site at: http://www.iiu.com. Make a bookmark >for it. Tell a friend. > >Thank you for taking the time to read our letter. > >INFORMATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS, UNLIMITED, INC. > > At 11:11 PM 1/14/97 -0500, you wrote: >****This letter is sent to you automaticly. If you wish to >be removed, reply and type remove*********** > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This is a new LEGAL service bringing Public Information >to the world of Personnel computing!!! > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This letter is being sent to you because you know that >information is Power. You are interested in new ways of >doing business economically and safely. You won't let >anyone take advantage of you. > >Please read the next few paragraphs to see if our services can help you. > >We are Informational Investigations, Unlimited, a public >information company. What we do is to provide the public >with information on people and companies. Let me explain. > >Say you've lost touch with an old friend. We can find that >person. What if that someone or a company owes you money. We >can find that person/company so you can collect. Here's >another way IIU can help you. > >Are you buying a house? Do you think knowing what the seller >paid for the same house could help you in the negotiations? >Do you trust the real estate to give you the right tax >assessment? We can give you the taxes on your dream house >directly from yhe assessors office. No better way to be >accurate than that! > >Are you hiring a 'nanny' or babysitter? I know from my >experience how emotional a decision that can be. The worry, >the questions about his/her background. EASE YOUR MIND! Why >not check to see if this person was convicted of a crime. Do >they have bad credit or a DWI? > >OK? Want to see one more? Here's how we have saved landlords >money for years. > >Renting an apartment? Extending credit? Call us! We can do >the background checking for you, saving you time and money >in the long run. Have you ever tried to get a deadbeat out >out of your apartment for non-payment? With today's courts, >it is almost impossible. Save money NOW. Call us to do a >background on the perspective tenant BEFORE you rent to them. >A few dollars now may save you THOUSANDS later in attorney's >fees and lost rent. > >CONVINCED? We won't belabor the point. We can provide you with >the information you need to make informed decisions quickly >and economically. > >Our fees? Simple. We charge you the cost of the search plus >$20.00. Our search fees, the amount it costs us to get your >information, is usually $50.00 or less. Most searches are >$10.-15.00. All information is obtained legally through >public databases. > >Call us at (800) 375-5260, Monday-Friday-9AM to 5PM ET. Or >visit our web site at: http://www.iiu.com. Make a bookmark >for it. Tell a friend. > >Thank you for taking the time to read our letter. > >INFORMATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS, UNLIMITED, INC. > > At 11:11 PM 1/14/97 -0500, you wrote: >****This letter is sent to you automaticly. If you wish to >be removed, reply and type remove*********** > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This is a new LEGAL service bringing Public Information >to the world of Personnel computing!!! > >++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >This letter is being sent to you because you know that >information is Power. You are interested in new ways of >doing business economically and safely. You won't let >anyone take advantage of you. > >Please read the next few paragraphs to see if our services can help you. > >We are Informational Investigations, Unlimited, a public >information company. What we do is to provide the public >with information on people and companies. Let me explain. > >Say you've lost touch with an old friend. We can find that >person. What if that someone or a company owes you money. We >can find that person/company so you can collect. Here's >another way IIU can help you. > >Are you buying a house? Do you think knowing what the seller >paid for the same house could help you in the negotiations? >Do you trust the real estate to give you the right tax >assessment? We can give you the taxes on your dream house >directly from yhe assessors office. No better way to be >accurate than that! > >Are you hiring a 'nanny' or babysitter? I know from my >experience how emotional a decision that can be. The worry, >the questions about his/her background. EASE YOUR MIND! Why >not check to see if this person was convicted of a crime. Do >they have bad credit or a DWI? > >OK? Want to see one more? Here's how we have saved landlords >money for years. > >Renting an apartment? Extending credit? Call us! We can do >the background checking for you, saving you time and money >in the long run. Have you ever tried to get a deadbeat out >out of your apartment for non-payment? With today's courts, >it is almost impossible. Save money NOW. Call us to do a >background on the perspective tenant BEFORE you rent to them. >A few dollars now may save you THOUSANDS later in attorney's >fees and lost rent. > >CONVINCED? We won't belabor the point. We can provide you with >the information you need to make informed decisions quickly >and economically. > >Our fees? Simple. We charge you the cost of the search plus >$20.00. Our search fees, the amount it costs us to get your >information, is usually $50.00 or less. Most searches are >$10.-15.00. All information is obtained legally through >public databases. > >Call us at (800) 375-5260, Monday-Friday-9AM to 5PM ET. Or >visit our web site at: http://www.iiu.com. Make a bookmark >for it. Tell a friend. > >Thank you for taking the time to read our letter. > >INFORMATIONAL INVESTIGATIONS, UNLIMITED, INC. > > From MAILER-DAEMON at Alpha.remcan.ca Thu Jan 16 15:37:07 1997 From: MAILER-DAEMON at Alpha.remcan.ca (Mail Delivery Subsystem) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:37:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Returned mail: Host unknown (Name server: softcell: host not found) Message-ID: <199701162230.RAA04447@Alpha.remcan.ca> The original message was received at Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:30:05 -0500 from Dial50.Solutions.Net [204.112.6.160] ----- The following addresses had delivery problems ----- (unrecoverable error) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- 501 ... 550 Host unknown (Name server: softcell: host not found) ----- Original message follows ----- Received: from shawn by Alpha.remcan.ca via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO) for id RAA04443; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:30:05 -0500 Return-Path: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970116173554.00965260 at toad.com> X-Sender: cypherpunks at toad.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:35:58 -0600 To: info at softcell From: "cypherpunks at toad.com" Subject: Re: Bulk e mail software Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" FUCK YOU SPAMMER At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Received: from iq-mcp.iquest.net (iq-mcp.iquest.net [206.246.190.153]) >by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id >SAA02218 for >; Tue, 14 Jan 1997 18:46:29 -0800 (PST) >Received: from Default by iq-mcp.iquest.net with smtp > (Smail3.1.29.1 #5) id m0vkHlU-005X2uC; Tue, 14 Jan 97 17:55 EST >Message-Id: >From: info at softcell >Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 17:59:01 PST >Subject: Bulk e mail software >Precedence: bulk >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > At 05:59 PM 1/14/97 PST, you wrote: >Please put remove in the subject and press >reply if you do not want mail from us > >Would you like to bulk E-Mail without getting your service >terminated? > >Get the software for FREE? > >And not send mail to people who do not want it? > >Just visit our web site located at. > >http://www.softcell.net > > > > > > From MAILER-DAEMON at Alpha.remcan.ca Thu Jan 16 15:47:32 1997 From: MAILER-DAEMON at Alpha.remcan.ca (Mail Delivery Subsystem) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:47:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Message-ID: <199701162241.RAA04820@Alpha.remcan.ca> The original message was received at Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:41:06 -0500 from Dial50.Solutions.Net [204.112.6.160] ----- The following addresses had delivery problems ----- (unrecoverable error) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to msmx2.mindspring.com: >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown 550 ... User unknown ----- Original message follows ----- Received: from shawn by Alpha.remcan.ca via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO) id RAA04816; Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:41:06 -0500 Return-Path: Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970116174655.00970150 at toad.com> X-Sender: cypherpunks at toad.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:47:02 -0600 To: cybergy at mindspring.com (Opportunity1), remove at mindspring.com From: "cypherpunks at toad.com" Subject: Re: Is this true? Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" FUCK YOU SPAMMER At 10:58 PM 1/8/97 -0600, you wrote: >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > >My information tells me you are someone looking for an opportunity to make extra money. What if you could market with the best bulk email product available and at the same time make $100 every time you refer someone else to buy it? > >This bulk email program can personally address your letters which alone can greatly increase your response rate. It also can download addresses from 18 different sources. Users of Floodgate and Pegasus are rushing to get their hands on this product. It's so easy to use that I found myself stripping addresses and doing my first mailings within hours after registering it. > >As Entrepreneurs we understand the key to success is recognizing where the market is. The Internet is full of people promoting products and services. Now you can offer them the tool they need the most. > >For more information email me at cybergy at mindspring.com > >If you would like to be removed from any future mailings simply send email to remove at opportunity1.com. > >Thank you, >Walter Cantrell > > From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Thu Jan 16 15:54:51 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 15:54:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to crack In-Reply-To: <199701161802.KAA08524@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: My guess is that somebody wandered off to the coke machine in the computer lab and left themselves logged in ... On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Ed Falk wrote: > > > > Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, ... > > This has *got* to be a troll. Nobody could be this clueless. > > > Well, actually, they could. > From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 16 16:21:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:21:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt may be more receptive to encryption now In-Reply-To: <970116095948_1444710331@emout10.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <82eN1D17w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Scottauge at aol.com writes: > > Perhaps EFF could even draft some laws for our protection EFF and John Gilmore have no credibility, but the homo "cypher punk's" reliance on more laws and bigger gubmint to solve all his problems is telling. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 16 16:24:22 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:24:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: DCSB: The Internet Consumer -- 1996 in Review & Predictions In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Robert Hettinga writes: > At 1:05 pm -0500 1/16/97, Ed Falk wrote: > >Similarly, people who've been plonked are often quoted in somebody > >else's message, so I see it anyway. > > So it seems... > > :-). > > So, Toto, you're not in "Cansas" any more. It's called a "Trash" folder. When the likes of J.D.Falk and Hettiga claim to have *plonked* one of their many "enemies", it really means that they are obsessed with that person and thoroughly read everything the "*plonked*" poster writes. Zero credibility. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cvhd at indyweb.net Thu Jan 16 16:27:59 1997 From: cvhd at indyweb.net (CVHD) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:27:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Finally a good Eudora/PGP integration under Win32 In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970116114943.006ae32c@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970116192747.006c9bac@indyweb.net> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 1129 bytes Desc: not available URL: From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Thu Jan 16 16:28:07 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:28:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Debunking rumors -- Re: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: I thought it a bit strange that "the state police" declared something to be illegal; I didn't think they made laws, even in Arkansas. OTOH, somebody may be trying to boost sales (quick! get one before it's banned!) ... -r.w. On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > Time to debunk this rumor. > > I just spoke with the Arkansas state police, who told me: > > "It wasn't put out by the state police. [If anything] it must be a city > ordinance from some city. That state police definitely didn't do it." > > -Declan > > > >jcr at idiom.com ("John C. Randolph") quotes Charles R. Smith > >> IMMEDIATE ATTENTION > >> The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or > >> possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled > >> descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. Tandy Corporation's > >> legal department is researching this and the product has been removed > >> from RSU distribution. DO NOT take order or sell this product until > >> this situation can be resolved. > > > >I called the Arkansas State Police, 501-221-8200, to try to verify this, > >and they're "going to have somebody call me back." I'm not holding my > >breath... > > > >If anybody has a definative source on this, I'd love to see it; it's > >mindboggling. > > > >thad > >-- Thaddeus Beier thad at hammerhead.com > > Visual Effects Supervisor 408) 287-6770 > > Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/people/thad > > > > ------------------------- > The Netly News Network > http://netlynews.com/ > > > From chuck at earth.wazoo.com Thu Jan 16 16:48:35 1997 From: chuck at earth.wazoo.com (Chuck Fender) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:48:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to crack In-Reply-To: <199701161802.KAA08524@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: He's got to be about 13... On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Ed Falk wrote: > > > > Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, ... > > This has *got* to be a troll. Nobody could be this clueless. > > > Well, actually, they could. > From hallam at ai.mit.edu Thu Jan 16 16:56:34 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:56:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <01BC03E7.BE213FB0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Michael Tighe SUN IMP wrote in article <5bjhda$f44 at life.ai.mit.edu>... > Alan Bostick writes: > > >It is also possible that somewhere in the chain of information between > >mom&pop, the media, and us, the distinction between "cordless phone" > >and cellular phone. I gather it was a conference call that was > >intercepted. All it takes is one participant using a cordless phone in > >range of one scanner, and the whole conversation is compromised. > > Yes, a conference call (and we do know there were multiple participants) > over a cordless makes sense. It was a conference call but over a cellular phone. Martin had hacked his Radio Shack Scanner using a well known technique. He had a radio ham license. I still don't expect a conviction. Lets see a guy gets a tape he believes shows that the Speaker of the house lied to the ethics committee. He hands it to a senior member of the ethics committee of the house despite knowing that in doing so he put himself at risk of prosecution. Does anyone in their right mind expect any jury to convict in such a case? Basically a trial would be open season for the defense to take pot shots at Newt. Q. "Why did you not hand the tape over to the chair of the committee? A. I thought they might try to suppers it. Q. Why did you give the tape to MacDermott? A. I thought it showed that the Speaker had acted illegally. Q. Illegal? How? A [at very great length to be repeated verbatim on CNN twice an hour] As a first time offender the most the Martins could expect to suffer would be a $5000 fine. They could easily recoup that on the chat show circuit. This is the country where Ollie North launched his political career by subverting the constitution and lying to congress and where JO Simpson murdered his wife and got away with it. Don't expect the Martins to be occupying a jail cell any time soon. Newt on the other hand... Phill From hallam at ai.mit.edu Thu Jan 16 16:58:15 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 16:58:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <01BC03E7.BCF283B0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Toto wrote in article <5bk506$ruj at life.ai.mit.edu>... > Brian Lane wrote: > The fact is that the transmission 'was' encrypted. While this fact > isn't > being 'reported', it is causing no small amount of consternation in > certain circles in Washington. Knowing the circles that would be concerned I know that they are discussing no such thing. Phill From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Thu Jan 16 17:06:28 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:06:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Bellsouth DCS System..Any thoughts Message-ID: <199701170043.QAA04634@sirius.infonex.com> Comrades....and associates Has anyone had any experience in verifying the encryption scheme used in Bellsouth Mobility DCS system. Apparently, the system utilizes a signal from 1,850 - 1,925 mhz, and the the signal is encrypted there after. I've been told that no one has been able to decifer a conversation as of yet. Also, has anyone been able to view or alter the contents on the smartcard within the phone...... All suggestion will be analyzed carefully at discretion Thanks in advance....... Antonio Montana.... From frissell at panix.com Thu Jan 16 17:35:59 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:35:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970116203557.0166ae18@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 07:50 AM 1/17/97 +1000, Greg Taylor wrote: >Most of the world has been using GSM digital technology for some years >now, with automatic international roaming, unless you travel to the USA. >No one in their right mind uses an analogue mobile phone any more if they >are concerned about eavesdropping. The Newt incident simply could not >happen with GSM. Of course GSM encryption was weakened by the orders of various governments so that the national police forces could still listen in. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMt7XY4VO4r4sgSPhAQGJVAQArpSn4h0aNzV4yWkFbpCdjGnvpt058Uyi +Xm7dEsmPSSxQhnBMFk2lpnW8bmtA1hakXqluj1wfoKvVlaXifswPqc2lRPlCc2w qg/bu4tHXCm34Yzy346TgUJ6fBf5mJPNz1fZFgydy1HJbGXgSrcoX/Dl2IjjqpPW VB4ncdkmtbY= =AO5Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 16 17:36:14 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:36:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970116093545.0062ece0@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 08:13 PM 1/14/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >US. Alone, that would have denied non-US patents to RSA. However, such an >explanation grandly ignores the fact that computer software (let alone >mathematics in general) was not considered patentable ANYWHERE (?) before >public-key systems made their appearance in 1976. ... >I'm still waiting for an "innocent" explanation for the US patent office >beginning to issue software patents. I don't think there is one. The first software patent was Dennis Ritchie's patent on setUID. Computer security is one area that, if you're going to allow patents on software at all (which I think are a bad idea, but that's politics), are likely to yield novel processes that will benefit the public if they're published. If you want an "innocent" explanation, it's that computers were finally starting to be affordable enough and software to be portable enough that there was a software market developing, and therefore there was money to be made (or stolen.) Before the mid-70s, there wasn't really much software that wasn't either obvious to a skilled practitioner (hence non-patentable), or else intimately tied to tweaky little details of some hardware product, where the hardware is patentable and the manufacturer is perfectly _happy_ to have everybody write non-portable code that locks you into using a FooBar 9000, while letting them claim that this code lets you run your applications 99.44% faster on the 9000 than on an IBM. And most early software patent applications _did_ include descriptions of some tweaky hardware implementation to make them fit better into the Patent Office mindset. Of course, the Patent Office, which didn't hire "software engineers" for a long time, had entirely no clue about what was obvious to skilled practitioners, so they've let all kinds of things be patented that were widely used in the trade, like XOR cursors and online commerce. But that's a flame for another newsgroup. >It also ignores the strong likelihood that the reason for the Patent-Office >policy change (done, apparently, without benefit of a corresponding law >change) was because with public-key/RSA there was finally an example of >software the government wished to deny to the average citizen, >and the only mechanism (short of secrecy, which was broken) to do so >was to patent it. D,H,R,S, and A didn't _have_ to apply for patents.... With hardware security products, the NSA has the power to seize and classify systems which are applying for patents, for no particularly good reason, and they used to do it often. For instance, there was an analog scrambler for CB radios that got its patent applications seized in about 1980. And most software patent applications for crypto have involved machinations to avoid getting trapped by this, like publishing in foreign journals before submitting applications. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 16 17:36:19 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 17:36:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: New US regs ban downloadable data-security software Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970116091533.0062ece0@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 10:53 AM 1/15/97 +1100, proff at suburbia.net wrote: >If you read ITAR you will see that State explicity bans export of any >operating system with a security rating of B2 or above. >The adgenda is pretty obvious. Actually, it's less obvious than that :-) The only way to get a security rating of B2 or above (or even D or above) is to submit your operating system for rating by the NCSC, which is a long, expensive process even for C2. By the time you get to B2, you're dealing with products that may have real-world uses but are primarily designed specifically for the military market. One of the sensitivities, besides keeping Scary Foreigners from getting Real Operating Systems, is that it makes it easier for the Scary Foreigners to look for any bugs the NCSC may have missed and understand any other weaknesses that the products may have which would let them break into US Military or Intelligence Agency systems. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From Nomad at Koolcom.com Thu Jan 16 18:05:14 1997 From: Nomad at Koolcom.com (Nomad at Koolcom.com) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 18:05:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Forrist Gump Can Do It" THIS MAILING IS BEING SENT TO YOU COMPLEMENTS OF A COMMERCIAL E-MAILER SERVER. PLEASE SEND ALL COMPLAINTS AND ( REMOVE FROM LIST REQUESTS) TO: Nomad@Capella.net Thank You, The Management ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <199701170143.UAA11457@www.theguru.com> A HOME BASED BUSINESS EVEN FORRIST GUMP CAN DO ! ! ! A FANTASTIC OPPORTUNITY WITH TRADENET MARKETING GROUND FLOOR OPPORTUNITY--ONLY 25,000 DISTRIBUTORS ONE TIME PURCHASE-LESS THAN $150.00 NO MONTHLY PURCHASE REQUIREMENTS NO MONTHLY QUOTAS OR TIME LIMITS PROTECTS THE ENVIRONMENT PRODUCT EVERY HOUSEHOLD USES EXTREMELY FAIR AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND COMPENSATION PLAN WEEKLY CHECKS INTERNATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES SOON FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PLEASE CALL JACK AT (800) 530-9495 From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Thu Jan 16 18:07:56 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 18:07:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ebonics bye! Message-ID: <199701170128.RAA09160@sirius.infonex.com> be unsuscried From frissell at panix.com Thu Jan 16 18:13:45 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 18:13:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: NY Tax Sale Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970116211310.006bc58c@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For those who may doubt my oft repeated prediction that coercive institutions will slowly dissolve into market institutions please note that next week New York State is having a Sales Tax "sale." All clothing purchases under $500 will be free of sales tax next week. That's 8.25% in New York City. Since CT and NJ don't tax most clothing sales this is clearly an attempt to meet the competition. Also for those who might like to become international fugitive financiers some day (like Marc Rich) see the business section of today's New York Times: January 16, 1997 Fugitive Financiers Find Fewer Places to Hide By PETER TRUELL Currently at: http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/financial/fugitive-financiers.html "To improve the Justice Department's record for capturing big-time fugitives, Attorney General Janet Reno last month started an interagency fugitive alert service, in conjunction with the United States Information Agency and the Voice of America. The effort includes a site on the World Wide Web (http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/oiafug/fugitives.htm) showing pictures of the most wanted fugitives." DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMt7gLIVO4r4sgSPhAQEPigP+JvOgxDbRT7fVCRmxT9H5uG0DWeiCVUoB 1jmjD4ZsS9KsQlIi9kpkzV5kw/OroqD1pcrxL8Ag+D4h2pkgytpaDFO0zPXrzwfG NADLN9agz7Lnlo8k/9bMpjbC5dFbCh7ayKA60MW/RqgTtiR/uC+2IXSISzVBeraA rahH94EBG4k= =yniF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From harka at nycmetro.com Thu Jan 16 18:43:01 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 18:43:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Netscape sig's... Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Here's something, that found it's way into my mailbox and might be of interest... In> SOFT> SecureWeb Documents: digitally signed documents -- FREE In> Netscape Navigator plug-in In> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 19:13:28 -0600 In> From: info at terisa.com In> http://www.terisa.com/ In> About SecureWeb Documents In> By using standard digital ID's (x509.v3 certificates), SecureWeb In> Documents can affix a digital signature to an electronic document. The In> result is impossible to alter or falsify without detection, unlike a In> written signature. Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMtxBYjltEBIEF0MBAQFFIwf+NBtJ76gj+jhD28q1KHgv1HiTSLcP1xIg ZCC779HJ29IM+imWFiqgv58HrGRva1lhMl9l0+DbWdS01muSeNAUuht+QlOY+ys8 9MPlsaTg2v0kEAE6+OQwWLs3C4HvlCBqbHIJubRTz+B4I3XP9pkRRc8VTO8INroA u5C+PF+t3QHWinpnmR/uwrdJWohKG6Ioh9U5MdZWkF+ks84Y3uKGQDIxLsGv5xjZ LI5u4OH7GjhuBNkuZgSoIm528dSmzPaYQk6sYJaSP2uz2HYnCEdfkE2/2+IRFn9m AvgQPDUXHslTsF3m0O0/0XwG29X0KemyERnBuYYso2JoI0O/2pBiKg== =/F/w -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 16 19:21:23 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:21:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970116185324.0062e970@popd.ix.netcom.com> > The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or > possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled > descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. Yee-hah! I'm guessing that it's probably illegal because the police use them for "secret" conversations, or some such silliness, and don't want Bad Guys to be able to eavesdrop on what's probably a trivially analog-scrambled phone-garbler. Perhaps them good ol' boys have some more devious reason, or even have a law backing them up, but probably not. How soon do you think it'll be before they start busting people for Radio Shack Equipment Smuggling? Why, next thing you know there'll be people sneakin' across the border from Texarkana with pickmeup-truck loads full o' contraband encryption gear as well as the usual Lone Star Beer cans in the back. If I were Radio Shack, and the state did this to me after the police bought a bunch of them for police use, I'd be real upset. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From mnorton at cavern.uark.edu Thu Jan 16 19:31:59 1997 From: mnorton at cavern.uark.edu (Mac Norton) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:31:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Debunking rumors -- Re: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Down here in arkansas, we're still wondering who told you this in the first place? MacN On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > Time to debunk this rumor. > > I just spoke with the Arkansas state police, who told me: > > "It wasn't put out by the state police. [If anything] it must be a city > ordinance from some city. That state police definitely didn't do it." > > -Declan > > > >jcr at idiom.com ("John C. Randolph") quotes Charles R. Smith > >> IMMEDIATE ATTENTION > >> The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or > >> possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled > >> descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. Tandy Corporation's > >> legal department is researching this and the product has been removed > >> from RSU distribution. DO NOT take order or sell this product until > >> this situation can be resolved. > > > >I called the Arkansas State Police, 501-221-8200, to try to verify this, > >and they're "going to have somebody call me back." I'm not holding my > >breath... > > > >If anybody has a definative source on this, I'd love to see it; it's > >mindboggling. > > > >thad > >-- Thaddeus Beier thad at hammerhead.com > > Visual Effects Supervisor 408) 287-6770 > > Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/people/thad > > > > ------------------------- > The Netly News Network > http://netlynews.com/ > > > From ravage at ssz.com Thu Jan 16 19:56:09 1997 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:56:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Virus Message-ID: <199701170402.WAA27752@einstein> Hi all, Check out, Virus Bill Buchanan ISBN 0-515-12011-1 $6.50 paperback Very interesting book about adaptive technology and one possible 'alternate' future. May not be technicaly correct but then again, what prediction is. On a related note (at least future tech predictions), I saw the new book put out by Wired on this issue (don't remember the exact title) in the science section of BookStop. It belongs in the sci-fi section. A bigger pile of wishfull thinking with no realistic view of either technology or society doesn't come to mind immediately. Is definately not a 'buy it'. "For a succesful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for nature will not be fooled." Richard Feynman Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com ps check out www.srl.org for the Austin show on March 28, 1997. From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 16 20:26:46 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 20:26:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: soc.culture.belarus In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701170421.WAA05288@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > :Can anyone tell me if soc.culture.belarus is still active? I have not been > able to access this newsgroup for a while now and my service provider hasn't > answered my question about this. I originally had to make a request to the > ISP to carry the newsgroup but after that, it was ok. > I hope it's only coincidental that I lost contact only about one day after I > placed a posting on the newsgroup. > Barry J Hilchey, > PO Box 668, St Marys, Ontario, N4X 1B6, Canada: > > I donn't know exactly what happend to that group, > but some time ago I had e-mail exchange with one > of the moderators. He complained that they (5 persons > or so) are sweating day and night moderating incoming > postings. It might be, therefore, that this honorable > job of censorship starved this people to death. > > Igor Fedchenia > Mr. Kasaty, if you want to try robomoderation for scb (which really reduces the amount of work that you have to do), you can use my bot. Moderators of soc.culture.russian.moderated are known as some of the laziest moderators on USENET, because about 90% of all posts are approved automatically by the bot. - Igor. From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Thu Jan 16 20:44:03 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 20:44:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Debunking rumors -- Re: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701170443.XAA09743@wauug.erols.com> Declan McCullagh sez: > > Time to debunk this rumor. > > I just spoke with the Arkansas state police, who told me: > > "It wasn't put out by the state police. [If anything] it must be a city > ordinance from some city. That state police definitely didn't do it." I have past experience with the individual cited in the original message. I'd rather believe a politician's spin doctor. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From darrington at debtfree.com Thu Jan 16 20:51:52 1997 From: darrington at debtfree.com (darrington at debtfree.com) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 20:51:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Debt-Freedom! Message-ID: <199701170451.XAA01535@ezdial.com> Hello,^Morons, Hi, Living in today's world with all the high-tech toys is great. Who ever thought the internet would be such an attraction... I never did. I love the internet, and I love meeting new people, but I have found it even a better place to be since I have found that becoming debt-free has allowed me so much freedom. I know that many families are drowning in debt... living pay check to pay check. I have found a program I would like to tell you about that could make you debt-free, including your mortgage.. in about 5 years, All on the income you earn now! If you are interested in becoming Debt-Free on your current income (yep, no sales work, no extra job, nothing special to join, no soap, pills, powders, or door selling involved, and it's all GUARANTEED by an Inc. 500 Company) Contact me and I will send you a FREE information package via e-mail that will start you on your way to True Financial Freedom! Reply To: nodebts at homebasebusiness.com Important: Put "NO DEBTS" in the subject field Thank you for allowing me to share this with you, It has really changed my life and that of my family! God Bless, Dean F. Arrington From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 16 21:14:22 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 21:14:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Debunking rumors -- Re: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS Message-ID: <199701170514.VAA03211@mail.pacifier.com> >On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >> Time to debunk this rumor. >> I just spoke with the Arkansas state police, who told me: >> "It wasn't put out by the state police. [If anything] it must be a city >> ordinance from some city. That state police definitely didn't do it." >> -Declan >> >jcr at idiom.com ("John C. Randolph") quotes Charles R. Smith >> >> IMMEDIATE ATTENTION >> >> The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or >> >> possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled >> >> descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. Tandy Corporation's >> >> legal department is researching this and the product has been removed >> >> from RSU distribution. DO NOT take order or sell this product until >> >> this situation can be resolved. >> > >> >I called the Arkansas State Police, 501-221-8200, to try to verify this, >> >and they're "going to have somebody call me back." I'm not holding my >> >breath... >> > >> >If anybody has a definative source on this, I'd love to see it; it's >> >mindboggling. >> > >> >thad The strangest part of this story is that I haven't even heard of the product they've described above. The number given sounds like a serial number, NOT a product number. Somehow, I think that it would have been covered around here by now if it were real. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 16 21:44:25 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 21:44:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Kill filing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DF118A.721F@gte.net> Michael Gurski wrote: > On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: > > At 1:05 pm -0500 1/16/97, Ed Falk wrote: > > And, in my case, Eudora displays each message in the status window as it's > > bringing something down from the POP server, and again as it filters. > > So, Toto, you're not in "Cansas" any more. It's called a "Trash" folder. > I used to have procmail shove messages from certain folks directly to > /dev/null, but then wondered a few days ago if I were missing > anything, so they ended up going to $MAILDIR/.in.garbage. After > looking in there today, I'm glad to say that it's back to /dev/null, > with no regrets. Of course, with the new moderated list, there shouldn't > be too much work for procmail, except for those folks who I personally > feel aren't worth reading... Michael, please tell me and everyone else at cypherpunks just why it is we should give a shit at all what your personal killfile habits are, and whether we should give a shit about whether you think anyone on this list is or isn't worth reading. You and a thousand other clowns seem to think this is cool to do, but you're actually pointing back at yourself with this kind of crap. From cbear at adgrafix.com Thu Jan 16 21:53:25 1997 From: cbear at adgrafix.com ($100,000 BUSINESS OPPORTUNITIE!) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 21:53:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: L@@K FOR FEW GOOD PEOPLE,THAT WANA MAKE $10,000 EVERY WEEK! Message-ID: <199701170449.WAA09159@dogbert.ipa.net> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ PLEASE Note That you're not on mailing list this is one, Time deal and you will never recive mail from us again! Thank you! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hello Entrepreneurs, Just thought I would drop you a note letting you know of an opportunity that I came across lately about 7 months ago. I have been amazed at the success I have had with this product. Timing is everything... I'm making $10,000+ per week in this Marketing plan after only 4 weeks. I'll train you how. Be 1st in your area. If you like what you hear and are serious about making money.Please goto URL below if you are interested. ~~~~~~CUT AND PASTE IN YOUR URL~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.angelfire.com/biz/100KBIZ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Regards Christopher From lordvidarr+ at CMU.EDU Thu Jan 16 23:00:49 1997 From: lordvidarr+ at CMU.EDU (Adam Gulkis) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:00:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <01BC03D2.A3F21CA0@s14-pm05.tnstate.campus.mci.net> Message-ID: I always try to have a good time with airport security. Last time I flew I had a brand new stainless steel nissan thermos half full of scotch in my backpack in addition to my laptop, a handful of dental tools and a bunch of sticks of microcrystaline wax. The rentacop almost shit all over himself tearing into my bag trying to find out what the nissan was and i'm pretty sure that he did when he saw the sticks of wax. Course I was busy being frisked by another guard (steel toes, steel shanks) and was really trying hard not to laugh. Next time I'm planning on painting some messages in lead paint and sticking them in a folder so they can read it as it gets scanned. Nice friendly hello A. Gulkis ------------------------------------------------------------------- Electronic and Time Based media? whats that? http://valhalla.res.cmu.edu/vidarr/ President, Screaming Viking Research Labs Reinventing Perceptions of Reality pgp key: finger vidarr at valhalla.res.cmu.edu ------------------------------------------------------------------- From atm at getback.hartley.on.ca Thu Jan 16 23:48:03 1997 From: atm at getback.hartley.on.ca (ATM INFO) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:48:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701170746.CAA27992@mail.pwrnet.com> ATM MACHINES FOR NO MONEY DOWN!!! Would you like to own your very own ATM cash machine? Earn $1.00 or up to $4.00 for each transaction. A new law passed April 1996 now allows you to own, operate and collect surcharges. Find out how to own your own ATM and never have to service or fill it and still make $$$$. To find out how, simply reply to this message with a Blank Message and ATM in the SUBJECT field and our autoresponder will send you the requested information back in a few minutes. ACT now and receive a free bonus offer worth $500.00!!!!! If you wish to be removed from this list please send a message to atmmachines at bigfoot.com with the words REMOVE in the subject field. ******************************************************************* ATM INFO sent you this message using WorldMerge, the fastest and easiest way to send personalized email messages to your customers, subscribers, leads or friends. For more information, visit http://www.coloradosoft.com ******************************************************************* From llurch at networking.stanford.edu Thu Jan 16 23:56:59 1997 From: llurch at networking.stanford.edu (Richard Charles Graves) Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 23:56:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Debunking rumors -- Re: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS Message-ID: <199701170756.XAA29660@Networking.Stanford.EDU> David Lesher / blah blah blah wrote: >I have past experience with the individual cited in the original >message. I'd rather believe a politician's spin doctor. I thought he was a politician's spin doctor. -rich From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 17 00:12:42 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:12:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: FC: Loving v. University of Oklahoma, from The Netly News Network In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32DF113E.708A@sk.sympatico.ca> Declan McCullagh wrote: > The Netly News Network > http://netlynews.com/ > > Loving v. the University of Oklahoma goes to trial in a federal > court in Tulsa tomorrow morning. But the incidents that gave rise to > the civil action occurred more than 14 months ago when a local > anti-pornography group, Oklahomans for Children and Families, got wind > of the sprawling alt.sex.* hierarchy on Usenet. The porn watchdog > group complained to State Rep. Fred Perry (R-Tulsa) about the alt.sex > feeds that were, naturally enough, part of the university's Usenet > feed. > > Anderson told us that his group is training other activists to turn > in offending service providers. "There are plums ready to be picked," > he said. "We're encouraging people all over the country to take > action." I would advise all cryptographers and cryptanalysts to immediately remove any brooms they own from their homes. Especially those living in Salem. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 17 00:12:50 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:12:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: ARKANSAS BANS PHONE SCRAMBLERS In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970116185324.0062e970@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32DF21C6.2E88@sk.sympatico.ca> Bill Stewart wrote: > > > The Arkansas Police have declared that is is illegal to own, use, or > > possess RSU product #11265113, a fully assembled > > descrambler/scrambler, in the State of Arkansas. > > How soon do you think it'll be before they start busting people > for Radio Shack Equipment Smuggling? I wonder if, when Radio Shack is forced to go 'underground', their employees, while standing beside the crack dealers on the street corner, will develop their own language, 'Shackonics'. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 17 00:13:05 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:13:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Privacy Issue (ANI in SF Bay Area) In-Reply-To: <199701161947.LAA26644@notesgw2.sybase.com> Message-ID: <32DF3432.11A2@sk.sympatico.ca> Ryan Russell/SYBASE wrote: > > Yesterday PacBell turned on ANI on our trunk groups, for > local area calls. On their own, mind you, without request > from us. If you call anyone here with a display phone, > it displays your number, even if you have caller-id > blocking on or you do a *70 (for those who don't know, > ANI is not caller-id, you can't block your number > from being displayed with ANI.) > > It also grabs your phone number if you leave a voice mail, > so even folks without display phones can benefit. Why do I get the feeling that they will soon be offering a new feature (for a 'slight surcharge') that will block this feature, as well? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 17 00:13:07 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:13:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Returned cypher-mail: Host unknown (Name server: softcell: host not found) In-Reply-To: <199701162230.RAA04447@Alpha.remcan.ca> Message-ID: <32DF36B3.1E8B@sk.sympatico.ca> Mail Delivery Subsystem wrote: > ----- The following addresses had delivery problems ----- > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > To: info at softcell > From: "cypherpunks at toad.com" > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > FUCK YOU SPAMMER Does this mean that even the listserver is getting tired of spam? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 17 00:13:24 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:13:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Virus In-Reply-To: <199701170402.WAA27752@einstein> Message-ID: <32DF478C.318F@sk.sympatico.ca> Jim Choate wrote: > "For a succesful technology, reality must take precedence over public > relations, for nature will not be fooled." > > Richard Feynman Jim, Do you think that this quote should be forwarded to the White House, or do you think they might have trouble with the concept? Toto From lucifer at dhp.com Fri Jan 17 00:15:13 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:15:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IMPORTANT] e$ Message-ID: <199701170815.DAA23816@dhp.com> Warning: if you fuck a Timmy `C' May in the ass, a tapeworm might bite your penis. /\**/\ ( o_o )_) Timmy `C' May ,(u u ,), {}{}{}{}{}{} From "registration at nature.com" at www.nature.com Fri Jan 17 00:16:59 1997 From: "registration at nature.com" at www.nature.com ("registration at nature.com" at www.nature.com) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 00:16:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Nature Registration Confirmation Message-ID: <199701170758.HAA00218@www.nature.com> Congratulations. You are now successfully registered with Nature on the World-Wide Web -- the world's most popular on-line science journal. Don't forget Nature on-line is updated weekly every Thursday with the very latest events information, table of contents, jobs, news and much more. While on-line, your registration details can also be used to request extra information free from advertisers. Your free registration allows you access at http://www.nature.com , as well as Nature's US mirror site at http://www.america.nature.com (the information there is exactly the same, but it offers faster access if you're based in the Americas). If you can read Japanese and if your machine is Kanjii-enabled, you will also find Nature's Japanese gateway site at http://www.naturejpn.com . If you ever forget your password, there's no need to re-register. Just e-mail registration at nature.com with your name/e-mail address, and we'll look up your details and confirm your password/username. Also, please rest assured that your information is treated as confidential. It is held on our secure server and will never be sold or traded to any other company, organisation or individual. We are constantly adapting Nature's award-winning site to keep it the first choice for the scientific community. Your suggestions and feedback are always much appreciated, and you may e-mail them to feedback at nature.com . We look forward to seeing you back at the Nature site soon. Yours sincerely, Stephen Hunt Nature Web Site e-mail: s.hunt at nature.com From nobody at replay.com Fri Jan 17 03:00:55 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 03:00:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: DPD on the Web Message-ID: <199701171100.MAA10275@basement.replay.com> Listen to the Dallas PD with RealAudio: http://www.policescanner.com/ Nobody From greens at hiwaay.net Fri Jan 17 04:11:23 1997 From: greens at hiwaay.net (Sarah L. Green) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 04:11:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <01BC03E7.BE213FB0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > It was a conference call but over a cellular phone. Martin had hacked his > Radio Shack Scanner using a well known technique. He had a radio ham > license. > Phill Actually I'd love to see this go to court & have the law itself tossed out. How many years have the airwaves been free? Now it is illegal to listen on the cellular frequencies. Sarah. ============================================================================== Sarah L. Green Hey, I never claimed to be >>osprey<< Madison, AL (USA) a genius nor a typist greens at hiwaay.net ============================================================================== From greens at hiwaay.net Fri Jan 17 04:17:55 1997 From: greens at hiwaay.net (Sarah L. Green) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 04:17:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Bill Frantz wrote: > At 7:07 PM -0800 1/14/97, Eric Murray wrote: > The 1935 communication act made it illegal to pass on what you had heard > when listening to certain radio services. Listening was OK. Telling > others wasn't. > A more recent act made it illegal to monitor celular frequencies, and to make equipement that receives or could easily be modified to receive cellular frequencies. Sarah. ============================================================================== Sarah L. Green Hey, I never claimed to be >>osprey<< Madison, AL (USA) a genius nor a typist greens at hiwaay.net ============================================================================== From SButler at chemson.com Fri Jan 17 05:13:16 1997 From: SButler at chemson.com (Butler, Scott) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 05:13:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: stop Message-ID: >please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr posting spam to the list ! please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr being an annoying little >paracite ! >please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr from becoming repetitive ! >please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr typing please stop >thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr ! please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr sending unsubscribe messages to >the whole list ! >please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr filling my mail-box with crap ! please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr from breathing ! please stop thea0594 at eurobretagne.fr sounding like a broken record ! I don't know what you want to be stopped from doing but any one of the above might be a good place to start Scott >:-) > From vip at allvip.com Fri Jan 17 05:20:59 1997 From: vip at allvip.com (ALLVIP) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 05:20:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Message-ID: <199701171304.IAA00236@fp.allvip.com> *To Remove: Please hit reply & type "remove" in the subject. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ <*> N e w Y e a r S p e c i a l - 3 D a y s O N L Y ! ! ! <*> ~ YOUR E x c l u s i v e 1 4 - l i n e Ad Emailed "ALONE" ~ to 2,500 Business Opportunity Seekers O N L Y $ 1 4 . 9 5 (reg. $59.00) Your Satisfaction is 1 0 0 % G U A R A N T E E D Virtual Email Addresses / Total Privacy & Anonymity <<*>> E X T R A B O N U S <<*>> Order distribution for 3 lists of 2,500 Business Opportunity Seekers & GET 1 list distribution === FREE That's 10,000 Exclusive emailings of YOUR Ad "ALONE" For ONLY $44.85 (reg. $239.00) Email: special at allvip.com For Easy Submission Form By emailing this address, info will be sent to you. Please Do NOT Hit Reply! This Exclusive New Year Offer is available for 3 days ONLY. Our space is filling VERY QUICKLY! Respond NOW and your space will be reserved immediately - No Faxes or Postal Mailing Necessary! Distribution for this New Year Special begins the 1st week of February On a F i r s t - r e s p o n s e, F i r s t - r u n b a s i s. ===================================== To REMOVE Email: remove at allvip.com PLEASE be certain to send your removal request << FROM the email address >> you wish to be removed. *~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~* <*> N e w Y e a r S p e c i a l - 3 D a y s O N L Y ! ! ! <*> ~ YOUR E x c l u s i v e 1 4 - l i n e Ad Emailed "ALONE" ~ to 2,500 Business Opportunity Seekers O N L Y $ 1 4 . 9 5 (reg. $59.00) Email: special at allvip.com For Easy Submission Form Please Do NOT Hit Reply! <<*>> E X T R A B O N U S <<*>> Order distribution for 3 lists of 2,500 Business Opportunity Seekers and GET 1 list distribution === FREE That's 10,000 Exclusive emailings of YOUR Ad "ALONE" For ONLY $44.85 (reg. $239.00) Your Satisfaction is 1 0 0 % G U A R A N T E E D This Exclusive New Year Offer is avaialble for 3 days ONLY. Our space is filling VERY QUICKLY! Respond NOW and your space will be reserved immediately - No Faxes or Postal Mailing Necessary! Distribution for this New Year Special begins the 4th week of January On a F i r s t - r e s p o n s e, F i r s t - r u n b a s i s. =========================================================== To REMOVE: remove at allvip.com PLEASE be certain to send your removal request << FROM the email address >> you wish to be removed. From aga at dhp.com Fri Jan 17 05:29:30 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 05:29:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Kill filing In-Reply-To: <32DF118A.721F@gte.net> Message-ID: Stop acting so stupid, Michael. On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Michael Gurski wrote: > > On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: > > > At 1:05 pm -0500 1/16/97, Ed Falk wrote: > > > > And, in my case, Eudora displays each message in the status window as it's > > > bringing something down from the POP server, and again as it filters. > > > So, Toto, you're not in "Cansas" any more. It's called a "Trash" folder. > > > I used to have procmail shove messages from certain folks directly to > > /dev/null, but then wondered a few days ago if I were missing > > anything, so they ended up going to $MAILDIR/.in.garbage. After > > looking in there today, I'm glad to say that it's back to /dev/null, > > with no regrets. Of course, with the new moderated list, there shouldn't > > be too much work for procmail, except for those folks who I personally > > feel aren't worth reading... > > Michael, please tell me and everyone else at cypherpunks just why it > is we should give a shit at all what your personal killfile habits > are, and whether we should give a shit about whether you think anyone > on this list is or isn't worth reading. > > You and a thousand other clowns seem to think this is cool to do, > but you're actually pointing back at yourself with this kind of crap. > From mycroft at actrix.gen.nz Fri Jan 17 06:16:58 1997 From: mycroft at actrix.gen.nz (Paul Foley) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 06:16:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Nature Registration Confirmation In-Reply-To: <199701170758.HAA00218@www.nature.com> Message-ID: <199701171240.BAA04178@mycroft.actrix.gen.nz> On Fri, 17 Jan 1997 07:58:27 GMT, "registration at nature.com"@www.nature.com wrote: If you ever forget your password, there's no need to re-register. Just e-mail registration at nature.com with your name/e-mail address, and we'll look up your details and confirm your password/username. Also, please rest assured that your information is treated as confidential. It is held on our secure server and will never be sold or traded to any other company, organisation or individual. Unless they write and ask, of course :-) -- Paul Foley --- PGPmail preferred PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33 C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- "I stayed up all night playing poker with tarot cards. I got a full house and four people died." -- Steven Wright From res at unidyne.uni.pt Fri Jan 17 07:31:09 1997 From: res at unidyne.uni.pt (Rodrigo Espirito Santo) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 07:31:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Get me off this fucking list, or else.... (fwd) Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:30:25 +0000 (GMT) From: Rodrigo Espirito Santo To: cypherpunks at toad.com Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com Subject: Get me off this fucking list, or else.... Hey you dumb asses, i tried to unsubscribe this list in the correct way but you guys don't know SHIT about this!!!!1 If you don't get me out now i'll subscribe each and every one of you to some goddamn gay and lesbiann and freak mailing list!!!!!! get me out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! From ca3sal at isis.sunderland.ac.uk Fri Jan 17 07:47:09 1997 From: ca3sal at isis.sunderland.ac.uk (Stephen.George.Allport) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 07:47:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701171546.PAA08870@cis515.cis.sund.ac.uk> Greg Taylor wrote >After following this thread for some time, I have to question whether >Americans realise how far behind the rest of the world they are in >cellphone technology. With the attention the US media give of the UK's royal family and the fomer Princess of Wales I'm suprised the nobody did anything in the US after the "squigy tapes" a couple of years back. Ste From harka at nycmetro.com Fri Jan 17 09:38:20 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 09:38:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Spam Hater URL :) Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In> Subject: CORRECT> Spam Hater URL In> Here is the URL In> http://www.compulink.co.uk/~net-services/spam/ In> Windows Spam Hater Software for Hitting Back! In> see http://www.compulink.co.uk/~net-services/spam/ Have fun :) Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMt0PyTltEBIEF0MBAQERUAf/Z8yw1OOEbP+1wGivh355JmDYXM9IebwP NBUvPpaYiNbOoq4axszj9rc5V0EITEeDQkyKahagozQwdknl/XX4s1JrXvmaZi2y ZM59n7N9FFPI4MNVLTg7maxKe13LStbzv86UDdwQMf54hGUqiSXFJs0tcDM6UyQB EoBHnu54C5SQAThbiQvOinXP9XbrAmBgvjKuy2p59FESUmB8JMPvgAbtB+3ecF3C fWiZnmVa2UvF+OoxDpYscqqfEGHRjw/tszTf5Y7fq/RRPPMEqVG5BMt/9Ep4rEdE wfLZXgBvN7bZWmUD1sOoXWQ3c/oYa/3tXft6DzY8JiMHvtsgzWtawQ== =O/jy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From frissell at panix.com Fri Jan 17 10:13:06 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:13:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Alex Kelly Strikes Again Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970117130602.0074b98c@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Alex Kelly, our favorite Greenwich Connecticut high school jock, accused rapist, ex-fugitive who returned to the US to face trial after 8 years on the run in Europe has done it again. He filed the paperwork to gain recognition of Irish citizenship from the Irish Consulate and his claim has been recognized. He is now free to apply for an Irish Passport. The DA is trying to yank his $1,000,000 bail. The wire services incorrectly report that he has been "granted" Irish citizenship. Actually, like anyone who has at least one grandparent born in Ireland, he *is* an Irish citizen under that nation's permissive nationality law and merely had to register his (overseas) birth with the Consulate. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMt+/eYVO4r4sgSPhAQHSbwP+NODK3r+64dMhpiOkDqSEUyD9OyHXJr58 rw9VFVN2y6JG2AIR5thogC+soMAMvUGuMKQiiXJkzSrTaHeanaFp/TG7FcDAi60d DlHQbYmc8iIAXgI3yUvl4oFqqdI44FAkwTfhFe0Qcf0Ha41OHEODP/S0DFNhp6/d +aQl7ECWsKo= =/GGg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From snow at smoke.suba.com Fri Jan 17 10:16:02 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 10:16:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <01BC03D2.A3F21CA0@s14-pm05.tnstate.campus.mci.net> Message-ID: <199701171832.MAA00342@smoke.suba.com> > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). >>shudder<< No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Fri Jan 17 11:21:31 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:21:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701171921.LAA18808@toad.com> At 10:45 PM 1/15/97 -0500, Rabid Wombat wrote: > > >On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >> Don't be too sure that crypto is that far beneath the radar. I spent >> Thursday through Saturday at an annual privacy conference for activists >> from around the country, and they understood the principles. Their >> voicemails were filling up with calls from reporters last Friday about the >> Gingrich incident, and I know they were talking crypto. > ... > >"Call Privacy and Security" are listed in bold, with "Say goodbye to >eavesdropping" right below. Don't sell the public short; even me mum >knows her cordless phone is insecure. ;) > I had to tell my sister not to use the cordless phone to use the automated banking services that our bank has available on grounds that transfers are also available through the same service. Our father is a math teacher, computer hobbyists since 1979. Both of my parents have college educations. My sister pegged the scales on the state distributed proficiency tests. Yet she knows practically nothing outside of her field. I will probably have to show her the values of cryptography before she actually has any patient records to deal with, (she's a pharmacy major.) From daw at cs.berkeley.edu Fri Jan 17 11:24:22 1997 From: daw at cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:24:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hi again, and an invitation to kibitz In-Reply-To: <199701140755.CAA04514@mail.intercon.com> Message-ID: <5bojee$gjn@joseph.cs.berkeley.edu> In article <199701140755.CAA04514 at mail.intercon.com>, Amanda Walker wrote: > (a) Server sends 8-byte challenge to client > > (b) Client sends Microsoft NT authentication response to the server > (take the password in Unicode form, do an MD4 hash, pad with 0s to 21 > bytes, split into 3 7-byte groups, use these as DES keys to encrypt > the challenge three times, send the 24-byte result as the response). > > (c) If authentication fails, close the connection. > > (d) If authentication succeeds, all subsequent traffic is enccrypted with > DES in CFB mode. Until April :), the DES key used is taken from the > first 7 bytes of the MD4 hash of the password (after April, we expect > to switch to Diffie-Hellman key exchange first, followed by a revised > authentication handshake). Some weaknesses: - It doesn't resist dictionary attacks (no salt) when the attacker can make one active probe (forge a fixed challenge and get the client's response). - It doesn't stop replay attacks (replay a fixed challenge, now the same DES key is used, so replay DES-encrypted session data). - DES-encryption doesn't provide message authentication against active attacks; use a MAC too. - You should use independent DES keys for each direction of the connection. - Also the DES encryption key doesn't change for each connection. It should. From Jeff_Woodruff at holderness.org Fri Jan 17 11:29:29 1997 From: Jeff_Woodruff at holderness.org (Jeff Woodruff) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:29:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: reply In-Reply-To: <199701162230.RAA04447@Alpha.remcan.ca> Message-ID: <61406.3700372@holderness.org> This message sent using the FirstClass SMTP/NNTP Gateway for Mac OS. From rwright at adnetsol.com Fri Jan 17 11:33:38 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:33:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Fwd) Black Liberation Radio Message-ID: <199701171933.LAA16898@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Thu, 16 Jan 1997 12:36:31 -0700 From: "Clover Hale" Subject: Black Liberation Radio To: iaj-futuremedia at igc.org BLACK LIBERATION RADIO BUSTED! This morning, the FCC raided Black Liberation Radio in Decatur, Illinois and seized all the equipment. BLR, an unlicensed radio station operated by Napolean and Mildred Williams, has been a growing thorn in the side of the local power structure. BLR has brought together the predominantly white workers who have undergone bitter strikes in the 90s (Caterpillar, etc.) with unemployed blacks and whites. It has given them all a voice, not just locally but to a degree nationally (Napolean was the keynote speaker at the recent Micro Broadcasters Convention in Oakland). This pioneering station must go back on the air. Napoleon requests donations to help them fight this. Please send what you can to: Napoleon Williams, 637 E Center St., Decatur IL 63526. In the face of a growing police state, Napoleon and Mildred are fighting back. They need your help. *PLEASE* call to issue protests: State Attorney General Jim Ryan 217-782-1090 Macon County States Attorney Lawrence "Larry" Fichter 217-424-1400 101 South Main, Decatur,Il 62523. ------------ Makani Themba mthemba at igc.apc.org 3780 Webster Street, Oakland, CA 94609 (510) 655-3112 (voice) (510) 658-5122 (fax) "Whoever controls the flow of information dictates our perceptions and perspectives; whoever controls the news shapes our destiny." - George Clinton Stop the execution of Mumia Abu Jamal! =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From daw at cs.berkeley.edu Fri Jan 17 11:35:32 1997 From: daw at cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 11:35:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.16.19970113191647.098f90d2@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <5bok3l$gl4@joseph.cs.berkeley.edu> In article , Declan McCullagh wrote: > The only other journalist who was there made an interesting point, that > encrypting cell phone traffic only up to the point it hits the phone > system wouldn't hinder L.E. access but would protect privacy. (Or, > perhaps, would be worse in the long term since we wouldn't have such > luscious examples.) This is well-known. GSM does this, for example. I've seen the point made in several textbooks. I don't know of any cellular systems that do end-to-end encryption (which would stop wiretapping at the landline switch) as opposed to airlink encryption. Does anyone else? From trei at process.com Fri Jan 17 12:07:38 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:07:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #6. Message-ID: <199701172006.MAA20293@toad.com> DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #6. Well, RSA now has put up the official rules, and some test data, for the DES Key Recovery Project. See http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/97challenge/ if you haven't already. The actual challenge will be posted 28 Jan, and the prize will be $10,000. I've had some nibbles of interest from the FPGA community, but not too much yet. If you know anyone with FPGA or ASIC hardware handy, tell them about the project, and point them at Wiener's paper (it can be found at http://www.aist-nara.ac.jp/Security/doc/ among locations. My software is complete, except for one thing: I have not incorporated Svend Olaf Mikkelsen's new Pentium code (see http://inet.uni-c.dk/~svolaf/des.htm). This is about 25% faster than mine, and well worth the extra effort. The conversion turns out to be non-trivial; it uses a different initial and final perm, the key schedules look different, and the rounds seem to carry a lot of context from one round to the next in the registers. All but the final problem is not too important - the data are all different by simple permutations, and the conversion is not too hard. The final problem is more interesting, since I do the first DES round only part of the time. This means that I'll have to do more context setup for those times when I'm starting at the second round (most of the time), and preserve that extra context after the times I *do* run the first round. The other problem is that the 'half-matches' and penultimate round half-matches will be different for the two systems. This complicates results checking. Anyway, come Monday, I want to email to a few people the generic 'C' code, along with my assembler version. If you're interested in doing a serious critique and/or porting of the code, and are a US/Canadian citizen living in the US/Canada, then email me with a statement to that effect. I'm only sending out a few copies - this is a slow beta, after all. If I don't get the Mikkelsen code in there by Monday, it should follow soon thereafter. After the DES Challenge is underway, I may try looking at the RC5 Challenges. Who else will be attending Verisign Partner Days or the RSA Data Security Conference at the end of the month? I'd like to meet some of the other participants on this list. Peter Trei trei at process.com From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 17 12:12:10 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:12:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Revokation Scheme Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970117120914.00639400@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 11:32 PM 1/14/97 -0500, harka at nycmetro.com wrote: >I started thinking about the issue, how to set up a system to have >somebody else revoke your key for you, if you don't have the means >to do so yourself. >The possible case I had in mind was, what if you're maybe a >dissident, you get arrested and your apartment (incl. disks/keys) >gets raided. You don't have any means to revoke the key yourself, >don't even have e-mail in general, and with the "one phone call", [.... method deleted .... lawyer, alice, bob, ... ] Too complex for what you're really doing. Give your lawyer a floppy with the key revocation certificate and a yellow sticky about how to call Alice or Bob for help if your lawyer's not computer-literate enough to follow the README file. If you're paranoid about the cops getting your unindicted co-conspirators' names, use PGP Inc. or some computer consultant instead of Alice and Bob and have your lawyer pay their per-hour rate. On your One Phone Call, tell him to get the floppy out of the sealed envelope in his safe and use it. Key revocation certificates don't leak your private keys, so the only risk if the Bad Guys get a copy is denial of service, including the pain of rebuilding all your connections, etc.; it doesn't leak your communications or allow them to forge mail. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 17 12:18:44 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:18:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: >On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: >> >> It was a conference call but over a cellular phone. Martin had hacked his >> Radio Shack Scanner using a well known technique. He had a radio ham >> license. >> >Phill > Actually I'd love to see this go to court & have the law itself >tossed out. How many years have the airwaves been free? Now it is >illegal to listen on the cellular frequencies. > >Sarah. > >============================================================================== >Sarah L. Green Hey, I never claimed to be >>osprey<< >Madison, AL (USA) a genius nor a typist greens at hiwaay.net >============================================================================== The concept that a corporation or individual transmitting information meant for receiption at 'significant' distances should be accorded the presumption of privacy is analogous that a person shouting out their window to a person on the street and assuming that insisting neighbors be required to turn a bind ear. However, since the government has pressed the point, couldn't one use this same logic to claim that since face-to-face conversations are assumed to be private that wire taps are illegal. I seem to recall that Chief Justice Brandice made this argument in the late '20s. Look where we are today. --Steve From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 17 12:23:49 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:23:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Forget DES, crack CAVE; was: Newt may be more receptive to encryption now Message-ID: >I think what's important to stress is that technical fixes work, laws >don't. > >Net-advocates in DC are already planning to suggest to Republicans that >they use crypto as a hammer to nail Gore (the chief White House supporter >of the current policy) and draw votes and cash from Silicon Valley. > >-Declan > > >On Thu, 16 Jan 1997 Scottauge at aol.com wrote: > >> >> Given his troubles with this "hay seed" scanner recording democrats, ol' Newt >> may be more receptive to encryption. >> >> Our privacy certainly is getting trashed by this presidency and I am hoping >> an impeachment is coming down the line. >> >> Since the congress is who makes the laws, maybe we all can focus some snail >> mail to these guys. >> >> Perhaps EFF could even draft some laws for our protection (what a joke - just >> to keep busy body beaurocrats outta our business). >> >> What does it matter anyhow, these guys dont read their own 300 - 5000 page >> laws anyhow.... >> >> Hopeless.... >> >> Why don't we threaten to monitor and post RealAudio of all the politico's juciest cellular intrigues, or design and distribute CAVE cracking software to allow simple monitoring of digital cellular communications. IMHO, this would be a better demonstration that the DES crack being contemplated. -- Steve From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Fri Jan 17 12:29:18 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:29:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: encryption program Message-ID: <199701171938.LAA12029@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > > I ran a quick Kappa test on it. ... I had a blast with this one. I was up until 4:30 last night working on Pierre van Rooyen's "Here follows a example..." cryptogram. It's like doing a jigsaw puzzle; there's a hump you cross over near the end where everything just falls into place. Jim Gillogly broke it in only a few hours, whereas I must have put in a whole day cumulatively (half of that writing software), but it was my first real cryptogram. It was a hell of a learning experience. They say that you can't design a crypto system until you've broken someone else's first, and this really drove it home. From tobrien at comet.net Fri Jan 17 12:58:33 1997 From: tobrien at comet.net (T. O'Brien) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:58:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <32DF143F.37B2@comet.net> �Unsubcribe From gen2600 at aracnet.com Fri Jan 17 12:59:03 1997 From: gen2600 at aracnet.com (Genocide) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 12:59:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Get me off this fucking list, or else.... (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Rodrigo Espirito Santo wrote: Such sophistication, I'm glad you'll leave, we don't need more people subtracting from the group... Gen/. > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:30:25 +0000 (GMT) > From: Rodrigo Espirito Santo > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Get me off this fucking list, or else.... > > Hey you dumb asses, i tried to unsubscribe this list in the correct way > but you guys don't know SHIT about this!!!!1 > If you don't get me out now i'll subscribe each and every one of you to > some goddamn gay and lesbiann and freak mailing list!!!!!! > get me out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > Genocide Head of the Genocide2600 Group ============================================================================ **Coming soon! www.Genocide2600.com! ____________________ *---===| |===---* *---===| Genocide |===---* "You can be a king or a street *---===| 2600 |===---* sweeper, but everyone dances with the *---===|__________________|===---* Grim Reaper." Email: gen2600 at aracnet.com Web: http://www.aracnet.com/~gen2600 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. It is by the Mountain Dew that the thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. ================================================================================ From rah at shipwright.com Fri Jan 17 13:02:47 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:02:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: (U.S.) National Cryptography Policy (paper and report) Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 14:09:24 CST Reply-To: Law & Policy of Computer Communications Sender: Law & Policy of Computer Communications From: Lyonette Louis-Jacques Subject: (U.S.) National Cryptography Policy (paper and report) Comments: To: net-lawyers at eva.dc.LSOFT.COM To: CYBERIA-L at LISTSERV.AOL.COM I'm forwarding this post to the CYBERIA-L and NET-LAWYERS lists as I think subscribers might be interested in these documents (include discussion of export controls), and their implication for international communications. Cheers, Lyo (Lyonette Louis-Jacques at llou at midway.uchicago.edu): Cryptography and the National Resource Council: The Role of Private Groups in Public Policy, by Kenneth W. Dam, is now available on the Web. http://www.law.uchicago.edu/Publications/Occasional/ The Role of Private Groups in Public Policy is adapted from a presentation made to the Presidents' Circle of the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine, Washington, D.C., November 21, 1996. It was recently issued as Occasional Paper No. 38 by the University of Chicago Law School. Kenneth W. Dam, Max Pam Professor of American and Foreign Law, University of Chicago Law School, was the Chair of the National Research Council's Committee to Study National Cryptography Policy. The Committee unanimously recommended eliminating restrictions on domestic use of encryption, and progressively relaxing restrictions on export. The government's concerns that national security and law enforcement agencies would be unable to eavesdrop on criminals and terrorists must be balanced against the dangers that American firms would be unable to lawfully use encryption strong enough to protect electronic commerce, and that American software developers, forced to use key escrow/key recovery encryption in their products ("a Maginot Line of defense against hackers") would find no market for their products. A late draft of the Committee's Report, "Cryptography's Role in Securing the Information Society," is available at their home page: http://www2.nas.edu/cstbweb/2646.html ----------- Paradise is exactly like + where you are right now .&______~*@*~______&. m only much, much, better "w/%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%\w" mmm*** ------------------------ `Y""Y""Y"""""Y""Y""Y' mm***** Language -- it's a shipwreck, p-p_|__|__|_____|__|__|_q-q mm**Y** it's a job - Laurie Anderson _-[EEEEM==M==MM===MM==M==MEEEE]-_.|..|.... (two .sigs sighted on the Net) --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Fri Jan 17 13:12:02 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:12:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701162147.HAA12921@iccu6.ipswich.gil.com.au> Message-ID: <199701142026.UAA00127@server.test.net> Greg Taylor writes: > After following this thread for some time, I have to question whether > Americans realise how far behind the rest of the world they are in > cellphone technology. > > Most of the world has been using GSM digital technology for some years > now, with automatic international roaming, unless you travel to the USA. > No one in their right mind uses an analogue mobile phone any more if they > are concerned about eavesdropping. The Newt incident simply could not > happen with GSM. > > Of course in most countries the government controls the federal police, > not the other way round. Using GSM would add protection against casual eavesdroppers, but would not provide that high a degree of protection. GSM encrypts only the links to the station - the traffic goes in the clear through the station. Plus A5 (crypto algorithm used in GSM) is weak, 40 bits of effective key space. It could be worse to have poor crypto, than no crypto, Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Message-ID: <199701142051.UAA00139@server.test.net> Asgaard writes: > On Sun, 12 Jan 1997, Adam Back wrote: > > >[...] Anyone know how modular the design is, for instance if > >it would be possible to give a GSM A5 based cell phone a crypto upgrade > >using published electrical interface standards? (I want one of those - > >Nokia phone with IDEA + 2048 bit RSA signatures + DH forward secrecy!) > > I don't understand what you are getting at here. > This would demand cooperation from the cell phone provider, > with a compatible device at the other end of the airwaves. If you super-encrypted the IDEA encrypted traffic with A5, it should not require cooperation of the cell phone provider. You always need a capable device at the other end. If the phone at the other end isn't IDEA/RSA/DH capable, you can fall back to only A5. My question about electrical interfaces was wondering if the above could be acheived by producing a plugable mini-smartcard, or desolderable IC which would allow this to be done with standard GSM phones. > Then the call would go unencrypted through much of the > system until it reached the callee's current cell sender > anyway. GSM is alledgedly A5 encrypted only in the air. > > And if A5 is a 'decent' algorithm or not is up to discussion. > It hasn't been up on the list for a long time now but from > earlier discussions I remember that the latest versions of > A5, if not 'strong' in a crypto anarchy sense, are susceptible > to attack only from very sophisticated adversaries and certainly > not from Newt's 'couple'. Not from Newt's eavesdroppers sure, but it wouldn't cost that much for someone who wanted the traffic. 40 bits of effective key space at most, Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 I'm going to be in Albuquerque seeing family for a week starting tomorrow. Any cypherpunks/e$/technomads folks out there wanna quaff a few, I'd be up for it. Also, I'm looking a temporary PPP dial-up in the Albuquerque for the week I'm there. No mail or news, just PPP, so I can hit my POPserver and run e$pam in remote-mode. Neither rain, nor snow, nor altitude, etc. can keep the e$pamster from his appointed rounds... Thanks! Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM Fri Jan 17 13:26:36 1997 From: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:26:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE Message-ID: <199701172045.MAA12756@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Could someone help this luser? Is he responding like this to every post on the list? ----- Begin Included Message ----- >From spooke at ita.flashnet.it Fri Jan 17 12:44:24 1997 X-Sender: rm02129 at ita.flashnet.it Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 21:45:00 +0100 To: ed.falk at Eng (Ed Falk) From: Spooke Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE globalkos.org >> >> Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, ... > >This has *got* to be a troll. Nobody could be this clueless. > > >Well, actually, they could. > > ----- End Included Message ----- From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 17 13:50:55 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 13:50:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701171921.LAA18808@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701172144.PAA02593@manifold.algebra.com> Sean Roach wrote: > I had to tell my sister not to use the cordless phone to use the automated > banking services that our bank has available on grounds that transfers are > also available through the same service. It is my understanding that an ordinary banking consumer that uses "pay bills by phone" service cannot transfer $$ to any arbitrary account. There is a limited list of permitted accounts, such as utility companies. Therefore, the risk of unauthorized transfer is very limited. I would not be worried about this issue at all. The world at large is insecure in very many respects: it is easy to find out credit card numbers, overhear conversations, install hidden microphones, hack into computers, etc etc. It does not mean that we should stop all activity simply because there is "some" risk of losses. > Our father is a math teacher, computer hobbyists since 1979. Both of my > parents have college educations. My sister pegged the scales on the state > distributed proficiency tests. Yet she knows practically nothing outside of > her field. I will probably have to show her the values of cryptography > before she actually has any patient records to deal with, (she's a pharmacy > major.) - Igor. From greens at hiwaay.net Fri Jan 17 15:56:34 1997 From: greens at hiwaay.net (Sarah L. Green) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 15:56:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Telecomm Act Reference (Was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: >From Damien Thorn's 'A CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS PRIMER' (at http://www.l0pht.com/~drwho/cell/texts/thorn1192.txt) To calm fears that cellular calls were not private, the cellular industry lobbied congress into passing legislation known today as the Electronic Communication Privacy Act (ECPA) of 1986 which makes it a crime to monitor cellular phone calls and a host of other transmissions like digital pagers. This law is used by cellular equipment dealers and service providers to reassure customers that their conversations will remain private. Sarah. ============================================================================== Sarah L. Green Hey, I never claimed to be >>osprey<< Madison, AL (USA) a genius nor a typist greens at hiwaay.net ============================================================================== From rcgraves at disposable.com Fri Jan 17 16:35:12 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:35:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Revokation Scheme In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970117120914.00639400@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32E01A37.702D@disposable.com> Bill Stewart wrote: > [...] >Key revocation certificates don't leak your private keys, >so the only risk if the Bad Guys get a copy is denial of service, >including the pain of rebuilding all your connections, etc.; I concur. Depending on your application (it always depends on your application), it's probably better to risk a spurious revocation than an interception. You needn't completely lose your connection to the web of trust, either. I've already generated a "next" key signed by my current key, just in case. No, the path server won't follow revoked keys, but someone not yet in possession of the revocation certificate is somewhat more likely to accept a message from someone with a key signed by your old key and in possession of the revocation certificate. -rich From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 17 16:56:41 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:56:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Forgery detection Message-ID: <199701180056.QAA20554@mailmasher.com> Timmy C. May's reheated, refurbished, and regurgitated cud is completely inappropriate for the mailing lists into which it is cross-ruminated. |||~ (0 0) _ooO_(_)_Ooo__ Timmy C. May From rcgraves at disposable.com Fri Jan 17 17:01:11 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 17:01:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701172144.PAA02593@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32E02050.735D@disposable.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > I would not be worried about this issue at all. The world at large is > insecure in very many respects: it is easy to find out credit card > numbers, overhear conversations, install hidden microphones, hack > into computers, etc etc. It does not mean that we should stop all > activity simply because there is "some" risk of losses. I agree. Security in terms of theft really doesn't concern me most of the time. If someone steals your credit card or bank number, chances are you'll get everything back without too much trouble (exceptional "identity theft" cases notwithstanding). My life is structured such that even if someone stole my car and burned down my house, I'd hardly mind. I've got friends to stay with, I can bike to work, and I've got enough insurance. Money is just money; I've got an average amount, which is more than I need. What does concern me is personal privacy. I don't want people tracking my movements or purchasing patterns, so I prefer to use cash or pseudonymous debit cards. -rich From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 17 17:30:32 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 17:30:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701171832.MAA00342@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: snow writes: > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > >>shudder<< > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on... --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 17 17:30:43 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 17:30:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Kill filing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: aga writes: > Stop acting so stupid, Michael. > > On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Michael Gurski wrote: > > > On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: > > > > At 1:05 pm -0500 1/16/97, Ed Falk wrote: > > > > > > And, in my case, Eudora displays each message in the status window as i > > > > bringing something down from the POP server, and again as it filters. > > > > So, Toto, you're not in "Cansas" any more. It's called a "Trash" folder ^^^^^^ Michael is so stupid, he can't spell "Kansas". That's why he's a "cypher punk". > > > I used to have procmail shove messages from certain folks directly to > > > /dev/null, but then wondered a few days ago if I were missing > > > anything, so they ended up going to $MAILDIR/.in.garbage. After > > > looking in there today, I'm glad to say that it's back to /dev/null, > > > with no regrets. Of course, with the new moderated list, there shouldn't > > > be too much work for procmail, except for those folks who I personally > > > feel aren't worth reading... > > > > Michael, please tell me and everyone else at cypherpunks just why it > > is we should give a shit at all what your personal killfile habits > > are, and whether we should give a shit about whether you think anyone > > on this list is or isn't worth reading. > > > > You and a thousand other clowns seem to think this is cool to do, > > but you're actually pointing back at yourself with this kind of crap. The jerks who describe in detail whom they killfile (like Hettiga) always lie. Control freaks are really obsessed with the people they claim to "plonk", and read everything their "enemies" write with great interest. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 17 17:41:52 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 17:41:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE In-Reply-To: <199701172045.MAA12756@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: ed.falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) writes: > Could someone help this luser? Is he responding like this to every post > on the list? > > ----- Begin Included Message ----- > > >From spooke at ita.flashnet.it Fri Jan 17 12:44:24 1997 > X-Sender: rm02129 at ita.flashnet.it > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 21:45:00 +0100 > To: ed.falk at Eng (Ed Falk) > From: Spooke > Subject: UNSUBSCRIBE > > globalkos.org > >> > >> Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, ... > > > >This has *got* to be a troll. Nobody could be this clueless. > > > > > >Well, actually, they could. > > > > > > > > ----- End Included Message ----- > Is he clueless enough to qualify as "cypher punk" or does one have to be verifiably homosexual as well? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From declan at well.com Fri Jan 17 18:08:06 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:08:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Enough is Never Enough -- pro-CDA alliances, from TNNN Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:04:35 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Enough is Never Enough -- pro-CDA alliances, from TNNN [Attached are two excerpts from the article. For the rest, check out: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/textonly/1,1035,549,00.html --Declan] ******** The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ Enough Is Never Enough By Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com) January 17, 1997 A broad coalition of conservative and anti-pornography groups and individuals will file legal briefs next Tuesday in the Supreme Court supporting the government's defense of the Communications Decency Act, The Netly News has learned. The alliance includes longtime supporters of the act, such as Enough is Enough, Focus on the Family, and the National Association of Evangelicals. Members of Congress will join a separate brief that the National Law Center for Children and Families is preparing. But a letter from the attorney representing the coalition asked the ACLU for permission to file a brief "on behalf of" 59 plaintiffs, including such unlikely participants as the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, PBS, SafeSurf... and Netscape. Netscape? The company that lobbied against the CDA? A firm with a reputation of putting their balls on the chopping block when fighting for Net-issues on Capitol Hill? Netscape was as shocked as I was to learn about their participation. "It wasn't authorized by me or my office. This is flabbergasting," Peter Harter, public policy counsel for Netscape, said. "I'd be crucified if this happened." [...] In their brief, which argues sociological rather than legal points, the groups hope to highlight the "dangers" of pornography online. They plan to supply the court with "legislative facts" to support the position Congress took when crafting the bill. The document also will include statistics discussing the effects of the Internet on children and the availability of material covered by the law. (Marty Rimm, where are you now?) Donna Rice-Hughes from Enough is Enough says: "It discusses three primary areas of our concern: letting the court know the problems on the Internet. Adult pornography, indecency, and child porn as well. A section on the harms of pornography. And a section dealing with the compliance issues: Is it feasible technically to comply with the CDA?" [...] Chris Stamper and Noah Robischon contributed to this report. From petro at suba.com Fri Jan 17 19:21:11 1997 From: petro at suba.com (Petro) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 19:21:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: cash machine PINheads (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701180321.VAA21345@suba01.suba.com> ------- start of forwarded message ------- Path: news.suba.com!feeder.chicago.cic.net!wolverine.hq.cic.net!news.neca.com!news.shkoo.com!news1.mpcs.com!hammer.uoregon.edu!arclight.uoregon.edu!news.bbnplanet.com!su-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!csn!nntp-xfer-1.csn.net!news.hemi.com!news From: Tkil Newsgroups: alt.sysadmin.recovery Subject: cash machine PINheads Date: 16 Jan 1997 11:27:04 -0700 Organization: Scrye.com Lines: 59 Sender: tkil at creepy.scrye.com Approved: yup. Message-ID: References: <5bh6ke$5rr at illuin.demon.co.uk> <5bhhd5$dfv$1 at comet3.magicnet.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp2.hemi.com X-Attribution: Tkil X-Newsreader: Red Gnus v0.80/Emacs 19.34 found in : A number of security systems were developed, of which two captured most of the market. These were the IBM system, launched in 1979; and the VISA system, which extended it and was introduced shortly afterwards. These systems relate the PIN to the account number in a secret way. The idea is to avoid having a file of PINs, which might be stolen or copied. and to make it possible to check PINs in the ATM itself so as to allow transactions when it is not online to the bank's central computer site. The definitive reference is Meyer and Matyas' huge book Cryptography: a new dimension in computer data security; there is a shorter account in Davies and Price Security for Computer Networks. PINs are calculated as follows. Take the last five significant digits of the account number, and prefix them by eleven digits of validation data. These are often the first eleven digits of the account number; they could also be a function of the card issue date. In any case, the resulting sixteen digit value is input to an encryption algorithm (which for IBM and VISA systems is DES, the US Data Encryption Standard algorithm), and encrypted using a sixteen digit key called the PIN key. The first four digits of the result are decimalised, and the result is called the `Natural PIN'. Many banks just issued the natural PIN to their customers. However, some of them decided that they wished to let their customers choose their own PINs, or to change a PIN if it became known to somebody else. There is therefore a four digit number, called the offset, which is added to the natural PIN to give the PIN which the cusomer must enter at the ATM keyboard. and from : *The Risks Digest Volume 14: Issue 76* [...] How is it possible to use an EXPIRED card to make $8000 in cash advances? It's possible because the ATM's verification center ONLY checks if the card number is on a list of STOLEN/LOST cards. If the card is not stolen/lost, the verification center then performs a verification check of the information FROM THE CARD ITSELF, not from some other database. So the perpetrators just wrote a new expiration date on the magnetic stripe of their fake card; the ATM verification center verified that the date hadn't yet passed and that was that. my apologies for the useful info, but the "yes it is" "no it isn't" bit was getting even more irritating. both of these items have quite a bit more text to them that makes for interesting reading -- i just excerpted the bits that dealt with where the PIN was verified. t. -- Tkil emacs evangelist, hopelessly hopeless romantic "Like brittle things that break before they bend" -- The Sisters Of Mercy, _Floodland_, "Driven Like The Snow" [1987] ------- end of forwarded message ------- -- ***************** PLEASE TAKE NOTE: In an effort to reduce the amount of junk mail that I receive, I am no longer reading email sent to petro at suba.com. send email to login at encodex.com where login = petro. You send unsoliciated commercial email, and I will kill you. From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 17 20:02:47 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:02:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E04544.7491@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > snow writes: > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > >>shudder<< > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on... This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily for the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the perfect solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for it. Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at them. Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, so what's the problem? From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 17 20:02:50 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:02:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E04936.58DE@gte.net> Sarah L. Green wrote: > On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > It was a conference call but over a cellular phone. Martin had hacked > > his Radio Shack Scanner using a well known technique. He had a radio > > ham license. > Actually I'd love to see this go to court & have the law itself > tossed out. How many years have the airwaves been free? Now it is > illegal to listen on the cellular frequencies. They're not gonna toss the law out, since the law doesn't really deal with thought crimes, i.e., hearing something you're not supposed to hear. The law allows them to prosecute people who deliberately monitor to collect information which can be used against the people being monitored, or to take advantage of them (steal trade secrets, etc.). There's a presumption that the person about to be prosecuted has a collection of information somewhere (on paper, on disk....) that they otherwise could not possibly have gotten legally. I've listened to judges describe something similar, in person - the use of mailing lists by former employees, usually salespeople, where the names/addresses and other info on the list might be proprietary. Lawyers for scumbags love to sue over this one, since it's harder for a judge to declare bad faith or a frivolous suit against the plaintiff when the issue is unfair competition instigated by "theft" of a mailing list. The rule comes down to whether the info is generally available legally, or whether it absolutely had to have been gotten illegally. From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 17 20:02:55 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:02:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E04A68.3CE1@gte.net> Sarah L. Green wrote: > On Wed, 15 Jan 1997, Bill Frantz wrote: > > At 7:07 PM -0800 1/14/97, Eric Murray wrote: > > The 1935 communication act made it illegal to pass on what you had heard > > when listening to certain radio services. Listening was OK. Telling > > others wasn't. > A more recent act made it illegal to monitor celular frequencies, > and to make equipement that receives or could easily be > modified to receive cellular frequencies. Scanner manufacturers have been getting around a lot of this by putting ever more of the scanner's intelligence on EEPROM or flash chips, and providing a computer interface to the scanner. Software to do the rest can be gotten thru the web, or thru addresses in 2600 or 411 magazine. I'm getting anxious to get a new scanner that can follow the cellular hopping, ditto for police using the new trunked systems that also hop frequencies, ditto for decoding digital, and for decoding other common scrambling like the crap that Motorola puts out. From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 17 20:18:12 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:18:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks-unedited subscriptions In-Reply-To: <32D30EFB.5F8@gte.net> Message-ID: <32E04EE4.514E@gte.net> Total subscribers for: Tue 14 Jan: 13 Wed 15 Jan: 15 Thu 16 Jan: 13 Fri 17 Jan: 14 Looks like one of two things: Either nobody wants the unedited list, or, some of the "regular people" subscribe to the edited list and "flames" list separately, to get both. From snow at smoke.suba.com Fri Jan 17 20:58:04 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 20:58:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701180514.XAA00633@smoke.suba.com> > snow writes: > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > >>shudder<< > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on... Rossanne Barr. Nude. Sorry to ruin your dinner. From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Fri Jan 17 21:01:51 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 21:01:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <32E04544.7491@gte.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > snow writes: > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > > > >>shudder<< > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on... > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily for > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the perfect > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for it. > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at them. > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, > so what's the problem? Cold temps... From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Fri Jan 17 21:11:04 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 21:11:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > snow writes: > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on... > That depends...on the movie. > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 17 21:50:23 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 21:50:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nurdane Oksas writes: > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > snow writes: > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > > > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on > > > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily for > > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the perfect > > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for it. > > > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at them. > > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage > > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, > > so what's the problem? > > Cold temps... What can naked people do to keep warm??? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu Fri Jan 17 22:01:00 1997 From: unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu (Internaut) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:01:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <01BC04D2.80B01D40@s10-pm06.tnstate.campus.mci.net> >What does concern me is personal privacy. I don't want people tracking >my movements or purchasing patterns, so I prefer to use cash or >pseudonymous debit cards. How pseudonymous are debit cards? Don't they go through visa before they debit your account? --Internaut From BJORN2LUZE at prodigy.com Fri Jan 17 22:02:56 1997 From: BJORN2LUZE at prodigy.com (NATHAN MALLAMACE) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:02:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jewish English: Hebonics Message-ID: <199701172152.QAA21520@mime4.prodigy.com> ------- http://pages.prodigy.com/VT/ look for the most updated link there... ------- If you have already read this, I suggest you PRINT IT this time and delete it. If you HAVEN'T READ IT YET. Make a copy and post it on some other mailing list. Read on... Wyane. - >>Jewish English or "Hebonics" >> >>The Encino School Board has declared Jewish English a second language. >>Backers of the move say the district is the first in the nation to >>recognize Hebonics as the language of many of American Jews. Here are >>some descriptions of the characteristics of the language, and samples >>of phrases in standard English and Jewish English. >> >>Samples of Pronunciation Characteristics >> >>Jewish English or "Hebonics" hardens consonants at the ends of words. >> >>Thus, "hand" becomes "handt." >> >>The letter "W" is always pronounced as if it were a "V". Thus >>"walking" becomes "valking" >> >>"R" sounds are transformed to a guttural utterance that is virtually >>impossible to spell in English. It is "ghraining", "algheady" >> >> >>Samples of Idiomatic Characteristics: >> >>Questions are always answered with questions: >> Question: "How do you feel?" >> Hebonics response: "How should I feel?" >> >>The subject is often placed at the end of a sentence after a pronoun >>has been used at the beginning: "She dances beautifully, that girl. " >> >>The sarcastic repetition of words by adding "sh" to the front is used >>for emphasis. >> >> mountains becomes "shmountains" >> turtle becomes "shmurtle" >> >> >>Sample Usage Comparisons: >> >> Standard English Phrase Hebonics Phrase >> >> "He walks slow" - "Like a fly in the ointment he walks" >> >> "You're sexy" - (unknown concept) >> >>"Sorry, I do not know - "What do I look like, a clock?" >> the time" >> >> "I hope things turn - "You should BE so lucky" >> out for the best" >> >>"Anything can happen" - "It is never so bad, it can't get worse" Interesting? Sorry, I wasn't the one who wrote this.. It's just interesting to me. Nathan From tozser at stolaf.edu Fri Jan 17 22:08:58 1997 From: tozser at stolaf.edu (Sir Robin of Locksley) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 22:08:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Enough is Never Enough -- pro-CDA alliances, from TNNN Message-ID: <199701180608.AAA17196@nic.stolaf.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 18:04:35 -0800 (PST) >From: Declan McCullagh >To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu >Subject: Enough is Never Enough -- pro-CDA alliances, from TNNN > >[Attached are two excerpts from the article. For the rest, check out: >http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/textonly/1,1035,549,00.html --Declan] > >******** > >The Netly News Network >http://netlynews.com/ > >Enough Is Never Enough >By Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com) >January 17, 1997 > > A broad coalition of conservative and anti-pornography groups and > individuals will file legal briefs next Tuesday in the Supreme Court > supporting the government's defense of the Communications Decency Act, > The Netly News has learned. > > The alliance includes longtime supporters of the act, such as > Enough is Enough, Focus on the Family, and the National Association of > Evangelicals. Members of Congress will join a separate brief that the > National Law Center for Children and Families is preparing. > > But a letter from the attorney representing the coalition asked > the ACLU for permission to file a brief "on behalf of" 59 plaintiffs, > including such unlikely participants as the National Association for > the Advancement of Colored People, PBS, SafeSurf... and Netscape. > > Netscape? The company that lobbied against the CDA? A firm with a > reputation of putting their balls on the chopping block when fighting > for Net-issues on Capitol Hill? Netscape was as shocked as I was to > learn about their participation. "It wasn't authorized by me or my > office. This is flabbergasting," Peter Harter, public policy counsel > for Netscape, said. "I'd be crucified if this happened." > >[...] > > In their brief, which argues sociological rather than legal > points, the groups hope to highlight the "dangers" of pornography > online. They plan to supply the court with "legislative facts" to > support the position Congress took when crafting the bill. The > document also will include statistics discussing the effects of the > Internet on children and the availability of material covered by the > law. (Marty Rimm, where are you now?) > > Donna Rice-Hughes from Enough is Enough says: "It discusses three > primary areas of our concern: letting the court know the problems on > the Internet. Adult pornography, indecency, and child porn as well. A > section on the harms of pornography. And a section dealing with the > compliance issues: Is it feasible technically to comply with the CDA?" > Stuff like this makes me sick. What the hell is up with these people!? You offended me so you must leave. Well, excuse me, there is a reason internet addresses have a WWW URL. It stands for World Wide Web and as such encompasses the world. If there is stuff in the world that offends someone, don't look! But to tell everyone else that they can't either since some were offended, that is a starting point for cencorship. Now it's porn, tomorrow it's you saying what you beleive (that might also be the truth...) If one is offended by something, don't look! How come Catholicism doesn't get banned and outlawed? Hell, it offends me... Guess not people! >[...] > > Chris Stamper and Noah Robischon contributed to this report. > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAgUBMuBpXKr5aWnB1HshAQEm0QgAwnTz+xjtVKCVNgA0/L5hkqBALubqySM3 zzZlifGue1tq9puyPFEvaPSgRuRWcZSJN9BOYXAVd/kMnMiGwlvV2mAFjGiOCl2W sPu5tUEC01V77l/egifYp8CvVGjsaZRBiQ5Ia0e5kqM/kd6/gxcbcRk69/3kpCQX E2CCHCMZS+aW/HOl2HhX2k8t8oVVAGLoJFkaNV5WEc33N5XMv7URTBpx07NH8nmc EjNpbroXl2LwqakAWleEFbr+eBQLJOPa43CKbRha6Dxop+LaaQrMBgihnHdD410P 6g0SgX0dJup9LTYryF3Ig30tUl/uJPdhg2TpjRw+/bom2v1m4iRZHg== =vZqM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Gabor K. Tozser (Gabe) From haystack at holy.cow.net Fri Jan 17 23:12:59 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 23:12:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701180655.BAA12721@holy.cow.net> Timothy May's obsessive masturbation has lead to advanced degree of blindness and hairy palms. ___ \/ \/ |_O O_| Timothy May | ^ | / UUU \ From unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu Fri Jan 17 23:36:55 1997 From: unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu (Internaut) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 23:36:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <01BC04DF.D5F8C600@s10-pm06.tnstate.campus.mci.net> snow wrote: > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). >>shudder<< No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... I was just kidding. We do have to take on risks, like people wearing clothes, carring packages, ect. As Igor Chudov @ home wrote recently in the Newt's phone calls thread: > I would not be worried about this issue at all. The world at large is > insecure in very many respects: it is easy to find out credit card > numbers, overhear conversations, install hidden microphones, hack > into computers, etc etc. It does not mean that we should stop all > activity simply because there is "some" risk of losses. We have two seemingly conflicting desires: the desire for security and the desire for privacy. I do not call being searched "privacy" yet I do not call not being searched "security". We need to find creative resolutions to these conflicts. Of course, it is debatable if there is even an expectation of privacy on an airplane. I don't mind terrably being searched in an airport by security because I don't expect the privacy. I expect security. I don't want to die. If I have things I don't want them to see, there are other ways to get it there. I would worry if they cataloged what I had in a database and sold it to others. The service is just that -a service. It is not a right. We can travel other ways, too. My late night ramblings cease, Internaut From harmon at tenet.edu Fri Jan 17 23:54:45 1997 From: harmon at tenet.edu (Dan Harmon) Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 23:54:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <199701180655.BAA12721@holy.cow.net> Message-ID: Too much free time. Surf'n the singularity. On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Bovine Remailer wrote: > Timothy May's obsessive masturbation has lead to > advanced degree of blindness and hairy palms. > > ___ > \/ \/ > |_O O_| Timothy May > | ^ | > / UUU \ > > From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 18 00:09:10 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:09:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Get me off this fucking list, or else.... (fwd) Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970118000831.0065be70@popd.ix.netcom.com> Either a) You don't follow directions very well (since you're still on the list, and since the software works just fine for people who can follow directions or consider spelling to be unimportant), or b) The mailing list daemon is broken (happens sometimes, but usually that gives you no traffic), or c) The mail you're sending doesn't have your correct headers on it (e.g. looks like it's from res at pc43.unidyne.uni.pt instead of res at unidyne.uni.pt), in which case you may need human help, or d) Somebody doesn't like you and subscribed you to the list because it's well-known to be a high-volume mailing list, and they keep subscribing you after you unsubscribe, in which case harassing the 1300+ people who _do_ want to be on the list is not a good thing to do. So send mail to majordomo at toad.com, saying "help" and RFTM. At 04:31 PM 1/17/97 +0000, Rodrigo Espirito Santo wrote: > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Fri, 17 Jan 1997 16:30:25 +0000 (GMT) >From: Rodrigo Espirito Santo >To: cypherpunks at toad.com >Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com >Subject: Get me off this fucking list, or else.... > >Hey you dumb asses, i tried to unsubscribe this list in the correct way >but you guys don't know SHIT about this!!!!1 >If you don't get me out now i'll subscribe each and every one of you to >some goddamn gay and lesbiann and freak mailing list!!!!!! >get me out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 18 00:18:11 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:18:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: National Security State has different standards for 'them' and 'us' Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970118001514.0066c860@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 04:48 PM 1/16/97 -0500, Brad Dolan wrote: >I was distracted a bit but I believe I heard on NPR news this morning that >Colorado Guv. Roy Roemer showed up at an airport sans id and had a moment >of difficulty getting on his flight. Roemer solved the problem by showing >the Federal Permission-To-Fly checker a picture of himself in a recent >newspaper. >I thought the ill-defined (or ill-described) rules required presentation >of a _government_ picture I.D. Since when is a newspaper photo a >government picture I.D.? No, they don't, though the airlines like you to think that since it simplifies their life and it's something they can tell $5/hour bag checkers as well as higher-paid gate agents. There is no national rule that applies to everybody requiring it; each airline apparently has to negotiate with the FAA to make sure they're doing a "reasonable" job of identifying their passengers. The airline is free to make whatever rules they want. On United, I normally use my employee ID and the credit card I use to buy the electronic-ticket, which verifies reasonably well that I'm the person the ticket was bought for (by the people who told the airline they're my employer's travel agents.) If the _government_ required _you_ to have government ID, there'd be serious Constitutional problems with it; regulating interstate commerce and air traffic safety by forcing the airlines to do something they'd kind of like to do anyway doesn't have the same problems, even though it's almost _more_ offensive to a free society. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Sat Jan 18 00:23:50 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:23:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <853575672.913152.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > I suppose you want a special censored list where everyone who uses > > the word "fuck" in relation to your good self or any other member of > > this list you agree with has their posting cut? > > No, I don't want censored anything. "Cypher punks" have degenerated into > a moderated forum where those who dare criticize His Royal Majesty John > the Cocksucker and his court are forcibly unsubscribed, while all sorts > of vile insults directed at John's many "enemies" are encouraged. I quite agree, there is something most definitely wrong with this whole situation, still, at least there are some crypto-relevant people on the "cryptography" mailing list. cypherpunks still has worthwhile nuggets on it but I must say the list has gone downhill sharply since the start of the censorship. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Sat Jan 18 00:28:58 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:28:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <853575672.913148.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > GSM includes A5 encryption here, so basically the whole design is worked out > - all you'd have to do is rip out the A5 chip and replace with a decent > encryption system. Anyone know how modular the design is, for instance if > it would be possible to give a GSM A5 based cell phone a crypto upgrade > using published electrical interface standards? (I want one of those - > Nokia phone with IDEA + 2048 bit RSA signatures + DH forward secrecy!) My guess is that this would not work. Does anyone know if when you use a GSM phone to call a landline number the cellphone<-> base station trafic is encrypted??? my guess is that only when you call GSM to GSM is the trafic encrypted and even then I would imagine each phone agrees a key with the base station for the network then the trafic between the base stations is cleartext. The only way, if this were the case, would be to write the code so that the headers and other network information like SIM ID number etc... were cleartext or just A5 to the network as standard and only the actual speech data was encrypted under something stronger. This approach could become troublesome, if I have time I`ll get hold of some GSM specifications and look at it more closely. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From nobody at huge.cajones.com Sat Jan 18 00:37:11 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:37:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: ftp sites for Applied Cryptography 2E. Message-ID: <199701180837.AAA14712@mailmasher.com> All the ftp sites I've found with the source code from Applied Cryptography had the source code from the first edition. I assume there are changes and additions to the source code in the second edition. Are there any ftp sites with the the newer code? From Profits at Goodnet.com Sat Jan 18 00:59:00 1997 From: Profits at Goodnet.com (Profits at Goodnet.com) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 00:59:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Opportunity Knocks" THIS MAILING IS BEING SENT TO YOU COMPLEMENTS OF A COMMERCIAL E-MAILER SERVER. PLEASE SEND ALL COMPLAINTS AND ( REMOVE FROM LIST REQUESTS) TO: Nomad@Capella.net Thank You, The Management ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <199701180856.BAA24554@goodguy.goodnet.com> THIS IS: HOT! HOT!! HOT!!! Multi-Billion $$$ Industry No Binary - NO 1/3 Rule - NO Mail-Outs - No Phone Calls -No Monthly Payments- FOR "TOP-GUN" POSITIONS YOUR IMMEDIATE RESPONSE IS REQUESTED. Totally New Concept Less than 500 people Nationwide! SPILLOVER COUNTS AND REALLY HAPPENS! Only $100.00 one time out-of-pocket Don�t dare miss this one! - You can be first this time! I am certain you will like this simple and yet very powerful program!!! *Call 800-530-9495, and I�ll personally FAX you the details. ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ 15% RETURN TIRED OF YOUR SHRINKING RETURNS ON YOUR PRESENT INVESTMENTS IN "CD's", MONEY MARKETS, IRS ACCOUNTS, MUTUAL FUNDS, AND ANNUITIES. THE ABOVE RETURN ALONG WITH THE FOLLOWING ARE AVAILABLE TO YOU: -MONTHLY INCOME- (Example unit price $6000 @ 15% comes to $75.00 monthly) -GUARANTEED RETURN OF PRINCIPAL- OPTION to CONTINUE or SELL at END of TERM SECURITY You Hold Title to a Valuable Asset LIQUIDITY You Have The Option to Liquidate with NO PENALTY QUALIFIES for IRA's, Keough's and SEP's UNIT PRICE $6000 INTERESTED!! PLEASE CALL (800)400-0484 or LOCAL 328-9583 AND I WILL PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THIS EXCELLENT INVESTMANT ALTERNATIVE ------------------------------------------------------------------ From nobody at huge.cajones.com Sat Jan 18 02:07:27 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 02:07:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Eudora PGP Message-ID: <199701181007.CAA19324@mailmasher.com> If somebody wants to play with the new Eudora PGP but don't have Eudora Pro 3.0, it is available at ftp://ftp.catalog.com/aussie/biscoe/Eudora30.zip Btw, is it legal for a moderator to let messages like this one through to the list...? Cheers From Profits at Goodnet.com Sat Jan 18 02:25:37 1997 From: Profits at Goodnet.com (Profits at Goodnet.com) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 02:25:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: "More Profits Faster" THIS MAILING IS BEING SENT TO YOU COMPLEMENTS OF A COMMERCIAL E-MAILER SERVER. PLEASE SEND ALL COMPLAINTS AND ( REMOVE FROM LIST REQUESTS) TO: Nomad@Capella.net Thank You, The Management ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- Message-ID: <199701181002.DAA04007@goodguy.goodnet.com> PLEASE IGNORE THIS MESSAGE IF YOU LIVE OUTSIDE THE USA -------- BEAT-THE-IRS & PAY-NO-MORE -------------------------- Our REPORT and forms will teach you how to: STOP Income Tax Withholding, STOP April filing of 1040 Form, & STOP THE IRS EXTORTION PERMANENTLY ------------------------------------------- - Success ABSOLUTELY GUARANTEED - (WORKS FOR ALL) - Includes FREE Hot 50% Dealership - ------------------------------------------- Includes unlimited FREE phone consultations, a copy of the U.S. Constitution, The Bill of Rights, forms and much, much more! Send this entire ad and a $25 Money Order to: LINKCO -- POB 66781 -- Phoenix, AZ 85082 Phone:(602)267-9688 Dealer #00001 - (Money Back Guarantee) - - Copyright 1996 Linkco - ----------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------- From: FREEDOM STAR BANK P.O. Box 66781 Phoenix, AZ 85082 To wise investors, The Freedom Star National Bank of Arizona offers: "The More You Save The More You Earn". We offer only CD's, i.e., Certificates of Deposit. $100-$1,000 deposit pays 18%. $1,000-$3,000 deposit pays 24%. $3,000-$5,000 deposit pays 30%. $5,000-$10,000 deposit pays 36%. $10,000 and up deposit pays 42%. All % rates are per year and are not compounded. There is a 50% penalty for early withdrawal. All deposits have a 1 year maturity. Call Mr. Jon L. Boulet at 1-602-267-9688 for more information or to make a deposit. Thanks! ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Come check out: WHOLESALE INTERNET ADVERTISING on Dazzlers Opportunity Mall URL= http://www.AtThePlaza.com/dazzlers Advertising on the internet can bring you awsome profits if you have what the public wants. If you have an opportunity that people want we can help you make more money faster. Place an ad with us and up to 50 Million people world wide will be able to see it. Your ad will be displayed for 1 FULL YEAR. Our rates are 50% to 75% lower than the average rates on the World Wide Web. Not only will you get your ad of up to 100 words posted for 1 year, you will also get a FULL COLOR BANNER display ad on our home page that links to your classified text. Your FULL COLOR BANNER display ad will be customed designed by experts to pull the highest possible response. 1/3 screen width banner ad and 100 words of text is only $48 for 1 FULL YEAR!!! 1/2 screen width banner ad and 100 words of text is only $60 for 1 FULL YEAR!!! 1 FULL screen width banner ad and 100 words of text is only $85 for 1 FULL YEAR!!! ADITIONAL WORDS are only 20 cents per word per year. We will be promoting our site heavily so you get a good response. Send us your text copy on a 3-1/2" disk in ASCII text format as a .txt file. If you don't know what that is call us or get a sec- retarial service to help you. Send your disk and remittance,(payable to LINKCO), to: LINKCO -- Dept. Dazzler -- POB 66781 -- Phoenix, AZ 85082 Phone: (602)267-9688 1-11 pm (MST) --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------- Check out -LINKCO- (602)267-9688 1-11-pm (MST) We offer the following: 1. Domain registration services. 2. Domain name sales, trades, and consignments. 3. Copywriting. 4. Typeseting and graphic design. 5. TAX advice and counciling. 6. E-mail address lists. 7. Fax number lists 8. Web page design and hosting. 9. Bulk e-mail software and e-mail address extractors. 10. Pop3 E-mail accounts that are bulk mail friendly. 11. FREE investment advice. 12. FREE MLM counciling. 13. Bulk e-mailing service. 14. 9 cent/min. long distance service. 15. Discount advertising - opportunity publications. ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------- From aga at dhp.com Sat Jan 18 02:54:26 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 02:54:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Kill filing In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > aga writes: > > > Stop acting so stupid, Michael. > > > > On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > Michael Gurski wrote: > > > > On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: > > > > > At 1:05 pm -0500 1/16/97, Ed Falk wrote: > > > > > > > > And, in my case, Eudora displays each message in the status window as i > > > > > bringing something down from the POP server, and again as it filters. > > > > > So, Toto, you're not in "Cansas" any more. It's called a "Trash" folder > ^^^^^^ > Michael is so stupid, he can't spell "Kansas". That's why he's a "cypher punk". > Is Michael a queer? > > > > I used to have procmail shove messages from certain folks directly to > > > > /dev/null, but then wondered a few days ago if I were missing > > > > anything, so they ended up going to $MAILDIR/.in.garbage. After > > > > looking in there today, I'm glad to say that it's back to /dev/null, > > > > with no regrets. Of course, with the new moderated list, there shouldn't > > > > be too much work for procmail, except for those folks who I personally > > > > feel aren't worth reading... > > > > > > Michael, please tell me and everyone else at cypherpunks just why it > > > is we should give a shit at all what your personal killfile habits > > > are, and whether we should give a shit about whether you think anyone > > > on this list is or isn't worth reading. > > > > > > You and a thousand other clowns seem to think this is cool to do, > > > but you're actually pointing back at yourself with this kind of crap. > > The jerks who describe in detail whom they killfile (like Hettiga) always lie. > Control freaks are really obsessed with the people they claim to "plonk", > and read everything their "enemies" write with great interest. > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > Now if this Michael is a queer, it reinforces the hypothesis: Most problem people on Usenet are queer. From jya at pipeline.com Sat Jan 18 05:58:58 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 05:58:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Repeal the 9th Amendment? Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970118135359.0068ca28@pop.pipeline.com> A challenge on the ignored Ninth Amendment: 1-14-97. Washington Times, p. A14: Why not just repeal the forgotten Ninth Amendment Your Jan. 9 article on the "assisted suicide" issue argued before the U.S. Supreme Court does not mention the Ninth Amendment once ("High court wrestles with assisted suicide"). I was not surprised. Democrats and Republicans consistently ignore the Ninth (and appoint judges who likewise ignore it). The Ninth Amendment states: "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." By ignoring this plain wording, the judiciary displays a reluctance to "create new constitutional rights," an admirable sentiment. Considering that no one seems to take it seriously, perhaps we should consider repealing the "forgotten" Ninth Amendment. After all, it seems to be written in invisible ink on just about every copy of the Bill of Rights owned by journalists and the judiciary. It is never the basis if deciding cases. Instead, it just clutters up the Bill of Rights and causes libertarians to prattle on endlessly about individual rights. I believe it would be healthy for this country to debate repealing the Ninth Amendment. Although I am opposed to the idea of repealing it, I am just as opposed to the idea of ignoring parts of the Bill of Rights. Perhaps my proposed debate will cause some lawyers, journalists, judges and Supreme Court justices to reconsider their present positions. Jim Ray Miami, Fla. Mr. Ray is chairman of the Dade County Libertarian Party Organization. From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sat Jan 18 06:06:59 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 06:06:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > snow writes: > > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > > > > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > > > > > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on > > > > > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily for > > > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the perfect > > > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for it. > > > > > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at them. > > > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage > > > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, > > > so what's the problem? > > > > Cold temps... > > What can naked people do to keep warm??? steal blankets from nearby passenger.. From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Sat Jan 18 06:34:58 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 06:34:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition Message-ID: <85359805820229@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> I was talking to someone recently about the feasibilty of keyword-scanning phone conversations. He thought it was probably still beyond the reach of current technology, I thought it wasn't (I gave a couple of references in a recent paper on government attitudes to crypto which indicate that it's being used right now by a number of governments). Anyway, I've got bits and pieces of one or two papers here which people might find interesting. The first one is: "Digital Circuit Techniques for Speech Analysis" by G.L.Clapper, presented at the AIEE Winter General Meeting in January 1962. I've only got the first two pages of the paper here, I think the full thing might have been published in the IEEE Trans.Communications in about 1963. This paper mentions a "digit recognizer" built at Bell Labs in 1952, and a Japanese voice-operated typewriter using 3,000 transistors and 6,000 diodes. The paper goes on to describe a means of producing a "compact digital code expressing significant qualities of speech in a form suitable for machine utilization". This was in 1962! A more recent paper is: "Discrete Utterance Speech Recognition without Time Alignment", John Shore and David Burton, IEEE Trans.Information Theory, Vol.29, No.4 (July 1983), p.473. This generates a feature vector every 10-30ms from input speech which is compared to pre-generated reference sequences. It also has references to many other papers covering the same area. Certainly it appears that by the early 1980's it was possible to scan speech for keywords and/or speakers and use this to target the surrounding conversation, and that early work on this had been done since about 1960. This is all from public sources, since certain organisations have a *far* greater interest in this particular area than anyone performing public research it's likely that equivalent classified research was some way ahead of this. Peter. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sat Jan 18 06:39:40 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 06:39:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Repeal the 9th Amendment? (fwd) Message-ID: <199701181446.IAA30422@einstein> Hi, Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 08:53:59 -0500 > From: John Young > Subject: Repeal the 9th Amendment? > > Your Jan. 9 article on the "assisted suicide" issue argued before > the U.S. Supreme Court does not mention the Ninth Amendment once > ("High court wrestles with assisted suicide"). I was not surprised. > Democrats and Republicans consistently ignore the Ninth (and > appoint judges who likewise ignore it). > > The Ninth Amendment states: "The enumeration in the Constitution > of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage > others retained by the people." By ignoring this plain wording, > the judiciary displays a reluctance to "create new constitutional > rights," an admirable sentiment. Considering that no one seems to > take it seriously, perhaps we should consider repealing the > "forgotten" Ninth Amendment. Don't forget the 10th, without the 10th the 9th isn't worth the ink it is written on. The two Amendments are meant to work hand in hand. Any party which mentions one without the other is either attempting an end run or else does not really understand what is being stated in them. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From AaronH4321 at aol.com Sat Jan 18 06:52:04 1997 From: AaronH4321 at aol.com (AaronH4321 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 06:52:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: One time pads and randomness? Message-ID: <970118095118_1012184551@emout17.mail.aol.com> Question: I want to use a one time pad pased crypto system. I understand that the randomness of the pad genorator is key to security(other than lossing the keys). What I want to know is if I use a psuedo-RNG that maybe repeats its self every 1000 characters and use it to only encrypt messagase that are 100's of charaters long, will this be a major security risk? Next question: Say I create a 1 million character one time pad that passes all of the randomness tests. It is "truely random". I place it on two computers. Now when these two computers want to send email computer "A" grabs a chunk of the one time pad starting at a random point and encrypts it. It labels the email with the random starting point and sends it to "B". There "B" moves to the random point and begins decryption. During to process both computers mark that section of the OTP used so that they don't retransmit with it. I realize this has a limited amount of messages before it is used up. But would this be secure? Any suggestions, complaints, big gapping holes I missed? Aaron.... From sandfort at crl.com Sat Jan 18 07:40:32 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 07:40:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <853575672.913152.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sat, 18 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > ...but I must say the list has gone downhill sharply since > the start of the censorship. I guess this a classic case of seeing what you want to see. (Uh, Paul, the moderation experiment HASN'T STARTED YET.) S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From i.am.not.a.number at best.com Sat Jan 18 08:48:12 1997 From: i.am.not.a.number at best.com (i.am.not.a.number at best.com) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 08:48:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks-unedited subscriptions Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970118090523.006ac2fc@best.com> dang! i forgot to change. what's the moderated list being called? which is this one? yikes --- i've been paying attention to somether things. At 08:17 PM 1/17/97 -0800, you wrote: >Total subscribers for: > >Tue 14 Jan: 13 >Wed 15 Jan: 15 >Thu 16 Jan: 13 >Fri 17 Jan: 14 > >Looks like one of two things: >Either nobody wants the unedited list, or, some of the "regular people" >subscribe to the edited list and "flames" list separately, to get both. > > > From tobrien at comet.net Sat Jan 18 08:50:02 1997 From: tobrien at comet.net (T. O'Brien) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 08:50:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <32E02B87.3B9A@comet.net> Your majordomo is malfunctioning. � Unsubscribe� From tobrien at comet.net Sat Jan 18 08:50:30 1997 From: tobrien at comet.net (T. O'Brien) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 08:50:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <32E02BA5.AEE@comet.net> Unsubscribe� From tobrien at comet.net Sat Jan 18 08:50:45 1997 From: tobrien at comet.net (T. O'Brien) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 08:50:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <32E02BB5.1874@comet.net> Unsubscribe� From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 18 08:54:48 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 08:54:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jewish English: Hebonics In-Reply-To: <199701172152.QAA21520@mime4.prodigy.com> Message-ID: <199701181651.KAA10265@manifold.algebra.com> See my extensive research on Sovonics also. (look up article titled "Sovonics is equallanguage...", posted to soc.culture.russian.moderated). igor NATHAN MALLAMACE wrote: > > ------- > > http://pages.prodigy.com/VT/ look for the most updated link there... > > > ------- > > If you have already read this, I suggest you PRINT IT this time and > delete it. If you HAVEN'T READ IT YET. Make a copy and post it on > some other mailing list. Read on... Wyane. > > - > > >>Jewish English or "Hebonics" > >> > >>The Encino School Board has declared Jewish English a second > language. > >>Backers of the move say the district is the first in the nation to > >>recognize Hebonics as the language of many of American Jews. Here > are > >>some descriptions of the characteristics of the language, and > samples > >>of phrases in standard English and Jewish English. > >> > >>Samples of Pronunciation Characteristics > >> > >>Jewish English or "Hebonics" hardens consonants at the ends of > words. > >> > >>Thus, "hand" becomes "handt." > >> > >>The letter "W" is always pronounced as if it were a "V". Thus > >>"walking" becomes "valking" > >> > >>"R" sounds are transformed to a guttural utterance that is > virtually > >>impossible to spell in English. It is "ghraining", "algheady" > >> > >> > >>Samples of Idiomatic Characteristics: > >> > >>Questions are always answered with questions: > >> Question: "How do you feel?" > >> Hebonics response: "How should I feel?" > >> > >>The subject is often placed at the end of a sentence after a > pronoun > >>has been used at the beginning: "She dances beautifully, that girl. > " > >> > >>The sarcastic repetition of words by adding "sh" to the front is > used > >>for emphasis. > >> > >> mountains becomes "shmountains" > >> turtle becomes "shmurtle" > >> > >> > >>Sample Usage Comparisons: > >> > >> Standard English Phrase Hebonics Phrase > >> > >> "He walks slow" - "Like a fly in the ointment he > walks" > >> > >> "You're sexy" - (unknown concept) > >> > >>"Sorry, I do not know - "What do I look like, a clock?" > >> the time" > >> > >> "I hope things turn - "You should BE so lucky" > >> out for the best" > >> > >>"Anything can happen" - "It is never so bad, it can't get > worse" > > > Interesting? > Sorry, I wasn't the one who wrote this.. It's just interesting to me. > > Nathan > - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 09:14:59 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 09:14:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition In-Reply-To: <85359805820229@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> Message-ID: <32E104FF.422B@gte.net> pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz wrote: > I was talking to someone recently about the feasibilty of keyword-scanning > phone conversations. He thought it was probably still beyond the reach of > current technology, I thought it wasn't (I gave a couple of references in a > recent paper on government attitudes to crypto which indicate that it's being > used right now by a number of governments). Anyway, I've got bits and pieces > of one or two papers here which people might find interesting. The first one is: > "Digital Circuit Techniques for Speech Analysis" by G.L.Clapper, presented at > the AIEE Winter General Meeting in January 1962. > I've only got the first two pages of the paper here, I think the full thing > might have been published in the IEEE Trans.Communications in about 1963. This > paper mentions a "digit recognizer" built at Bell Labs in 1952, and a Japanese > voice-operated typewriter using 3,000 transistors and 6,000 diodes. The paper > goes on to describe a means of producing a "compact digital code expressing > significant qualities of speech in a form suitable for machine utilization". > This was in 1962! Mae Brussell (daughter of I. Magnin chain founder) and later John Judge have been writing about this and related subjects for more than 20 years now. Check out "The John Judge Reader". From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 09:29:40 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 09:29:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks-unedited subscriptions In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970118090523.006ac2fc@best.com> Message-ID: <32E10868.645A@gte.net> i.am.not.a.number at best.com wrote: > dang! i forgot to change. > what's the moderated list being called? > which is this one? yikes --- i've been paying attention > to somether things. > At 08:17 PM 1/17/97 -0800, you wrote: > >Total subscribers for: This is exactly the reason the jerks (Gilmore, Sandfort) CHANGED THE NAME of the original list, and had the *moderated* list co-opt the original name. This is one of the oldest and most well-used national security tricks in the book. When I asked Gilmore about this, he ignored my question and rambled on about some irrelevant thing. Surprised? From shamrock at netcom.com Sat Jan 18 09:39:30 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 09:39:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970118094021.006f0038@192.100.81.126> At 03:34 AM 1/19/97, pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz wrote: >I was talking to someone recently about the feasibilty of keyword-scanning >phone conversations. He thought it was probably still beyond the reach of >current technology, I thought it wasn't. I once met a fellow who's company makes high performance key word scanning and speaker recognition products for use by governmental entities in analyzing voice communications. Unfortunately, I lost his business card. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 18 10:17:01 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:17:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <32E02BA5.AEE@comet.net> Message-ID: <199701181810.MAA10982@manifold.algebra.com> T. O'Brien wrote: > ------------438F2CA70B04 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii > > > >
Unsubscribe 
> > > > ------------438F2CA70B04-- > Here's a shell script that i wrote to help people like Prof. OBrien. #!/bin/sh if [ "x$1" = "x" ] ; then echo Usage: $0 email 1>&2 exit 1 fi /usr/sbin/sendmail -f $1 majordomo at toad.com << __EOB__ Subject: unsubscribe From: $1 To: majordomo at toad.com unsubscribe cypherpunks __EOB__ From blake at bcdev.com Sat Jan 18 10:31:35 1997 From: blake at bcdev.com (Blake Coverett) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:31:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: One time pads and randomness? Message-ID: <01BC0543.DBB9DCF0@bcdev.com> > I want to use a one time pad pased crypto system. I understand that the > randomness of the pad genorator is key to security(other than lossing the > keys). What I want to know is if I use a psuedo-RNG that maybe repeats its > self every 1000 characters and use it to only encrypt messagase that are > 100's of charaters long, will this be a major security risk? I'm afraid you've fallen into one of the standard traps. A PRNG can *not* make a OTP no matter how you use it. The total amount of entropy in a PRNG is the amount of entropy in the seed you use to key it. All the other bits are directly derived from that seed. A true OTP is completely secure from an information-theory point of view because every byte has a full eight bits of entropy. A PRNG can never have this. Having said all this, it is possible to make a good cipher from a PRNG. RC4, for example, is exactly that and the variable sized key is the seed for the PRNG. It is however very difficult to come up with a good algorithm for that cryptographically sound PRNG and you would be much further ahead to use an existing one rather that trying to roll your own. > Say I create a 1 million character one time pad that passes all of the > randomness tests. It is "truely random". I place it on two computers. Now > when these two computers want to send email computer "A" grabs a chunk of the > one time pad starting at a random point and encrypts it. It labels the email > with the random starting point and sends it to "B". There "B" moves to the > random point and begins decryption. During to process both computers mark > that section of the OTP used so that they don't retransmit with it. I realize > this has a limited amount of messages before it is used up. But would this be > secure? Any suggestions, complaints, big gapping holes I missed? I don't see anything wrong as such, but there is nothing to be gained either. If your random data is real OTP material there is no need to skip to a random byte within it, just start at the beginning and use it in sequence. If your random data is the output of a PRNG like the above then random starting point doesn't buy you much additional security because the entire set of keying material can be recreated from the seed. It may increase the work-factor of searching for the key, but it also imposes the practical problem of keeping all that keying material secure. More importantly don't confuse statistically random with cryptographically random. Just because a bunch of bits passes all the randomness test you can think of doesn't mean it contains 100% entropy. Consider the digits of an irrational number like sqrt(2) or pi, the digits appear statistically random but they can be recreated from just a tiny bit of knowledge. A good litmus test is to ask yourself if there is any way you can reproduce those bits. If there is, they aren't a one time pad. (Of course even if you can't it doesn't mean they are good. :-) regards, -Blake From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 10:50:25 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:50:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Dan Harmon writes: > Too much free time. A crontab deamon has all the time in the world. > Surf'n the singularity. > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Bovine Remailer wrote: > > > Timothy May's obsessive masturbation has lead to > > advanced degree of blindness and hairy palms. > > > > ___ > > \/ \/ > > |_O O_| Timothy May > > | ^ | > > / UUU \ > > > > --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 10:50:55 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:50:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701180514.XAA00633@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: snow writes: > > snow writes: > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > > >>shudder<< > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on.. > > Rossanne Barr. Nude. > > Sorry to ruin your dinner. It's funny how the same punks who want to scroew their keys and restrict their own free speach by moderating their mailing list, refuse to fly nekkid for their own protection. I guess Pedro's views aren't representative. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 10:52:05 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:52:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <01BC04D2.80B01D40@s10-pm06.tnstate.campus.mci.net> Message-ID: Internaut writes: > >What does concern me is personal privacy. I don't want people tracking > >my movements or purchasing patterns, so I prefer to use cash or > >pseudonymous debit cards. > > How pseudonymous are debit cards? In practice, a debit card must be tied to a bank account with a valid SS#. You try something suspicious and the IRS will debit the account $500 and/or freeze it. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 10:52:27 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:52:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nurdane Oksas writes: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > snow writes: > > > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > > > > > > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > > > > > > > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothe > > > > > > > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily for > > > > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the perfect > > > > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for it. > > > > > > > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at them. > > > > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage > > > > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, > > > > so what's the problem? > > > > > > Cold temps... > > > > What can naked people do to keep warm??? > > steal blankets from nearby passenger.. I once saw a movie where they had a heroin (or cocaine?) processing lab and everybody was supposed to work naked so it would be hard to steal some of the product. Of course in the movie all the employees were good- looking women (Oksas would have been the big star!). --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 10:52:29 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:52:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <853575672.913152.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk writes: > > > I suppose you want a special censored list where everyone who uses > > > the word "fuck" in relation to your good self or any other member of > > > this list you agree with has their posting cut? > > > > No, I don't want censored anything. "Cypher punks" have degenerated into > > a moderated forum where those who dare criticize His Royal Majesty John > > the Cocksucker and his court are forcibly unsubscribed, while all sorts > > of vile insults directed at John's many "enemies" are encouraged. > > I quite agree, there is something most definitely wrong with this > whole situation, still, at least there are some crypto-relevant > people on the "cryptography" mailing list. cypherpunks still has worthwhile > nuggets on it but I must say the list has gone downhill sharply since > the start of the censorship. I quite agree - a number of people stopped posting in protest when Cocksucker Gilmore unsubscribed me because he didn't like the content of my articles. Of course Paul "brute force attack on one-time pad" Bradley was one of the pro-censorship goons who asked John to "remove" me from the mailing list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 10:52:37 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:52:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Sandy Sandfort writes: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, ^ There's some confusion as to what this 'C' stands for. It stands for "cocksucker", as in "Timmy Cocksucker May" -- not "crypto". Q: How does Moderator Sandfart address a "cypher punks" meating? A: "My fellow cocksuckers!" > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > ...but I must say the list has gone downhill sharply since > > the start of the censorship. > > I guess this a classic case of seeing what you want to see. E.g. there'll be no more "copyright violations" (aka "news spam") on the moderated list. Can anyone suggest an appropriate place for it? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 10:52:41 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 10:52:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks Message-ID: <4Lmq1D13w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Someone wrote to me: >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL >people will have to be filtered. Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D. >I realize that normal people are few and far between in cypher punks. There may be quite a few normal and knowledgeable people left among the subscribers, but most posters are indeed militant homosexual censors who don't care about crypto except to drop a few "kewl" phrases - like Paul Bradley's infamous "brute-force attack on one-time pads". >I am NOT a cypher-punk and I hope that you do not class me as one, I am >merely interested in cryptography and believe it or not I actually pick >up tips every now and again from the list. I'm sure you're not a "cypher punk" - you're both too smart and too straight. :-) A while back I saw an announcement of a "cypher punks" meating where Jim Bell was explicitly disinvited, and I announced that I don't consider myself a "cypher punk". Jim Bell is a pro-censorship asshole, but I will defend his freedom of speech nevertheless. Occasional tidbits of useful information do still appear on this list. >I am against moderation on the list and I aggree that Gilmug is a lying >cocksucker. Please bear in mind that not everyone on the list is a >"jew-hating" faggot with nothing but shit between their ears. I wholeheartedly agree - however anyone who describes himself as a "cypher punk", after John Gilmore's dishonorable actions, probably is. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 18 11:10:59 1997 From: aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com (AIDAS) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:10:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <853575672.913152.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > > I suppose you want a special censored list where everyone who uses > > > the word "fuck" in relation to your good self or any other member of > > > this list you agree with has their posting cut? > > > > No, I don't want censored anything. "Cypher punks" have degenerated into > > a moderated forum where those who dare criticize His Royal Majesty John > > the Cocksucker and his court are forcibly unsubscribed, while all sorts > > of vile insults directed at John's many "enemies" are encouraged. > > I quite agree, there is something most definitely wrong with this > whole situation, still, at least there are some crypto-relevant > people on the "cryptography" mailing list. cypherpunks still has worthwhile > nuggets on it but I must say the list has gone downhill sharply since > the start of the censorship. > > Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Um, Paul? I hate to break it to you, but they're not moderating yet. If they were, we wouldn't get as much slime as we do on the list. Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed with the spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons that can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so forth. So I ask you this: If the moderation isn't yet implemented, then how has it "gone down sharply since the start of the censorship [which hasn't been done yet]?" I just can't wait to see what kind of witty comment Dimitri will have on the first and second paragraphs of my response. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 11:20:14 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:20:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Repeal the 9th Amendment? In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970118135359.0068ca28@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: John Young writes: > Why not just repeal the forgotten Ninth Amendment ... > Mr. Ray is chairman of the Dade County Libertarian Party Organization. This Jim Ray shyster is also a pathological liar and probably a faggot. I hope Sandfart and Gilmore give him AIDS. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 11:20:34 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:20:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nurdane Oksas writes: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > snow writes: > > > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > > > > > > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > > > > > > > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothe > > > > > > > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily for > > > > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the perfect > > > > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for it. > > > > > > > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at them. > > > > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage > > > > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, > > > > so what's the problem? > > > > > > Cold temps... > > > > What can naked people do to keep warm??? > > steal blankets from nearby passenger.. Offer nearby passengers to share the blankets. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 11:21:26 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 11:21:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: Victory Party] In-Reply-To: <32E10439.6B4A@gte.net> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > aga wrote: > > Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:34:37 GMT > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, SB wrote: > > From: J Durbin > > > Forward on the good Dr. Vulis from ne.internet.services. > > > Newsgroups: ne.internet.services, alt.fan.speedbump, alt.god.grubor > > > Steve Subject: Re: Victory Party > > > hannigan at shore.net (Martin Hannigan) wrote: > > >Steve/Grubby/Vulis/Aga: You can come too. Of course. > > > The Cypherpunks mailing list people invited Vulis to come speak > > at one of their CA meetings. They even offered to pay for his airfare > > and lodging, but he was too afraid to show up. > > What a coward, just like Boursy and Grubor. > > > Hey you fucker; you pay my expenses and I will come. > > You get a one hour lecture and one hour of questions and > > answers afterward. Everybody gets frisked for guns at the door, > > since we do not trust some of those cypherpunks. > > Picture the typical cypherpunk (especially Sandfort, who organized the > whole thing): Old, out of shape, ignorant, lonely, perverted, ugly, > etc. etc. Dr. Vulis actually brightened up their "life" for a few > moments, then, when he didn't take the bait for the roast, they felt > rejected, like a love spurned. It's so transparent. It just wasn't worth the time. I found F2F contact with the likes of Hughes and Gilmore pretty boring and unproductive. But if Dr. Grubor wishes to address a Cypherpunks meating, and expose them as a bunch of homosexual censors, I think it would be a neat idea. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 18 12:10:57 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 12:10:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: One time pads and randomness? In-Reply-To: <01BC0543.DBB9DCF0@bcdev.com> Message-ID: <199701182006.OAA00886@manifold.algebra.com> By the way, did anyone try to run "all randomness tests" on a sequence of digits of, say, decimal representation of "e"? igor Blake Coverett wrote: > > > I want to use a one time pad pased crypto system. I understand that the > > randomness of the pad genorator is key to security(other than lossing the > > keys). What I want to know is if I use a psuedo-RNG that maybe repeats its > > self every 1000 characters and use it to only encrypt messagase that are > > 100's of charaters long, will this be a major security risk? > > I'm afraid you've fallen into one of the standard traps. A PRNG can *not* > make a OTP no matter how you use it. > > The total amount of entropy in a PRNG is the amount of entropy in the seed > you use to key it. All the other bits are directly derived from that seed. > > A true OTP is completely secure from an information-theory point of view > because every byte has a full eight bits of entropy. A PRNG can never > have this. > > Having said all this, it is possible to make a good cipher from a PRNG. > RC4, for example, is exactly that and the variable sized key is the > seed for the PRNG. It is however very difficult to come up with a > good algorithm for that cryptographically sound PRNG and you would > be much further ahead to use an existing one rather that trying to > roll your own. > > > Say I create a 1 million character one time pad that passes all of the > > randomness tests. It is "truely random". I place it on two computers. Now > > when these two computers want to send email computer "A" grabs a chunk of the > > one time pad starting at a random point and encrypts it. It labels the email > > with the random starting point and sends it to "B". There "B" moves to the > > random point and begins decryption. During to process both computers mark > > that section of the OTP used so that they don't retransmit with it. I realize > > this has a limited amount of messages before it is used up. But would this be > > secure? Any suggestions, complaints, big gapping holes I missed? > > I don't see anything wrong as such, but there is nothing to be gained either. > If your random data is real OTP material there is no need to skip to a random > byte within it, just start at the beginning and use it in sequence. If your random > data is the output of a PRNG like the above then random starting point doesn't > buy you much additional security because the entire set of keying material can > be recreated from the seed. It may increase the work-factor of searching for > the key, but it also imposes the practical problem of keeping all that keying > material secure. > > More importantly don't confuse statistically random with cryptographically > random. Just because a bunch of bits passes all the randomness test > you can think of doesn't mean it contains 100% entropy. Consider the > digits of an irrational number like sqrt(2) or pi, the digits appear statistically > random but they can be recreated from just a tiny bit of knowledge. > > A good litmus test is to ask yourself if there is any way you can > reproduce those bits. If there is, they aren't a one time pad. > (Of course even if you can't it doesn't mean they are good. :-) > > regards, > -Blake > - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 12:41:15 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 12:41:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks-unedited subscriptions In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970118090523.006ac2fc@best.com> Message-ID: i.am.not.a.number at best.com writes: > dang! i forgot to change. > what's the moderated list being called? > which is this one? yikes --- i've been paying attention > to somether things. This is Sandfart's and Gilmore's trick - substitute a censored list for the unmoderated one, and hope that no one will notice. Also a lot "subscribers" to the original list are not real people, but local redistribution lists, or deamons who post the traffic in local newsgroups or archive it at various repositories. It would be a good little hack to send a 'who' to majorodomo to get the existing subscribers to cypherpunks, coderpunks, and cryptography(@c2), and forge a separate "subscribe cypherpunks-unedited" from each address to majordomo at toad.com. Then let the ones who don't want duplication unsubscribe from the original list (now moderated). If someone wants to pull thos off, but needs technical assistance, please e-mail me offline and I'll explain how to do it. Of course I can't subscribe to the "unedited" list because the lying cocksucker John Gilmore (spit) instructed his Majordomo to play dead when it sees my address. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 12:43:47 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 12:43:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <51Rq1D26w165w@bwalk.dm.com> AIDAS writes: > > Um, Paul? I hate to break it to you, but they're not moderating yet. If > they were, we wouldn't get as much slime as we do on the list. One memorable "censorship" incident occurred when the lying cocksucker John Gilmore (spit) forcibly unsubscribed me from this list because he didn't like the contents of my submissions - or did you forget already? Look up Declan's disgraceful writeup on Netly News archives. At that time most valuable contributors to this list (such as myself) resolved not to contribute crypto-relevant content to a censored forum. > Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed with the > spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons that > can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so forth. Not sure about "all", but someone whose name sounds like AIDS, and who advocates censorship, most likely is one. > So I ask you this: If the moderation isn't yet implemented, then how has > it "gone down sharply since the start of the censorship [which hasn't been > done yet]?" The way Sandfart has gone down on Gilmore or the way Gilmore has gone down on Inman? Or the way "copyright violations" (formerly known as "news spam") will not be sent to a censored forum? > I just can't wait to see what kind of witty comment Dimitri will > have on the first and second paragraphs of my response. You're not worth a witty comment, 'punk. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 18 12:58:47 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 12:58:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Enough is Never Enough -- pro-CDA alliances, from TNNN In-Reply-To: <199701180608.AAA17196@nic.stolaf.edu> Message-ID: <32E15626.78C6@sk.sympatico.ca> Sir Robin of Locksley wrote: > > Donna Rice-Hughes from Enough is Enough says: "It discusses three > > primary areas of our concern: letting the court know the problems on > > the Internet. Adult pornography, indecency, and child porn as well. > Now it's porn, tomorrow it's you saying what > you beleive (that might also be the truth...) > If one is offended by something, don't look! How come Catholicism doesn't get > banned and outlawed? Hell, it offends me... I'm afraid that you are in the minority in your beliefs, at least here on the CypherPunks list. Most CypherPunks believe that we need a higher authority to protect us from things that we don't want to see. Most CypherPunks see that Beneviolent Moderation is a good thing, as was made plain from the discussions on the list in this regard, so I assume that they would not be so hypocritical as to oppose the attempts of others to bring the blessing of Beneviolent Moderation to everyone on the InterNet. I expect the majority of CypherPunks will be more than willing to throw their support behind efforts to remove pornography from the whole InterNet, just as they were eager to remove posts containing 'bad words' from this list. Of course, you must realize that I don't pretend to speak for all CypherPunks subscribers--only for the upright, decent ones, who, like Donna Rice-Hughes, want to live in a safe, filtered world, free from the intrusion of wrong-thinkers. Some of the CypherPunk subscribers seem to favor taking personal responsibility for what they chose to read or not read, but they are just a small, troublesome minority on the list. Donna Rice-Hughes and her crowd are merely late-comers on the moderation scene, trying to emulate the 'good' CypherPunks who finally stood up and said, "Enough is enough." Toto From vznuri at netcom.com Sat Jan 18 13:05:22 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:05:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft Message-ID: <199701182105.NAA13618@netcom10.netcom.com> it seems that microcurrency has still not hit the "big time" yet. or perhaps some people see otherwise. what is the evidence for how far it has penetrated ala DigiCash etc? I haven't seen much myself. I predict that microcurrency will not catch on in a big way until it is integrated with browsers, and when it is, it will be adopted in an insanely large rush like the way the web itself caught on with the GUI (and was mostly comatose before it). I'd like to have seen microcurrency catch on like a brushfire at this point, and was trying to figure out why it hadn't, and focused on the above key aspect. hence, I wonder: WHO WILL BE THE FIRST TO INCORPORATE A MICROCURRENCY FEATURE IN THEIR BROWSER, MICROSOFT OR NETSCAPE? why am I shouting? because I hope that we can create a buzz around this question, to the point that both manufacturers begin to realize how much is at stake in this single little feature. I'd like to see speculation and articles about it in the trade press. let it turn into a hot topic of conversation.. do either MS or Netsacpe have plans to do so right now? I suspect the future of the browser wars will belong to he who does the microcurrency feature. here's how it might work: the browser has an internal piggyback that can be filled up with cash. it has various features that prohibit a charge of greater than some fixed limit of being made, per time, per site etc... also in no case can more money than is currently in the piggy bank be charged. once the charge hits, there is no contesting allowed, because the charge is so low. a little bar on the user interface could indicate how much cash is left. the idea would also be to invent some new html tags that indicate the charge on a link. the charge is incurred when 1/2 of the page is sent (there would be all kinds of hacks in which people could retrieve only part of a page to avoid the charge, hence this limit or some variation thereof). so when I move my mouse over a link in the browser, I see not only its address as with Netscape's, but also some charge that will incur when I hit it. there could be color coding and little graphics for costs also. notice how much crypto really caught on when Netscape incorporated it, and how this action alone did more for the proliferation of crypto in cyberspace, almost, than all prior efforts combined. I think that microcurrency will be unleashed in a very similar way. the system I describe above can be built up pretty easily from existing technology such as DigiCash. pretty much all the major ingredients are available.. it's just a matter of time before some enterprising programmers plug it all together in an easy to use way. (as far as I know the Digicash software is not easily integrated with any browser, am I correct?) by framing the question as I have above, the question is no longer "how should microcurrency be implemented", or "should it be", but "who will be the first to do it?", a nice competitive incentive to the key companies involved. so, Netscape, Microsoft, are either of you listening? do you have any idea how much is riding on this option? are you working on it right now? if not, are you prepared to face the consequences? has anyone heard any rumors about their intention to implement microcurrency? I've long predicted some pretty revolutionary strides in cyberspace that will make all development up to now look pretty sickly and pale, when microcurrency is invented and brought into a trivial-to-use GUI. in a sense it is the the economic system that the whole industry (or even the whole world) has been waiting for ever since its beginning. it will unleash a torrent of frenzied innovation and reorganization beyond what anyone has ever seen or thought possible. p.s. has anyone done a plugin that handles cash in the way I am referring to? this may be a really neat way for third-party developers to cash in on this, but I suspect that it's so crucial that the browser manufacturers will eventually incorporate it themselves. From aga at dhp.com Sat Jan 18 13:26:23 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:26:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: Victory Party] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Dale Thorn writes: > > > aga wrote: > > > Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 13:34:37 GMT > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, SB wrote: > > > From: J Durbin > > > > Forward on the good Dr. Vulis from ne.internet.services. > > > > Newsgroups: ne.internet.services, alt.fan.speedbump, alt.god.grubor > > > > Steve Subject: Re: Victory Party > > > > > hannigan at shore.net (Martin Hannigan) wrote: > > > >Steve/Grubby/Vulis/Aga: You can come too. Of course. > > > > > The Cypherpunks mailing list people invited Vulis to come speak > > > at one of their CA meetings. They even offered to pay for his airfare > > > and lodging, but he was too afraid to show up. > > > What a coward, just like Boursy and Grubor. > > > > > Hey you fucker; you pay my expenses and I will come. > > > You get a one hour lecture and one hour of questions and > > > answers afterward. Everybody gets frisked for guns at the door, > > > since we do not trust some of those cypherpunks. > > > > Picture the typical cypherpunk (especially Sandfort, who organized the > > whole thing): Old, out of shape, ignorant, lonely, perverted, ugly, > > etc. etc. Dr. Vulis actually brightened up their "life" for a few > > moments, then, when he didn't take the bait for the roast, they felt > > rejected, like a love spurned. It's so transparent. > > It just wasn't worth the time. I found F2F contact with the > likes of Hughes and Gilmore pretty boring and unproductive. > > But if Dr. Grubor wishes to address a Cypherpunks meating, > and expose them as a bunch of homosexual censors, I think > it would be a neat idea. > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > They have to pay the transportation for my two assistants also, and one is a big black man so no racial shit. The discussion is limited strictly usenet cypherpunks/fags. And you keep your hands off of my men, too. You queers do not get any hunks to go with this Lecture. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 14:11:22 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:11:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <199701181810.MAA10982@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <12Xq1D35w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > Here's a shell script that i wrote to help people like Prof. OBrien. Igor writes shell scripts. Igor likes girls. Igor knows (some) crypto. Therefore Igor is not a "cypher punk". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From rah at shipwright.com Sat Jan 18 14:29:27 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:29:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: 1997 Mac Crypto Conf registration Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Sender: mac-crypto at thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Vinnie Moscaritolo Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:33:11 -0800 From: Vinnie Moscaritolo To: Multiple recipients of Subject: 1997 Mac Crypto Conf registration -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- hey all; I have posted a registration webpage for the 1997 Mac Crypto Conf at http://www.vmeng.com/mc/conf.html If you plan to give a talk there, I am looking for abtracts by end of Jan thanks Vinnie Moscaritolo http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A - ------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Pretty Safe Mail 1.0 iQCVAwUBMtvcsfMF2+rAU+UdAQFOogP/R1/WmmAi3oEgLsC1il1OKf+7jR9j4L5U tAvhZIB6nyYpuHdP1fZ+/KfyCi4fYDmHIO4wVJo1BfbUtYL0YkIqzw/00JM8zfHR Zm9pcjSo70EDZPuypYyH+t0RlXJZj1eU0KjhAtRGeeWxAhP686wWCvz8hW4f2VfX uiLObXiqXiw= =faEk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From AaronH4321 at aol.com Sat Jan 18 14:38:05 1997 From: AaronH4321 at aol.com (AaronH4321 at aol.com) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:38:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: One time pads, Next question? Message-ID: <970118173710_845991204@emout17.mail.aol.com> Okay, with the intel I have gotten from the responses let me modify and clarify. So, I now know that you can't use a PRNG to create a OTP. If I did have a RNG that could create a "cryptographically" random, million character OTP and I physically loaded the data onto each computer I wanted to communicate with(e.i. group of laptops all loaded at the same location, same time), how cryptographically secure would the data be. I know that physical security would be a nessescary to the system. If I add some type of error checking to make sure someone that knows the plaintext doesn't modify specific characters, an attacker knows what the message is (e.g. "Send $10 to Bob") the message can be altered (to "Send $99 to Bob") even though it is encrypted. So, lets recap. If the keyig material is kept secure, and if the OTP is cryptographically random, and if error checking is implemented then would this be considered a secure(however encumbering it may be) system. Aaron..... From nobody at replay.com Sat Jan 18 14:41:34 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:41:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Concerned about Pretty Safe Mail for Mac Message-ID: <199701182241.XAA29079@basement.replay.com> I'm concerned about the product "Pretty Safe Mail" for the Macintosh, by a company called Highware. I was wondering whether anyone here had tried evaluating it at all. It is a complete PGP implementation (not a front-end). They claim to have licensed some of PRZ's code from PGP. However, as far as I can tell, they are not making any of the source code available. As someone on the comp.security.pgp newsgroups pointed out, writing a wonderful user interface on a PGP trojan horse that either crippled the session key generator or used the session key to leak random portions of secret key primes would be a perfect tactic for a government wishing to penetrate PGP security. With such a great interface, compared to the original PGP, it can't help but become widely used. I realize that without the source code, it's a major hassle, but has anyone looked at Pretty Safe Mail (previously called Safemail) at all for suspicious behavior? For example: 1) non-random session key generation? 2) non-random key pair generation? 3) unnecessary disk access to secret keys? 4) anything else? Any findings, positive or negative, would be appreciated. From azur at netcom.com Sat Jan 18 14:44:50 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 14:44:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: GSM DATA FEATURES GSM is particularly suited for mobile data communications. All GSM base systems support 9.6kbit/s circuit-switched data services, soon many will increase transmission speed up to 28.8kbit/s. A new part of the GSM standard, known as High Speed Circuit Switched Data (HSCSD), is being developed which will boost user capacity up to 64 kbit/s, and higher. Interconnecting this 64 kbit/s wireless capability with public ISDN networks, for example, will give mobile users complete end-to-end digital connectivity with the attendant benefits of very fast set-up times and high link quality. Technically, HSCSD requires a new radio link protocol; a modification of the existing protocol used to provide the GSM voice channel. GSM uses TDMA (Time Division Multiple Access) technology, which divides each 200 kHz carrier into eight timeslots. To provide a single voice channel, one timeslot is used; one timeslot is also used to provide a single 9.6 kbit/s data circuit. However, all eight slots will be used to provide one 64 kbit/s circuit. The main benefit of this approach is that it is designed for the existing GSM infra-structure. There is no need for operators to change their entire network infrastructure in order to implement it. Operators will therefore be able to implement HSCSD in a quick and efficient way, once the specification has been ratified. ENCRYPTED GSM LINKS If the GSM phone includes a data port, as some already do, just connect your laptop, dial your ISP and 'push' the encrypted traffic over that link (e.g., using TCP/IP and PGPfone). REFERENCES If you really want to dive headfirst into GSM, the following is a resource list generated in 1994: @article(rahn, author = {Rahnema, Moe}, title = "Overview of the {GSM} System and Protocol Architecture", journal = {IEEE Communications Magazine}, month = {April}, year = 1993) @incollection(chee, author = {Cheeseman, David}, title = "The pan-{European} cellular mobile radio system", booktitle = {Personal and Mobile Radio Systems}, editor = {R.C.V. Macario}, publisher = {Peter Peregrinus}, address = {London}, year = 1991) @incollection(bals1, author = {Balston, David M.}, title = "The pan-{European} cellular technology", booktitle = {Personal and Mobile Radio Systems}, editor = {R.C.V. Macario}, publisher = {Peter Peregrinus}, address = {London}, year = 1991) @article(moha, author = {Mohan, Seshadri and Jain, Ravi}, title = "Two User Location Strategies for Personal Communication Services", journal = {IEEE Personal Communications}, volume = 1, number = 1, year = 1994) @inproceedings(haug, author = {Haug, Thomas}, title = "Overview of the {GSM} Project", booktitle = {EUROCON 88}, month = {June}, year = 1988) @inproceedings(mall, author = {Mallinder, Bernard J. T.}, title = "Specification Methodology Applied to the {GSM} System", booktitle = {EUROCON 88}, month = {June}, year = 1988) @inproceedings(aude, author = {Audestad, Jan A.}, title = "Network Aspects of the {GSM} System", booktitle = {EUROCON 88}, month = {June}, year = 1988) @incollection(bals2, author = {Balston, D. M.}, title = "The pan-{European} System: {GSM}", booktitle = {Cellular Radio Systems}, editor = {Balston, D. M. and Macario, R.C.V.}, publisher = {Artech House}, address = {Boston}, year = 1993) @incollection(wats, author = {Watson, C.}, title = "Radio Equipment for {GSM}", booktitle = {Cellular Radio Systems}, editor = {Balston, D. M. and Macario, R.C.V.}, publisher = {Artech House}, address = {Boston}, year = 1993) @incollection(harr1, author = {Harris, I.}, title = "Data in the {GSM} Cellular Network", booktitle = {Cellular Radio Systems}, editor = {Balston, D. M. and Macario, R.C.V.}, publisher = {Artech House}, address = {Boston}, year = 1993) @incollection(harr2, author = {Harris, I.}, title = "Facsimile over Cellular Radio", booktitle = {Cellular Radio Systems}, editor = {Balston, D. M. and Macario, R.C.V.}, publisher = {Artech House}, address = {Boston}, year = 1993) @article(dech, author = {D\'echaux, C. and Scheller, R.}, title = "What are {GSM} and {DCS}", journal = {Electrical Communication}, month = {2nd Quarter}, year = 1993) @article(feld, author = {Feldmann, M. and Rissen, J. P.}, title = "{GSM} Network Systems and Overall System Integration", journal = {Electrical Communication}, month = {2nd Quarter}, year = 1993) @article(bezl, author = {Bezler, M. and others}, title = "{GSM} Base Station System", journal = {Electrical Communication}, month = {2nd Quarter}, year = 1993) @article(schm, author = {Schmid, E. H. and K\"ahler, M.}, title = "{GSM} Operation and Maintenance", journal = {Electrical Communication}, month = {2nd Quarter}, year = 1993) @article(lobe, author = {Lobensommer, Hans and Mahner, Helmut}, title = "{GSM} -- a {European} Mobile Radio Standard for the World Market", journal = {Telcom Report International}, volume = 15, number = {3-4}, year = 1992) @article(hube, author = {Huber, Josef--Franz}, title = "Advanced Equipment for an Advanced Network", journal = {Telcom Report International}, volume = 15, number = {3-4}, year = 1992) @book(winc, author = {Winch, Robert G.}, title = "Telecommunication Transmission Systems", publisher = {McGraw-Hill}, address = {New York}, year = 1993) @inproceedings(natv, author = {Natvig, Jon E. and Hansen, Stein and de Brito, Jorge}, title = "Speech Processing in the pan-{European} Digital Mobile Radio System ({GSM}) --- System Overview", booktitle = {IEEE GLOBECOM 1989}, month = {November}, year = 1989) @inproceedings(vary, author = {Vary, P. and others}, title = "Speech Codec for the {European} Mobile Radio System", booktitle = {IEEE GLOBECOM 1989}, month = {November}, year = 1989) @inproceedings(sout, author = {Southcott, C. B. and others}, title = "Voice Control of the pan-{European} Digital Mobile Radio System", booktitle = {IEEE GLOBECOM 1989}, month = {November}, year = 1989) @unpublished(nils, author = {Nilsson, Torbjorn}, title = "Toward a New Era in Mobile Communications", note = {http://193.78.100.33/ (Ericsson WWW server)}) PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear (N7ZEZ) | Internet: azur at netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet, electronic currency and wireless development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler From alano at teleport.com Sat Jan 18 15:04:02 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 15:04:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft In-Reply-To: <199701182105.NAA13618@netcom10.netcom.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > it seems that microcurrency has still not hit the "big time" > yet. or perhaps some people see otherwise. what is the evidence > for how far it has penetrated ala DigiCash etc? I haven't seen > much myself. > > I predict that microcurrency will not catch on in a big way > until it is integrated with browsers, and when it is, it > will be adopted in an insanely large rush like the way > the web itself caught on with the GUI (and was mostly comatose > before it). It will also not catch on until there are better standards involving microcurrency transactions amongst the vendors. It would also help if there was a single interface (or "helper app") for whatever vendor you decided to go with. Currently every vendor of payment schemes has made it proprietary in some way. (At least the ones I have seen.) This means that if the user visits three different web pages, each using a payment scheme from a different vendor, that user has to be signed up with all of those vendors. (Or at least have their helper apps.) I will not even go into the hastles of trying to set it up from the server side. (The last payment scheme I installed (cybercash) was not very well documented. The documentation on the web site contradicted the software with the tar file. (And both were wrong at some point.)) Until these payment schemes are easier to deal with for the web page provider, they will not catch on. (There will also need to be more support for Internet service providers with multiple vendors all on different payment schemes.) Until there is a single standard hammered out, micropayments will still be few and far between. From lucifer at dhp.com Sat Jan 18 15:31:49 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 15:31:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <199701182330.SAA07352@dhp.com> At 7:26 AM 1/18/1997, Sandy Sandfort wrote: >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > >C'punks, > >On Sat, 18 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > >> ...but I must say the list has gone downhill sharply since >> the start of the censorship. > >I guess this a classic case of seeing what you want to see. >(Uh, Paul, the moderation experiment HASN'T STARTED YET.) No, he's got it right. The announcement of the moderation experiment was followed by a decline in interesting threads. "Why is the stock price falling? We only announced nationalization. IT HASN'T STARTED YET." From GJDCPA at aol.com Sat Jan 18 16:16:00 1997 From: GJDCPA at aol.com (GJDCPA at aol.com) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:16:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Announcing On Line Tax Tips Message-ID: <199701190025.RAA06798@pw1.PrairieWeb.COM> Hello,^Morons, January 17, 1997 Subject: Tax Tips and Important Due Date Reminder We are pleased to announce our site at http://www.gjdcpa.com. The purpose of our website is to provide information for the taxpaying public to assist you with your 1996 income tax return preparation. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 18 16:25:50 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:25:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cheap CyberShots In-Reply-To: <199701181645.SAA17382@vesuri.Helsinki.FI> Message-ID: <32E17314.3640@sk.sympatico.ca> In the interests of upgrading the quality of cheap shots in CyberSpace, I thought I would pass along the following as an example of how to 'finesse' a cheap shot. > Shouting Ground Technologies, Inc. is concerned about the increased > abuse of the internet with "spamming". In this instance, we find > ourselves in a dilemma. > * We do not condone any improper use of the internet, including > spamming. > * We respect the right of privacy of individuals, and the right > to conduct lawful business unhindered. ... > In the past few days we've received a lot of complaints about the > inappropriate messages. Several people have demanded that we take > immediate action. A couple were very critical that we did not > cut their internet access immediately. ... > So people are in effect suggesting that we > * Unilaterally violate the terms of their service contract, subjecting > us to liability for their lost business. > * Violate their right to privacy by filtering and reading all of > their e-mail and news traffic. > Presumably we would have the same culpability for all of our clients, > so we'd have to read everybody's e-mail before passing it on. We > suspect that anybody that wants to be treated that way already > has service with Prodigy. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 18 16:26:07 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:26:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Get me off this fucking list, or else.... (fwd) In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970118000831.0065be70@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32E176BB.22BA@sk.sympatico.ca> Bill Stewart wrote: > c) The mail you're sending doesn't have your correct headers on it > (e.g. looks like it's from res at pc43.unidyne.uni.pt instead of > res at unidyne.uni.pt), in which case you may need human help, or Also if you change your username or alias in your emailer, e.g. CoolGuy ---> DumbFucker (Hey! I just 'spammed' myself!) then majordomos seem to sometimes have trouble properly unsubscribing you. I believe that, in theory, they are supposed to be able to do so, as long as your actual mailing address stays the same, but I have found this not always to be the case. And if you have changed email accounts since subscribing, then only the Kenny Houston Psychic Majordomo can properly unsubscribe you. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 18 16:26:09 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:26:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks In-Reply-To: <4Lmq1D13w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <32E17817.2CFE@sk.sympatico.ca> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > most posters are indeed militant homosexual censors > who don't care about crypto except to drop a few "kewl" phrases - like > Paul Bradley's infamous "brute-force attack on one-time pads". I thought it was 'brute-force attack on Maxipads'. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 18 16:26:11 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:26:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <199701181810.MAA10982@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32E1865C.206F@sk.sympatico.ca> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Here's a shell script that i wrote to help people like Prof. OBrien. Igor, I made a few 'improvements' in your script, so that the people who need it most will feel more comfortable with it. > #!/bin/sh > > if [ "x$1" = "x" ] ; then > echo Usage: $0 email 1>&2 > exit 1 > fi > > /usr/sbin/sendmail -f $1 majordomo at toad.com << __EOB__ Subject: unscrivibe > From: $1 > To: majordomo at toad.com > unbriscrive me from that list I joined that sounded cool, dude are you listning, this time, you moroon? how did you ever get to be a major, when you caint even get me off this damn list? are you stoopid? can you even 'spel' stoopid? i bet you don't even know where the key, is, do you? (you didn't answer me when I asked you, is it a secret?) so get me off this dam list or I will be forced to use capitols, next time. > __EOIdiocy__ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 18 16:26:32 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:26:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E17AF8.1FB7@sk.sympatico.ca> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > ...but I must say the list has gone downhill sharply since > > the start of the censorship. > > I guess this a classic case of seeing what you want to see. > (Uh, Paul, the moderation experiment HASN'T STARTED YET.) I think that 'fear' has already started eating away at people's brains. I have found I am getting more crypto- related 'private' email from people who seem to be afraid of being 'seen' talking to me. In terms of 'seeing what you want to see', I have the perfect solution for those who actively seek to do just that. Set your email filter so that you only read your own posts. That way, your world-view will be filled only with smart, witty, intelligent posts. As for 'moderation', I consider it to have started with the forced removal of Dr. DV K from the list, although, of course, others are free to 'wrongly' disagree with me on this. Toto From sandfort at crl.com Sat Jan 18 16:40:30 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:40:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STATS] Cypherpunks-unedited subscriptions In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970118090523.006ac2fc@best.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sat, 18 Jan 1997 i.am.not.a.number at best.com wrote: > dang! i forgot to change. > what's the moderated list being called? Cypherpunks. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From sandfort at crl.com Sat Jan 18 16:42:13 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:42:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > In practice, a debit card must be tied to a bank account with a valid SS#. > You try something suspicious and the IRS will debit the account $500 and/or > freeze it. Not if it's a foreign bank account. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From hal at rain.org Sat Jan 18 16:57:14 1997 From: hal at rain.org (Hal Finney) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:57:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft Message-ID: <199701182228.OAA00244@crypt.hfinney.com> From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" > I predict that microcurrency will not catch on in a big way > until it is integrated with browsers, and when it is, it > will be adopted in an insanely large rush like the way > the web itself caught on with the GUI (and was mostly comatose > before it). > [...] > notice how much crypto really caught on when Netscape > incorporated it, and how this action alone did more for > the proliferation of crypto in cyberspace, almost, than > all prior efforts combined. I think that microcurrency > will be unleashed in a very similar way. I assume you are referring to secure web connections via SSL in talking about crypto. In that case there was a very strong pent up demand for the service. Customers were afraid to send credit card numbers and other personal information across the web. Sellers were pressuring the net server companies to do something to quell these concerns so on-line selling could succeed. Netscape did it, and in the grand tradition of the net, implementation beat design and SSL defeated SHTTP. In its early versions SSL had a lot of problems but it was a good enough solution for what it needed to be. The question is whether there is similar market demand for pay per view web pages. Do web service operators think they can offer value added services which will motivate customers to click through the for-pay link? Maybe porn would be a good initial market. There are so many sites where you've got to sign up ahead of time for $20 or so for a month's membership. This is a considerable barrier. But if you could just take a peek for $.50 there would be a lot of people interested. Porn is what started the VCR market before it later "went respectable", so maybe the same thing could happen here. I know that a lot of the initial vendors with First Virtual were selling racy pictures, although I think the company has taken steps to reduce their association with that market. This is not exactly the microcurrency that Vladimir is talking about but it would be a good model for integrating some payment system with a browser and it could serve as the foundation for other for-pay pages with lower fees. There is also the issue of sellers learning to use the various payment systems which are out there. Here again if Netscape and Microsoft would just pick one then everyone could standardize on it, which would increase acceptance a great deal. Ecash as it is implemented now has the problem that the customer has to open a special bank account. What you need is a payment system where you can use your existing VISA card and withdraw cash against it into your electronic wallet. This is pretty close to the FV model but their payment system is somewhat clumsy. I haven't followed the electronic payment market closely for the last couple of years. Are there any payment systems which look like good candidates for integration with browsers? Hal From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 16:58:18 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:58:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: <4Lmq1D13w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <32E16634.3BC6@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Someone wrote to me: > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL > >people will have to be filtered. > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D. Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship? In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to have two accounts? From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 16:58:27 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:58:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E17060.542C@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > snow writes: > > > > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > I once saw a movie where they had a heroin (or cocaine?) processing lab > and everybody was supposed to work naked so it would be hard to steal > some of the product. Of course in the movie all the employees were good- > looking women (Oksas would have been the big star!). When you have the resources to run a coke lab, your employees *can* be all good-looking women [hee hee]. So, to avoid the ugly-naked passenger syndrome, stick mainly to business flights in certain areas, or flights to exclusive resorts, etc. From aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 18 16:58:29 1997 From: aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com (AIDAS) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:58:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <51Rq1D26w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > At that time most valuable contributors to this list (such as myself) > resolved not to contribute crypto-relevant content to a censored forum. A decision to which you have definately stuck. > > Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed with the > > spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons that > > can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so forth. > > Not sure about "all", but someone whose name sounds like AIDS, and who > advocates censorship, most likely is one. Non sequitor. > > So I ask you this: If the moderation isn't yet implemented, then how has > > it "gone down sharply since the start of the censorship [which hasn't been > > done yet]?" > > The way Sandfart has gone down on Gilmore or the way Gilmore has gone > down on Inman? Or the way "copyright violations" (formerly known as > "news spam") will not be sent to a censored forum? Non sequitor. > > I just can't wait to see what kind of witty comment Dimitri will > > have on the first and second paragraphs of my response. > > You're not worth a witty comment, 'punk. Or you're not capable of providing one. I think you reached your wit's end a long time past. From cfpinfo at well.com Sat Jan 18 16:59:04 1997 From: cfpinfo at well.com (Bruce Koball) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 16:59:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: CFP'97 Message-ID: <199701190058.QAA07803@well.com> The Seventh Conference on Computers, Freedom, and Privacy March 11-14, 1997 San Francisco Airport Hyatt Regency; Burlingame, California CFP'97 : Commerce & Community CFP'97 will assemble experts, advocates, and interested people from a broad spectrum of disciplines and backgrounds in a balanced public forum to address the impact of new technologies on society. This year's theme addresses two of the main drivers of social and technological transformation. How is private enterprise changing cyberspace? How are traditional and virtual communities reacting? Topics in the wide-ranging main track program will include: PERSPECTIVES ON CONTROVERSIAL SPEECH THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE NET GOVERNMENTAL & SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS OF DIGITAL MONEY INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON CRYPTOGRAPHY CYPHERPUNKS & CYBERCOPS REGULATION OF ISPs SPAMMING INFOWAR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND INFO-PROPERTY THE 1996 ELECTIONS: CREATING A NEW DEMOCRACY THE COMING COLLAPSE OF THE NET CFP'97 will feature parallel-track lunchtime workshops during the main conference on topics including: THE CASE AGAINST PRIVACY HOW A SKIPTRACER OPERATES CYBERBANKING HOW THE ARCHITECTURE REGULATES RIGHTS IN AVATAR CYBERSPACE NATIONAL I.D. CARDS PUBLIC KEY INFRASTRUCTURES EUROPEAN IP LAW SEXUAL HARASSMENT IN CYBERSPACE VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES DOMAIN NAMES ARCHIVES, INDEXES & PRIVACY GOVERNMENT REGULATION OF ECASH CRYPTO AND THE 1st AMENDMENT The conference will also offer a number of in-depth tutorials on subjects including: * The Economics of the Internet * Regulation of Internet Service Providers * The Latest in Cryptography * The Constitution in Cyberspace * Info War: The Day After * Personal Information and Advertising on the Net * Transborder Data Flows and the Coming European Union * Intellectual Property Rights on the Net: A Primer INFORMATION A complete conference brochure and registration information are available on our web site at: http://www.cfp.org For an ASCII version of the conference brochure and registration information, send email to: cfpinfo at cfp.org From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Sat Jan 18 17:29:38 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 17:29:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mondex Message-ID: <199701190129.SAA03781@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Warning: if you fuck a Tim Mayflower in the ass, a tapeworm might bite your penis. /// (0 0) ____ooO_(_)_Ooo__ Tim Mayflower From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 18 17:58:58 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 17:58:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <199701182330.SAA07352@dhp.com> Message-ID: <199701190154.TAA04181@manifold.algebra.com> Anonymous wrote: > > No, he's got it right. The announcement of the moderation experiment > was followed by a decline in interesting threads. This is actually inevitable. When people feel controlled, they do not come up with as many interesting ideas. This is a cost of moderation. Whether it does or does not outweigh the benefits (like some people not being fired) is a good question. Some other fora, such as alt.pagan, were so drowned in trolls that they simply could not conduct any meaningful discussions. For them, the benefit of moderation was creation of a place to talk. What is important for freedom of speech is not the presence of "closed" places like moderated cypherpunks, but the presence of "open" places like cypherpunks-unedited. I'd probably subscribe to it, as long as its level of noise is tolerable. The interesting thing that moderators will soon discover is that competition between the moderated and the unedited list would lead to so substantial improvement of the unedited list, that lots of people will not feel a need for any moderation and will unsubscribe from the moderated list and subscribe to the unmoderated one. Sandy & Co should not view it as their failure, but rather as their success. What they want, hopefully, is not to be control freaks, but to make readers better off. (and no one gets any worse off against their will) - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 18:12:50 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:12:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Enough is Never Enough -- pro-CDA alliances, from TNNN In-Reply-To: <199701180608.AAA17196@nic.stolaf.edu> Message-ID: <32E180DC.1150@gte.net> Toto wrote: > Sir Robin of Locksley wrote: > > > Donna Rice-Hughes from Enough is Enough says: "It discusses > > > three primary areas of our concern: letting the court know the > > > problems on the Internet. Adult pornography, indecency, and > > > child porn as well. > > Now it's porn, tomorrow it's you saying what you beleive (that > > might also be the truth...) If one is offended by something, > > don't look! How come Catholicism doesn't get banned and outlawed? > > Hell, it offends me... I didn't see the question anywhere, so I'm asking: This Donna Rice-Hughes couldn't possibly be the Donna Rice who sat on Gary Hart's lap for the famous picture, could she? From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 18 18:14:45 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:14:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <32E17060.542C@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701190210.UAA04384@manifold.algebra.com> Prof. Dale Thorn wrote: > When you have the resources to run a coke lab, your employees *can* > be all good-looking women [hee hee]. So, to avoid the ugly-naked > passenger syndrome, stick mainly to business flights in certain areas, > or flights to exclusive resorts, etc. > Dale, Do not forget that it is possible to have good looking women w/o the resources needed for a coke lab. In fact, totally different resources are important. - Igor. Literature: 1. Rzhevsky, Poruchik, Selected Works. From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 18 18:18:51 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:18:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: <32E16634.3BC6@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701190213.UAA04414@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Someone wrote to me: > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL > > >people will have to be filtered. > > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D. > > Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying > now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. > > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his > attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to > is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship? > > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > have two accounts? > it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain corrections) on these two directories. diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another. take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation does not screw you up). thats it - Igor. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 18 18:20:47 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 18:20:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E19F4B.28A0@sk.sympatico.ca> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > In practice, a debit card must be tied to a bank account with a valid SS#. > > You try something suspicious and the IRS will debit the account $500 and/or > > freeze it. > > Not if it's a foreign bank account. Sandy, This is not intended as a flame, but I think one of us is crazy here (and I'm getting weekend passes from the 'home', so it can't be me). I am finding it hard to understand how the same people who seemed dedicated to silencing Dr. DV K on this list can then turn around and 'correct' him, or 'add to' his comments, or 'one-up' him in the insult department. It certainly lends fuel to his claim that moderation will be merely a one-way censorship process, as did the plethora of comments (from 'purported' adults), as the espoused date of the beginning of moderation drew near, whereupon various missives were launched by the 'righteous', taking 'parting shots' at those whom they assumed would be relegated to the CypherPunks Flame Camps. I have no quarrel with whatever is done in regard to this list, since it is essentially a private list, but I am rather mystified at the seemingly self-delusional aspects of instituting this nebulous moderation process. Toto From sandfort at crl.com Sat Jan 18 20:25:24 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:25:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E19F4B.28A0@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > I am finding it hard to understand how the same people who > seemed dedicated to silencing Dr. DV K on this list can > then turn around and 'correct' him, or 'add to' his comments, > or 'one-up' him in the insult department. Correcting is not an insult. His statement was incorrect or incomplete. I corrected it. His comment was on topic, though in error. My correction was on topic. He was not "silenced" in any way. Toto's proposition, therefore, does not make sense to me. Contrary to several peoples erroneous assumptions, there will be no flaming--of anyone--on the moderated list. When moderation is under weigh, I will do nothing to restrain flaming on the flame and unedited lists. Toto's prejudice (in the literal sense of the word, i.e., "to pre-judge") is showing. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From sandfort at crl.com Sat Jan 18 20:25:36 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:25:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <199701190154.TAA04181@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sat, 18 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > The interesting thing that moderators will soon discover is that > competition between the moderated and the unedited list would lead > to so substantial improvement of the unedited list, that lots of > people will not feel a need for any moderation and will unsubscribe from > the moderated list and subscribe to the unmoderated one. > > Sandy & Co should not view it as their failure, but rather as their > success. What they want, hopefully, is not to be control freaks, but > to make readers better off. (and no one gets any worse off against > their will) Absofuckinglutely. Thanks for shinning some light on the issue. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 20:30:16 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:30:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: AIDAS writes: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > At that time most valuable contributors to this list (such as myself) > > resolved not to contribute crypto-relevant content to a censored forum. > > A decision to which you have definately stuck. Thank you - and I urge others to follow my example. > > > Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed with the > > > spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons that > > > can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so forth. > > > > Not sure about "all", but someone whose name sounds like AIDS, and who > > advocates censorship, most likely is one. > > Non sequitor. ^ Do "cypher punks" use lousy spelling as a kind of "poor fag's crypto"? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From reece at taz.nceye.net Sat Jan 18 20:34:30 1997 From: reece at taz.nceye.net (Bryan Reece) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:34:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: <199701190213.UAA04414@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <19970119043828.28200.qmail@taz.nceye.net> Delivered-To: reece-cpunks at taz.nceye.net Delivered-To: reece at taz.nceye.net Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:13:00 -0600 (CST) Cc: dlv at bwalk.dm.com, cypherpunks at toad.com, freedom-knights at jetcafe.org Reply-To: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov) From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) X-No-Archive: yes Organization: Bool Sheet Software X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME7] Content-Type: text Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Precedence: bulk Dale Thorn wrote: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Someone wrote to me: > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL > > >people will have to be filtered. > > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D. > > Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying > now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. > > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his > attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to > is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship? > > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > have two accounts? > it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain corrections) on these two directories. diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another. take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation does not screw you up). thats it If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet). From Elisabeth at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 18 20:47:03 1997 From: Elisabeth at ix.netcom.com (Elisabeth at ix.netcom.com) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:47:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Global Home-based Business Message-ID: <199701190418.UAA11276@dfw-ix1.ix.netcom.com> This message is being brought to you by EMAIL BLASTER 2.0 software. If you would like a FREE copy of this software or any of our other HOT programs ABSOLTELY FREE call our FAX ON DEMAND number at 213-960-7822. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ One of the World's leading companies in Personal Care and Health products, has gone on-line. The company is doing business in the USA, Canada, Mexico, Europe, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, Taiwan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and soon will open in South America. If you are interested in a Home-based business opportunity, which offers: A company with a proven track record A huge and expanding market Unique and consumable goods Ability to create leverage Worldwide market......... you should visit the following page: http://www.intelmkt.com/galonso We are one of the fastest growing organizations distributing these products worldwide. Our members are Doctors, Engineers, Teachers, Professionals, and motivated individuals with many different backgrounds who have in common the interest and desire of building a very profitable business in their spare time. Thank you for your time. Elisabeth Alonso P.S. This message will be sent only once. You are not on any mailing list. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 18 21:00:21 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:00:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701190210.UAA04384@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <5ZHR1D53w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > Prof. Dale Thorn wrote: > > When you have the resources to run a coke lab, your employees *can* > > be all good-looking women [hee hee]. So, to avoid the ugly-naked > > passenger syndrome, stick mainly to business flights in certain areas, > > or flights to exclusive resorts, etc. > > Do not forget that it is possible to have good looking women w/o the > resources needed for a coke lab. In fact, totally different resources > are important. Time to create "Nudist Airlines" - the most secure airline in the air! --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sat Jan 18 21:04:33 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:04:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > snow writes: > > > > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). > > > > > > > > > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > > > > > > > > > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothe > > > > > > > > > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily for > > > > > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the perfect > > > > > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for it. > > > > > > > > > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at them. > > > > > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage > > > > > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, > > > > > so what's the problem? > > > > > > > > Cold temps... > > > > > > What can naked people do to keep warm??? > > > > steal blankets from nearby passenger.. > > I once saw a movie where they had a heroin (or cocaine?) processing lab > and everybody was supposed to work naked so it would be hard to steal > some of the product. Of course in the movie all the employees were good- > looking women (Oksas would have been the big star!). Thank you for the complement; You've only seen me with clothes :) Would you like to share my blanket? From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 18 21:30:54 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:30:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: <19970119043828.28200.qmail@taz.nceye.net> Message-ID: <199701190526.XAA00327@manifold.algebra.com> Bryan Reece wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Someone wrote to me: > > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can > > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL > > > >people will have to be filtered. > > > > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals > > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's > > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond > > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you > > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture > > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D. > > > > Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of > > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying > > now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't > > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. > > > > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his > > attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the > > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to > > is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered > > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that > > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship? > > > > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > > have two accounts? > > > > it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article > in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain > corrections) on these two directories. > > diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another. > > take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation > does not screw you up). > > thats it > > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet). > a lot, since moderators sleep, eat, go to movies, etc. - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 21:42:36 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:42:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E1841B.37C7@gte.net> AIDAS wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > At that time most valuable contributors to this list (such as myself) > > resolved not to contribute crypto-relevant content to a censored forum. > > A decision to which you have definately stuck. > > > I just can't wait to see what kind of witty comment Dimitri will > > > have on the first and second paragraphs of my response. > > > > You're not worth a witty comment, 'punk. > > Or you're not capable of providing one. I think you reached your wit's end > a long time past. Could AIDAS also be LOGOS (Sandy)? All of these are five characters long. Coincidence? From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 21:42:52 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:42:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <199701190154.TAA04181@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32E186BB.7079@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Anonymous wrote: > What is important for freedom of speech is not the presence of "closed" > places like moderated cypherpunks, but the presence of "open" places > like cypherpunks-unedited. > I'd probably subscribe to it, as long as its level of noise is tolerable. > The interesting thing that moderators will soon discover is that > competition between the moderated and the unedited list would lead > to so substantial improvement of the unedited list, that lots of > people will not feel a need for any moderation and will unsubscribe from > the moderated list and subscribe to the unmoderated one. > Sandy & Co should not view it as their failure, but rather as their > success. What they want, hopefully, is not to be control freaks, but > to make readers better off. (and no one gets any worse off against > their will) All this assumes that Sandfort and Gilmore are real, sincere, and somewhat honest people. Which of course is not at all the case. There is an agenda here, it has a hidden money trail, and the dis- information put out as to the "real" purpose of the moderation should be ignored, at least by intelligent people. "Cypherpunks" who assume Sandfort is doing this out of the goodness of his heart, or that Gilmore is providing a truly "free" service, should get themselves some better drugs. The very first test of credibility they failed was when they *renamed* the original list and co-opted the original name for the edited list. Don't trust 'em. From aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 18 21:48:14 1997 From: aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com (AIDAS) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:48:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <32E1841B.37C7@gte.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Or you're not capable of providing one. I think you reached your wit's end > > a long time past. > > Could AIDAS also be LOGOS (Sandy)? Not last I checked. > All of these are five characters > long. Very perceptive. >Coincidence? Yes. From snow at smoke.suba.com Sat Jan 18 21:57:40 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:57:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701190614.AAA00241@smoke.suba.com> Vulis wrote: > > steal blankets from nearby passenger.. > I once saw a movie where they had a heroin (or cocaine?) processing lab Crack processing lab. Star'd (IIRC) Ice-T as a Cop. From amanda at intercon.com Sat Jan 18 21:59:00 1997 From: amanda at intercon.com (Amanda Walker) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 21:59:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Wow. Message-ID: <199701190558.AAA20187@mail.intercon.com> Well, in the week or two since resubscribing to Cypherpunks, I've seen a trickle of postings about cryptography, security, and privacy, and a flood of insults, harangues, fighting words, and so on. Some of this reads more like a script from a Jerry Falwell TV spot than anything I recognize as "Cypherpunk" traffic. I don't care who's offended whom. I'm not interested in participating in a forum where the supposed topic is submerged underneath a lot of adolescent alpha primate chest-beating. I'm off to look for a mailing list where people are ACTUALLY DISCUSSING CRYPTOGRAPHY AND IMPLEMENTING CRYPTOSYSTEMS. This list may still be called "cypherpunks", but it doesn't have much cypherpunk left in it, as far as I can tell. Disgusted, Amanda Walker Senior Software Engineer InterCon Systems Corporation From snow at smoke.suba.com Sat Jan 18 22:10:50 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 22:10:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: <32E16634.3BC6@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701190627.AAA00288@smoke.suba.com> Mr. Thorn said: > Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying > now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > have two accounts? Subscribe to unfiltered + flames. Anything that shows up twice was "filtered". Subscribe to unfiltered + flames and then filter all mail from flames to a seperate "folder" to check at your leasure. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 22:15:08 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 22:15:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > > I am finding it hard to understand how the same people who > > seemed dedicated to silencing Dr. DV K on this list can > > then turn around and 'correct' him, or 'add to' his comments, > > or 'one-up' him in the insult department. > Correcting is not an insult. His statement was incorrect or > incomplete. I corrected it. His comment was on topic, though > in error. My correction was on topic. He was not "silenced" in > any way. Toto's proposition, therefore, does not make sense to me. > Contrary to several peoples erroneous assumptions, there will be > no flaming--of anyone--on the moderated list. When moderation is > under weigh, I will do nothing to restrain flaming on the flame > and unedited lists. Toto's prejudice (in the literal sense of the > word, i.e., "to pre-judge") is showing. Please don't get the wrong idea, that I'm paranoid or something, but I think I just saw a tiny leak, a miniscule Freudian slip of sorts - Sandy says "I will do nothing to restrain ..... the unedited list...". Do we now have to have occasional assurances that the "unedited" list is not being restrained? I thought that was a given, beyond question of any kind. I thought *all* of the controversy revolved around the edited/censored list (having stole the original list's name), and that everyone understood that the uncensored list was untouchable. But now Sandy is taken to offering reassurances. What's next?? From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 23:40:25 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 23:40:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701190614.AAA00241@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: <32E1CFCB.49DF@gte.net> snow wrote: > Vulis wrote: > > > steal blankets from nearby passenger.. > > I once saw a movie where they had a heroin (or cocaine?) processing lab > Crack processing lab. Star'd (IIRC) Ice-T as a Cop. The other star/badguy, if I remember correctly, was Wesley Snipes. Wes bought one of my text databases at the bookstore in Santa Monica, then found he couldn't run the programs on his Macintosh computer. There is truly no hope. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 23:46:13 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 23:46:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: <199701190627.AAA00288@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: <32E1D130.3F52@gte.net> snow wrote: > Mr. Thorn said: > > Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of > > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying > > now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't > > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. > > > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > > have two accounts? > Subscribe to unfiltered + flames. Anything that shows up twice was "filtered". > Subscribe to unfiltered + flames and then filter all mail from flames > to a seperate "folder" to check at your leasure. I'm already getting multiple copies of messages I can't account for. The frequency and number seem to be random, and I'm not counting forwarded stuff. Take the posts from the most "trusted" people. Subtract out any personal cc's, account for additional lists subscribed to, compare for similar (but not identical) posts, and still the numbers don't add up. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 18 23:58:07 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 23:58:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Enough is Never Enough -- pro-CDA alliances, from TNNN In-Reply-To: <01BC0596.F925F960@bcdev.com> Message-ID: <32E1D3F8.3A33@gte.net> Dale wrote: > > This Donna Rice-Hughes couldn't possibly be the Donna Rice who sat on > > Gary Hart's lap for the famous picture, could she? > But of course... she was emotionally traumatized by the who experience > (or some such line) and is now 'reformed'. The mind boggles. I've gotten several confirmations on this, and no negatives, so.... What I remember is that Hart and Schweiker were on one of the intel committees in the early 1970's, working more-or-less side by side with Frank Church et al, uncovering the real dirty laundry of the CIA and its infiltration of nearly every college and important business and media in the USA. Hart's minor spillage to the press must have pissed someone off, so they got the famous picture with Rice in all the papers, and Hart's presidential bid went right down the toilet. Now this same girl is on the righteous team, like Chuckie Colson? Yeah, I believe it. My you-know-what is starting to pucker up. From roamer at fau.campus.mci.net Sun Jan 19 00:01:19 1997 From: roamer at fau.campus.mci.net (roamer.fau) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 00:01:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: mailing list Message-ID: <32E081C4.3A11@fau.campus.mci.net> Please place me on your mailing list. Thank You, Mark From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Sun Jan 19 00:02:47 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 00:02:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL Message-ID: <19970119064820.11000.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Dear Cypher Punks, I BEG YOU TO HELP ME!!! Is it possible to prove that number 0.1234567891011121314151617181920... iz irrational? Or may be it is rational? Also, another question for math geniuses here: Is it REALLY true that there are real numbers that cannot be generated by any algorithm? Some guy said that since the set of algorithms is countable, but the set of real numbers is more than countable, there must be some numbers for which there is no algorithms that generate them. But I still do not believe him. Also, is it true that the sequence of digits in e is random because the ONLY way to get to the p'th digit is to calculate the p-1'st digits? Also, is it the correct definition of a real number: ``A real number is the class of numbers which can represent the length of an arbitrary line.'' I AM REAL DESPERATE FOR YOUR ASS ISTANCE. From diode at www.diode.com Sun Jan 19 00:06:03 1997 From: diode at www.diode.com (Diode) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 00:06:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet Message Message-ID: <199701190905.BAA13631@www.diode.com> Saw your posting thought you might be interested... If you would like to chat on the Internet with people from all over the world please visit the site you have been hearing about... http://www.aj1.com/lovechat Also be sure to to visit the Online guide to over 10,000 Adult related sites... http://www.diode.com/adultdirect From sandfort at crl.com Sun Jan 19 01:40:57 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 01:40:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Do we now have to have occasional assurances that the "unedited" list > is not being restrained? I thought that was a given, beyond question > of any kind. I thought *all* of the controversy revolved around the > edited/censored list (having stole the original list's name), and that > everyone understood that the uncensored list was untouchable. But now > Sandy is taken to offering reassurances. What's next?? > > Dale, don't be such an ass. If "everyone understood that the uncensored (sic) list was untouchable" then why have you and others continued to challenge that proposition. You have put forward the classic heads-I-win-tails-you-lose logical fallacy. If I say nothing to support the proposition you whine about a "hidden agenda." If I reaffirm my commitment to the plan, you spout pop psychological nonsense of the "the lady doth protest too much variety." Which is it, Dale? You are so transparent. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 19 03:14:25 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 03:14:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E2155C.A65@sk.sympatico.ca> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > Correcting is not an insult. My post did not say it was, and did not suggest that you insulted Dr. DV K in your post. > He was not "silenced" in any way. Toto's proposition, > therefore, does not make sense to me. If being forcefully unsubscribed 'does not count' as an attempt to silence someone, then I suppose that neither does shipping them to a labor camp in Siberia. > Toto's prejudice (in the literal sense of the > word, i.e., "to pre-judge") is showing. If you are going to define the words you are using, then perhaps you should define them a little more specifically and back them up with specifics, rather than use them as out-of-context, vague declarations. Black's Law Dictionary defines 'prejudice' as: A forejudgment; A leaning towards one side of a cause for some reason other than a conviction of its justice. My post did not make a judgement as to the integrity of your (or anyone's) future moderation of this list, but expressed concern in relation to the attitudes toward moderation, based on the postings that have already taken place on this list. (You're toast, punk. / Your end is drawing near, asshole. etc., etc., etc.) Until I see some indication, other than vague assurances, that there is, in fact, some established rational behind the way the moderation process will be implemented, my concerns will remain. As far as figuring out, to everyone's satisfaction, just what constitues a 'flame', good luck, since everyone seems to have a different definition. Vague, unsubstatiated claims of someone's 'prejudice' might be considered by some to be a flame, or simply regarded as 'misjudgement' by others. Personally, I have no problem with someone telling me "You're full of shit.", rather than, "Sir, I believe you are in error." Others, having played less hockey, might have gentler sensibilities. DataETRetch seemed to feel terribly put-upon and personally attacked by various CypherPunks being so brazenly outspoken as to simply ask for some basis of verification for the outlandish claims they were making for their software. Their representative openly accused the CypherPunks of 'flaming' him for raising valid concerns about the technical nature of their software. There certainly seem to be more than a few people who have faith in your capacity to be a decent moderator, and I see no great reason to disagree with them, but it bothers me that you would take my statement of my concerns, and my reasons behind them, to be a personally biased pre-judgement of your integrity. I find it bothersome that some of the self-proclaimed 'upstanding' members of the CypherPunks list have responded to my attacks on their 'logic' with 'personal' attacks on, and insults toward, myself. At the same time, I would rather hear what they have to say, and be able to make my own personal judgement as to whether the problem is mine, or theirs, than to be 'protected' from them. I hope that your efforts towards decreasing the list's level of blatantly offensive crapola will not lead towards reducing the CypherPunks' tendencies to be outspokenly strong in their convictions. Cryptography is going to be an increasingly important issue in all areas of life in our electronically-global future, and without serious discussion of the issues that go hand-in-hand with its development, then the 'numbers' and the technology behind them have little real meaning. Toto From jcr at idiom.com Sun Jan 19 03:31:49 1997 From: jcr at idiom.com (John C. Randolph) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 03:31:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Donna Rice, etc. Message-ID: <199701191131.DAA29955@idiom.com> Toto wrote: > Sir Robin of Locksley wrote: > > > Donna Rice-Hughes from Enough is Enough says: "It discusses > > > three primary areas of our concern: letting the court know the > > > problems on the Internet. Adult pornography, indecency, and > > > child porn as well. > > Now it's porn, tomorrow it's you saying what you beleive (that > > might also be the truth...) If one is offended by something, > > don't look! How come Catholicism doesn't get banned and outlawed? > > Hell, it offends me... >I didn't see the question anywhere, so I'm asking: >This Donna Rice-Hughes couldn't possibly be the Donna Rice who sat on >Gary Hart's lap for the famous picture, could she? Yes, it's the very same Bimbo who scuttled Gary Hart's campaign, and then parlayed that notoriety into a modeling contract.. Mind you, I'm all for Bimbos knocking dipshit hypocrites out of the running for a presidential nomination, but the idea of having this "party girl" try to police the content of my beloved internet really pisses me off. She made money in the past wiggling her tits for the camera, and again, I'm all for bimbos making money wiggling for cameras, but when she tries to tell me what I should or shouldn't be able to see, my reply *must* be: Fuck you, you hypocritical, ignorant, little slut. I am also going to take issue with her trysting with a married man. I wish Hart's wife had verbally beaten the living shit out of her. -jcr Obligatory Crypto Policy reference: Why couldn't she have scuttled Feurher Clinton's career, instead? From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Sun Jan 19 05:31:18 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 05:31:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: <853575672.913148.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <199701161239.MAA00283@server.test.net> Paul Bradley writes: > Adam Back writes: > > encryption system. Anyone know how modular the design is, for instance if > > it would be possible to give a GSM A5 based cell phone a crypto upgrade > > using published electrical interface standards? (I want one of those - > > Nokia phone with IDEA + 2048 bit RSA signatures + DH forward secrecy!) > > My guess is that this would not work. > > Does anyone know if when you use a GSM phone to call a landline > number the cellphone<-> base station trafic is encrypted??? > > my guess is that only when you call GSM to GSM is the trafic > encrypted and even then I would imagine each phone agrees a key with > the base station for the network then the trafic between the base > stations is cleartext. The only way, if this were the case, would be > to write the code so that the headers and other network information > like SIM ID number etc... were cleartext or just A5 to the network as > standard and only the actual speech data was encrypted under > something stronger. This approach could become troublesome, > if I have time I`ll get hold of some GSM specifications and look at > it more closely. All you've got to do is super-encrypt the IDEA encrypted traffic with the standard A5 hardware - the base station won't notice the difference. Schematically, standard GSM hardware: +-------------+ +-----------+ | compress/ | +------------+ <-->| A/D & D/A |<-->| decompress |<------>| A5 enc/dec |<--> +-----------+ +-------------+ +------------+ schematically, adding a super-encryption layer: +-------------+ +-----------+ | compress/ | +------------+ <-->| A/D & D/A |<-->| decompress |<-| |->| A5 enc/dec |<--> +-----------+ +-------------+ | | +------------+ v v +-------------+ | IDEA/RSA/DH | +-------------+ So the question was (addressed to anyone who knows anything about the electrical interfaces used in GSM) about standardisation of electrical interfaces -- for instace if the electrical interface between the voice compression/decompression IC and A5 IC were standardised, you could build a replacement voice codec IC which performed IDEA/RSA/DH as well as standard the voice codec function, and had the same pin out. This IC would allow a wide range of GSM phones to be upgraded with minimal effort on the part of GSM phone manufacturers -- or even desoldered and replaced by end users, or crypto hardware company. However, there are several reasons why it would probably require proper integration into a GSM phone design: - keys tied to phone number memories - display of signature result on screen - PIN for phone's RSA signature keys - face to face key exchange - key revocation - generating new keys Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Someone wrote to me: > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL > > >people will have to be filtered. > > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D. > > Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying > now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. > > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his > attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to > is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship? > > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > have two accounts? > > You can not. You need another account. I wrote to Steve Case about this censorship problem, and I am waiting for him to respond. Do you want another account to get the censored list at? From aga at dhp.com Sun Jan 19 06:08:27 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 06:08:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: <19970119043828.28200.qmail@taz.nceye.net> Message-ID: On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote: > Delivered-To: reece-cpunks at taz.nceye.net > Delivered-To: reece at taz.nceye.net > Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 20:13:00 -0600 (CST) > Cc: dlv at bwalk.dm.com, cypherpunks at toad.com, freedom-knights at jetcafe.org > Reply-To: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov) > From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) > X-No-Archive: yes > Organization: Bool Sheet Software > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24 ME7] > Content-Type: text > Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com > Precedence: bulk > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Someone wrote to me: > > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can > > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL > > > >people will have to be filtered. > > > > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals > > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's > > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond > > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you > > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture > > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D. > > > > Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of > > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying > > now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't > > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. > > > > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his > > attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the > > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to > > is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered > > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that > > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship? > > > > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > > have two accounts? > > > > it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article > in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain > corrections) on these two directories. > > diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another. > > take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation > does not screw you up). > > thats it > > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet). > Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right. And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS at each location, so you can write some batch programs to save you the manual wwork. From aga at dhp.com Sun Jan 19 06:10:42 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 06:10:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: <199701190526.XAA00327@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Bryan Reece wrote: > > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Someone wrote to me: > > > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can > > > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL > > > > >people will have to be filtered. > > > > > > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals > > > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's > > > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond > > > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you > > > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture > > > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D. > > > > > > Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of > > > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying > > > now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't > > > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. > > > > > > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his > > > attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the > > > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to > > > is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered > > > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that > > > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship? > > > > > > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > > > have two accounts? > > > > > > > it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article > > in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain > > corrections) on these two directories. > > > > diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another. > > > > take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation > > does not screw you up). > > > > thats it > > > > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with > > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all > > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the > > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet). > > > > a lot, since moderators sleep, eat, go to movies, etc. > > - Igor. > But x should be no more than 24. From jya at pipeline.com Sun Jan 19 06:50:17 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 06:50:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: INV_ade Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970119144516.006792bc@pop.pipeline.com> 1-19-97. NYP: "At the New Frontier of Eavesdropping." Markoff. Many phone companies are now rushing to introduce new digital services that provide better sound quality. But when security standards were set for the new systems five years ago, technical experts from the Government discouraged the phone companies from building in coding systems that would be difficult to break. Moreover, the phone companies themselves decided that real privacy was not a major issue. "Time to market turned out to be more important than real security," said John Gilmore. Indeed, in recent weeks the supposedly secret formula for scrambling digital wireless phone calls was posted to an Internet mailing list. That virtually insures that hackers will soon create a way to modify scanners like the one the Martins used, making digital calls just as vulnerable as analog calls are today. "There's a period in which privacy prevails over surveillance, but it's never for very long." ----- INV_ade From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 19 08:00:23 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:00:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nurdane Oksas writes: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > snow writes: > > > > > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with cl > > > > > > > > > > > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily fo > > > > > > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the per > > > > > > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for > > > > > > > > > > > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at t > > > > > > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage > > > > > > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, > > > > > > so what's the problem? > > > > > > > > > > Cold temps... > > > > > > > > What can naked people do to keep warm??? > > > > > > steal blankets from nearby passenger.. > > > > I once saw a movie where they had a heroin (or cocaine?) processing lab > > and everybody was supposed to work naked so it would be hard to steal > > some of the product. Of course in the movie all the employees were good- > > looking women (Oksas would have been the big star!). > > Thank you for the complement; You've only seen me with clothes :) I can tell. > Would you like to share my blanket? Sure! A true gentleman (like me) is always ready, willing, and able to share a security blanket with a lady. "Something nekkid's in the air!" --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 08:37:09 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:37:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701190816.CAA00492@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > > > I am finding it hard to understand how the same people who > > > seemed dedicated to silencing Dr. DV K on this list can > > > then turn around and 'correct' him, or 'add to' his comments, > > > or 'one-up' him in the insult department. > > > Correcting is not an insult. His statement was incorrect or > > incomplete. I corrected it. His comment was on topic, though > > in error. My correction was on topic. He was not "silenced" in > > any way. Toto's proposition, therefore, does not make sense to me. > > Contrary to several peoples erroneous assumptions, there will be > > no flaming--of anyone--on the moderated list. When moderation is > > under weigh, I will do nothing to restrain flaming on the flame > > and unedited lists. Toto's prejudice (in the literal sense of the > > word, i.e., "to pre-judge") is showing. > > Please don't get the wrong idea, that I'm paranoid or something, but > I think I just saw a tiny leak, a miniscule Freudian slip of sorts - > Sandy says "I will do nothing to restrain ..... the unedited list...". > > Do we now have to have occasional assurances that the "unedited" list > is not being restrained? I thought that was a given, beyond question > of any kind. I thought *all* of the controversy revolved around the > edited/censored list (having stole the original list's name), and that > everyone understood that the uncensored list was untouchable. But now > Sandy is taken to offering reassurances. What's next?? > I am getting tired now, but here is a proposed solution. You suspect Prof. Sandfort in an intention to edit "unedited" list. You do not trust administrators of toad.com. I hope though that there are people whom you somewhat trust. If you trust me, or someone else, like Prof. Dave Hayes, here's what we can do: I establish a sendmail alias cypherpunks at algebra.com that expands to, say, your address and also cypherpunks at toad.com. You can encourage all people, whom you expect to be censored on the unedited list, to post through cypherpunks at algebra.com. I can even set up a little program that would digitally sign receipts of all messages coming to cypherpunks at algebra.com. You and anyone else can receive such receipts. It means that you, Dale Thorn, in cooperation with other readers but WITHOUT cooperation from toad.com, will be able to see which articles sent through algebra.com finally made it to the unedited list. Not all posters will use such service, but you can expect the "censored" people to do so. If you indeed notice an impropriety, the digitally signed receipts will be your proof that articles were submitted. As long as the other readers trust me (or Dave Hayes, or whoever volunteers), you will have a strong case even without relying on freudian slips. - Igor. From sandfort at crl.com Sun Jan 19 08:40:41 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:40:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E2155C.A65@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > If you are going to define the words you are using, then > perhaps you should define them a little more specifically > and back them up with specifics, rather than use them as > out-of-context, vague declarations. > Black's Law Dictionary defines 'prejudice' as: A forejudgment; > A leaning towards one side of a cause for some reason other > than a conviction of its justice. First, I did not use it as a legal term of art, so a legal dictionary is not appropriate. Second, I see no sustantive difference between "forejudgment" and my shorthand version (pre-judge). Third, I wrote "literal." Examine the etimology of the word for it's literal meaning. It's pretty obvious AND specific [ME.; OFr, /prejudice/ (Fr. /prejudice/); L praejudicium/, from /prae/, before, and /judicium/, a judgment, from /judex/, /judicgis/, a judge.] In other words, to pre-judge. Get it? > As far as figuring out, to everyone's satisfaction, just > what constitues a 'flame', good luck, since everyone seems > to have a different definition. I have no intention nor duty to satisfy everyone. That is not possible. I will use a "reasonable person" test. (I am, by the way, using this in the legal term of art sense.) > Personally, I have no problem with someone telling me "You're > full of shit.", rather than, "Sir, I believe you are in > error." Others, having played less hockey, might have > gentler sensibilities. Other folks on this list seem to have other opinions. That's why there are horse races. I don't like it, but Toto are free to wallow in it if he chooses. > I hope that your efforts towards decreasing the list's level > of blatantly offensive crapola will not lead towards reducing > the CypherPunks' tendencies to be outspokenly strong in their > convictions. Somehow, I don't think that will be a problem, as this debate has demonstrated. > Cryptography is going to be an increasingly important issue > in all areas of life in our electronically-global future, and > without serious discussion of the issues that go hand-in-hand > with its development, then the 'numbers' and the technology > behind them have little real meaning. I totally agree with this not-full-of-shit position. Toto and I, unlike some others, seem to agree on the importance of crypto. We only seem to have a problem with how best to discuss the issues. It's a start. S a n d y P.S. I talked to Gilmore about the holdup in getting started. He has been too busy to get the tech side going, but when he does, (a) everyone will be notifed as to the start date, and the test will still run for an entire month. Until then, it is (sadly) business as usual. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 08:46:59 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:46:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701191643.KAA03069@manifold.algebra.com> aga wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Bryan Reece wrote: > > > > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with > > > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all > > > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the > > > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet). > > > > > > > a lot, since moderators sleep, eat, go to movies, etc. > > > > - Igor. > > > > But x should be no more than 24. > Yeah, 24 is a good ballpark figure. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 08:51:10 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:51:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701191645.KAA03106@manifold.algebra.com> Prof. aga wrote: > > On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote: > > it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article > > in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain > > corrections) on these two directories. > > > > diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another. > > > > take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation > > does not screw you up). > > > > thats it > > > > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with > > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all > > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the > > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet). > > > > Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right. > And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS > at each location, so you can write some batch programs to > save you the manual wwork. > No, one address is enough. You can look at a Unix tool called procmail, which allows filtering of incoming messages. For example, you could completely insulate yourself from, say, follower of clawed albino. - Igor. From ravage at ssz.com Sun Jan 19 09:05:02 1997 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 09:05:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: .1234567891011... is irrational? Message-ID: <199701191701.LAA32650@einstein> Hmmm, irrational means "not expressible as the ratio of two integers" and since the class of integers (I) includes the concept of infinity, .123456789101112131415 = 1234567891011121314... ------------------------ n where n -> infinity Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 19 09:25:11 1997 From: aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com (AIDAS) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 09:25:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed with the > > > > spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons that > > > > can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so forth. > > > > > > Not sure about "all", but someone whose name sounds like AIDS, and who > > > advocates censorship, most likely is one. > > > > Non sequitor. > ^ > Do "cypher punks" use lousy spelling as a kind of "poor fag's crypto"? (For those too stupid to see it except when explicitly denoted) Ah, very strong response indeed. I feel as if shot down in flames, and my mind aches from the slice of your wit. Deliver us, oh Vulis, for we are in need! From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 09:29:24 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 09:29:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E259C9.7B20@gte.net> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Do we now have to have occasional assurances that the "unedited" list > > is not being restrained? I thought that was a given, beyond question > > of any kind. I thought *all* of the controversy revolved around the > > edited/censored list (having stole the original list's name), and that > > everyone understood that the uncensored list was untouchable. But now > > Sandy is taken to offering reassurances. What's next?? > Dale, don't be such an ass. If "everyone understood that the > uncensored (sic) list was untouchable" then why have you and > others continued to challenge that proposition. You have put > forward the classic heads-I-win-tails-you-lose logical fallacy. > If I say nothing to support the proposition you whine about a > "hidden agenda." If I reaffirm my commitment to the plan, you > spout pop psychological nonsense of the "the lady doth protest > too much variety." Which is it, Dale? You are so transparent. Your/Gilmore's *renaming* of the original list, and co-opting of the *original* name for the edited list is prima facie evidence of bad faith, i.e., a transparent attempt to fool the public into accepting that the edited list is the *real, original* list, despite the dis- claimer put forth in the introduction to the new plan (a paragraph that few will read, and much fewer will remember). I'll make you a deal, even though I hold no *real* cards. Set the original name back to the original, unedited list, and vice-versa, and I'll back off of all these complaints, assuming that you don't try something else that impinges on the integrity of the original list. As far as hidden agendas go, the flip side of that coin is that I'm expected to believe that Gilmore is the Mother Teresa of the Internet, or something like that. Personally, I don't care what scam you or he could possibly (hypothetically) be involved in, as long as it doesn't impinge on certain essential liberties and truths, in a way that offends me. If you insist that what you and he are doing is totally non-profit, has nothing to do with government grants or spying, etc., and is purely a personal hobby-type pursuit, well, I don't really believe in the Easter Bunny, and please forgive me for not believing this one. Note that I'm not attacking you purely because I'm alleging (hypothetically) that you have an ulterior motive for the work you're doing on cypherpunks, I'm merely pointing out reasonable speculations which could account for what's happening here. From reece at taz.nceye.net Sun Jan 19 09:37:06 1997 From: reece at taz.nceye.net (Bryan Reece) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 09:37:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <19970119174114.21552.qmail@taz.nceye.net> Delivered-To: reece-cpunks at taz.nceye.net Delivered-To: reece at taz.nceye.net Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 08:52:58 -0500 (EST) From: aga cc: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" , cypherpunks at toad.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Precedence: bulk On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Someone wrote to me: > > >Did you not mean any homo who has ever shaffted Gilmore and Sandy can > > >write what the fuck they like but straight or intelligent or NORMAL > > >people will have to be filtered. > > > Yes, that's precisely how Sandfart's moderation will work. Homosexuals > > like Jason Durbin will continue to post personal attacks on Gilmore's > > many "enemies", but the victims of the libel will not be able to respond > > and refute their lies. The concept of "the best response to speech you > > don't like is more speech" is totally alien to the homosexual subculture > > on the Internet. These control freaks are into censorship and B&D. > > Here's a problem. I don't have "technical" capabilities in the area of > communications software, and I have too full a plate to start studying > now. But, I/we need to monitor the "moderator", to make sure he doesn't > allow people to attack others, then cut the responses. > > If he does this, and he doesn't rectify it when it's called to his > attention, he would need to be punished in some way. One of the > questions I have is, how do I know what's cut when all I subscribe to > is the uncensored list? I do *not* want to subscribe to the filtered > list plus the "flames" list, out of principle. Is this something that > would be forced on me/us in order to monitor the censorship? > > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > have two accounts? > > You can not. You need another account. Not quite true. I'm going to use one account on a host running qmail to find the differences between the lists (one will go to accountname-mod at qmailhost, the other to accountname-raw, and a cron job will do the comparisons every few minutes). If you have an account on a unix box running sendmail, you can have .forward run a program to sort messages out by sender into separate files for normal mail, the raw list, and the moderated list. I wrote to Steve Case about this censorship problem, and I am waiting for him to respond. Do you want another account to get the censored list at? From ravage at ssz.com Sun Jan 19 09:45:51 1997 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 09:45:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Igor@home = Secret Squirrel Message-ID: <199701191752.LAA00157@einstein> Hi all, I am motivated to post this, something I would normaly not do, because of the issue of trust of moderators that has arisen lately. Igor and myself were in a discussion about number theory last nite. We reached a point of impass. Igor made the suggestion that we bring the discussion to cpunks. I requested that we drop the issue and specificaly not bring it to cpunks. My reasoning had several facets. First, the position that I was in is probably wrong. My motivation was to examine the methodology of dis-proof (which I was disappointed with). Also, it is not a serious issue with me and whether my particular view is right or wrong is irrelevant. Cypherpunks is not the place for truly technical discussions (as is apparent with even a cursory glance). Traffic on this list practicaly drowns my ability to filter it and more drivel I (and probably you) don't need. And finaly, the discussion was fine for a Saturday afternoon discussion, I don't have the interest or time to carry it out over days or weeks, I have to work for a living. Igor agreed to drop the issue and not to bring it to the list. However, this morning I find Secret Squirrel posting some questions which are taken practicaly verbatin from my exchange w/ Igor. Seemed like a truly improbable event. Take it for what it's worth. "An appeal to authority is an appeal to a human being just like yourself who does not have your best interests at heart. What makes you believe they are able to resolve your problems better than yourself?" Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From aga at dhp.com Sun Jan 19 09:53:18 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 09:53:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: the clawed albino follower cunt In-Reply-To: <199701191645.KAA03106@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Prof. aga wrote: > > > > On 19 Jan 1997, Bryan Reece wrote: > > > it is easy undex unix, what you have to do is store arriving article > > > in separate directories by message ID and run diff (with certain > > > corrections) on these two directories. > > > > > > diff will print you the files that are in one dir and not in another. > > > > > > take an extraction, and delete too new articles (so that propagation > > > does not screw you up). > > > > > > thats it > > > > > > If you just want the differences and aren't too concerned with > > > timeliness, I'm planning on running a cypherpunks-rejects list containing all > > > the messages that went out the unedited list but didn't show up on the > > > moderated one within x hours (not sure what x should be yet). > > > > > > > Then you must use two separate addresses to do that right. > > And you may want them to both be UNIX or at least the same OS > > at each location, so you can write some batch programs to > > save you the manual wwork. > > > > No, one address is enough. You can look at a Unix tool called procmail, > which allows filtering of incoming messages. For example, you could > completely insulate yourself from, say, follower of clawed albino. > > - Igor. > But I am not the one who needs insulated. I have a nice ISP who does not get intimidated, but there are a dozen other guys out there who the bitch has tried to eliminate access for in the past couple of years, so the bitch is about to get exposed. I have people working who will find out the real name of that cunt in the near future. From sandfort at crl.com Sun Jan 19 10:10:56 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:10:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E259C9.7B20@gte.net> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Your/Gilmore's *renaming* of the original list, and co-opting of the > *original* name for the edited list is prima facie evidence of bad > faith,... Sophist, paranoid nonsense. This one-month test is of a moderated *Cypherpunks* list. So there was no renaming. The unedited list was a gimme for cry babies such as Dale. When the test is complete, things will go back to the previous status if that's what folks want. If not, Cypherpunks will continue as a moderated list (of some sort, further test may be conducted if list members want). > i.e., a transparent attempt to fool the public... (a) If it were transparent, it wouldn't fool anyone, now would it? (b) I've stated it all clear enough so that only the most naive persons could infer an attempt to fool anyone. (c) "The public" has nothing to do with it. This is a private list. > I'll make you a deal, even though I hold no *real* cards. Set the > original name back to the original, unedited list, and vice-versa, > and I'll back off of all these complaints, assuming that you don't > try something else that impinges on the integrity of the original list. Maybe after the test if that's what folks want. In the meantime, hey Dale, knock yourself out. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From tozser at stolaf.edu Sun Jan 19 10:21:07 1997 From: tozser at stolaf.edu (Sir Robin of Locksley) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 10:21:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL Message-ID: <199701191820.MAA24006@nic.stolaf.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Dear Cypher Punks, > >I BEG YOU TO HELP ME!!! > >Is it possible to prove that number 0.1234567891011121314151617181920... >iz irrational? Most definately. All you need to do is prove that the set of this number is uncountable, ergo is irrational. If you have friend who have done math in real analysis they can explain more. > >Or may be it is rational? > >Also, another question for math geniuses here: > >Is it REALLY true that there are real numbers that cannot be generated >by any algorithm? Some guy said that since the set of algorithms is >countable, but the set of real numbers is more than countable, there >must be some numbers for which there is no algorithms that generate them. If you show me an algorythm that calculates the real number TT (=3.14.....) I'll give you a Nobel Prize personally! > >But I still do not believe him. > >Also, is it true that the sequence of digits in e is random because the ONLY way to get to the >p'th digit is to calculate the p-1'st digits? > Exactly! This is called recursive definition. To get the p-th set in the sequence you need to find p-1 first... >Also, is it the correct definition of a real number: > >``A real number is the class of numbers which can represent the length of >an arbitrary line.'' Well, that is not entirely true... The length of any arbitrary line can be any number, rational, natural, etc. Real numbers are the numbers that defy all other categorization (they are not rational, irrational, natural, etc.) They are complex and despite any instinctual perception, there are a lot of them! I don't know if these maed a lot of sense but all of these questions are answered in a good Elementary Real Analysis book. > > >I AM REAL DESPERATE FOR YOUR ASS ISTANCE. Sincerely, Gabe -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAgUBMuJmYqr5aWnB1HshAQH2bwf+O/C0vRosJAclWr9OhYufFtSYnGohHjnA hwbcb6wftvrRES4HyMu9GfCYZanZ37TI4erblofctiJh7RVgFmvJxK0VDbaSth8J Ns0u/c86dw6qSeE8XG+1LBQ9hH8eXJ4Mojnohea4L9IesjfqugZwh6+g/1BXngco wpOnhixj9Xxoh8Bu/N01rNtaCOcDQPziCYWg3iKTIJ0ySP0zZBPoamVq7OYAhXzY +sn5lABFZ81/VQf0Y/7drWnZhBDpJXq7xtbo4NZGkDbQ6ifNaH9AlF9+9vLJn6AS osG5SsS2TmeJLmpi3BxC0k1cNHGHI7+DGazRVMrtCZFFMeeh5RtRgQ== =ZAZJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------- | Gabor K. Tozser | 1500 St. Olaf Ave. | | St. Olaf College | Northfield, MN 55057 | --------------------------------------------------- From ravage at ssz.com Sun Jan 19 11:12:12 1997 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 11:12:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL (fwd) Message-ID: <199701191919.NAA00377@einstein> Hi, Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:20:45 -0600 > From: Sir Robin of Locksley > >Is it possible to prove that number 0.1234567891011121314151617181920... > >iz irrational? > > Most definately. All you need to do is prove that the set of this number is > uncountable, ergo is irrational. If you have friend who have done math in real > analysis they can explain more. irrational means 'not expressible as the ratio of two integers', this does not imply uncountable. Whether 0.12345678910111213... is irrational or not depends on how we choose to define a rational number where the denominator and numerator are both approaching infinity and how quickly those approaches occur. [ What is your definition of infinity/infinity ?] As alluded to before, 0.12345678910111213 = 12345678910111213.... / n (where n = infinity) 0.123456789101112... is certainly countable because by the definition of countable it must be 1-to-1 with the counting numbers (ie non-negative integers), which this one clearly is since it contains each positive non-zero integer (ie the set of numbers required to produce the number are clearly less, 1 less to be exact, than the counting numbers). > If you show me an algorythm that calculates the real number TT (=3.14.....) > I'll give you a Nobel Prize personally! c=2pi*r so, pi = c/2r You have a algorithm (ie recipe) for determining pi to whatever degree of precision you are willing to go to. If you insist on using a digital computer (whose domain of operation is limited to rationals by defintion) then you are doomed to fail. However, move to analog computers (eg a compass) and it can be quite easy to calculate, though not easy to plug into an equation. > Well, that is not entirely true... The length of any arbitrary line can be any > number, rational, natural, etc. Real numbers are the numbers that defy all > other categorization (they are not rational, irrational, natural, etc.) They > are complex and despite any instinctual perception, there are a lot of them! Complex numbers are not a member of the Reals, rather the Reals are a sub-set of the Complex. [ I recognize this is not what you meant but, "The slovenliness of our language makes it easier to have foolish thoughts." George Orwell ] VNR Concise Encyclopedia of Mathematics, 15th ed. ISBN 0-442-22646-2 pp. 74 "If every segment is to have a numerical measure as its length, then a new domain of numbers is needed, an extension to the domain of rational numbers. This new domain can no longer be constructed, as in the previous case, by number pairs. But hints for its construction are provided by a theoretical analysis of the measuring process for segments." A mathematicaly rigorous defintion of the class of numbers called 'Real' is that which equates the members of that set to the possible lengths of an arbitrary line segment. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From nobody at huge.cajones.com Sun Jan 19 11:38:13 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 11:38:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STEGO] Sphere packings Message-ID: <199701191938.LAA32285@mailmasher.com> Tim C. May will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking his own mother's dead body. \|/ (*,*) Tim C. May _m_-_m_ From nobody at replay.com Sun Jan 19 11:43:48 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 11:43:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: And who will "moderate" the windbag Sandfort? Message-ID: <199701191943.UAA14523@basement.replay.com> One of the biggest offendors in getting into long flamewars has always been Sandfort himself. Why am I not surprised that most of his recent posts have had nothing to do with crypto but a lot to do with his own flames about others? And at such length, oh vey! He said: "First, I did not use it as a legal term of art, so a legal dictionary is not appropriate. Second, I see no sustantive difference between "forejudgment" and my shorthand version (pre-judge). Third, I wrote "literal." Examine the etimology of the word for it's literal meaning. It's pretty obvious AND specific [ME.; OFr, /prejudice/ (Fr. /prejudice/); L praejudicium/, from /prae/, before, and /judicium/, a judgment, from /judex/, /judicgis/, a judge.] In other words, to pre-judge. Get it?" Blah blah blah yadda yadda yadda yadda yo momma wears army boots yadda yadda blah blah This longwinded flame is from a longwinded windbag. He proposes to screen the posts of others for "suitability" but flames others ("dont be such an ass" in another of this afternoon's posts from him) and resorts to long and boring dissections like this one. "I have no intention nor duty to satisfy everyone. That is not possible. I will use a "reasonable person" test. (I am, by the way, using this in the legal term of art sense.)" Who will moderate this "windbag"? He thinks the list is his. It may run on Gilmour's machine, but the "Cypherpunks" are not owned by Gilmour and Sandfort. "P.S. I talked to Gilmore about the holdup in getting started. He has been too busy to get the tech side going, but when he does, (a) everyone will be notifed as to the start date, and the test will still run for an entire month. Until then, it is (sadly) business as usual." Why was this new dictatoriul policy (especially making the moderated list the default, instead of offering the moderated list as a new option) announced to begin on January 11th, then? Gilmour is probly having second thoughts (a good thing) and is just dragging his feet. Disgusted. From i.am.not.a.number at best.com Sun Jan 19 11:44:50 1997 From: i.am.not.a.number at best.com (i.am.not.a.number at best.com) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 11:44:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Wow. Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970119115857.006aeea4@best.com> i have no doubt that a certain amount of the noise on this list is the work of agents provocateurs ... and we should just live with it because its entire intent is a certain kind of denial-of-service attack. just ket used to taking extra time and using the delete function a lot. there's still a lot on the list you don't get elsewhere. ah..... if i only had my natural lang. agent running! At 12:58 AM 1/19/97 -0500, Amanda Walker wrote: >Well, in the week or two since resubscribing to Cypherpunks, I've seen a >trickle of postings about cryptography, security, and privacy, and a flood >of insults, harangues, fighting words, and so on. Some of this reads more >like a script from a Jerry Falwell TV spot than anything I recognize as >"Cypherpunk" traffic. > >I don't care who's offended whom. I'm not interested in participating in a >forum where the supposed topic is submerged underneath a lot of adolescent >alpha primate chest-beating. > >I'm off to look for a mailing list where people are ACTUALLY DISCUSSING >CRYPTOGRAPHY AND IMPLEMENTING CRYPTOSYSTEMS. This list may still be >called "cypherpunks", but it doesn't have much cypherpunk left in it, as >far as I can tell. > >Disgusted, > >Amanda Walker >Senior Software Engineer >InterCon Systems Corporation > > From i.am.not.a.number at best.com Sun Jan 19 11:44:57 1997 From: i.am.not.a.number at best.com (i.am.not.a.number at best.com) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 11:44:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: One time pads and randomness? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970119115207.006b11d4@best.com> as i have writ before, the sources i have read say that digits of the transcendentals are THOUGHT to be uniformly and 'randomly' distributed --- in quotes because there are many criteria for randomness and i don't mean to imply a specific one. however, this supposision is no stronger than a conjecture. has not been proven, AFAIK. At 02:06 PM 1/18/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >By the way, did anyone try to run "all randomness tests" on a sequence >of digits of, say, decimal representation of "e"? > >igor > >Blake Coverett wrote: >> >> > I want to use a one time pad pased crypto system. I understand that the >> > randomness of the pad genorator is key to security(other than lossing the >> > keys). What I want to know is if I use a psuedo-RNG that maybe repeats its >> > self every 1000 characters and use it to only encrypt messagase that are >> > 100's of charaters long, will this be a major security risk? >> >> I'm afraid you've fallen into one of the standard traps. A PRNG can *not* >> make a OTP no matter how you use it. >> >> The total amount of entropy in a PRNG is the amount of entropy in the seed >> you use to key it. All the other bits are directly derived from that seed. >> >> A true OTP is completely secure from an information-theory point of view >> because every byte has a full eight bits of entropy. A PRNG can never >> have this. >> >> Having said all this, it is possible to make a good cipher from a PRNG. >> RC4, for example, is exactly that and the variable sized key is the >> seed for the PRNG. It is however very difficult to come up with a >> good algorithm for that cryptographically sound PRNG and you would >> be much further ahead to use an existing one rather that trying to >> roll your own. >> >> > Say I create a 1 million character one time pad that passes all of the >> > randomness tests. It is "truely random". I place it on two computers. Now >> > when these two computers want to send email computer "A" grabs a chunk of the >> > one time pad starting at a random point and encrypts it. It labels the email >> > with the random starting point and sends it to "B". There "B" moves to the >> > random point and begins decryption. During to process both computers mark >> > that section of the OTP used so that they don't retransmit with it. I realize >> > this has a limited amount of messages before it is used up. But would this be >> > secure? Any suggestions, complaints, big gapping holes I missed? >> >> I don't see anything wrong as such, but there is nothing to be gained either. >> If your random data is real OTP material there is no need to skip to a random >> byte within it, just start at the beginning and use it in sequence. If your random >> data is the output of a PRNG like the above then random starting point doesn't >> buy you much additional security because the entire set of keying material can >> be recreated from the seed. It may increase the work-factor of searching for >> the key, but it also imposes the practical problem of keeping all that keying >> material secure. >> >> More importantly don't confuse statistically random with cryptographically >> random. Just because a bunch of bits passes all the randomness test >> you can think of doesn't mean it contains 100% entropy. Consider the >> digits of an irrational number like sqrt(2) or pi, the digits appear statistically >> random but they can be recreated from just a tiny bit of knowledge. >> >> A good litmus test is to ask yourself if there is any way you can >> reproduce those bits. If there is, they aren't a one time pad. >> (Of course even if you can't it doesn't mean they are good. :-) >> >> regards, >> -Blake >> > > > > - Igor. > > From lucifer at dhp.com Sun Jan 19 12:25:21 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:25:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL Message-ID: <199701192025.PAA02720@dhp.com> At 12:20 PM 1/19/1997, Sir Robin of Locksley wrote: >>Is it possible to prove that number >>0.1234567891011121314151617181920... iz irrational? > >Most definately. All you need to do is prove that the set of this >number is uncountable, ergo is irrational. If you have friend who >have done math in real analysis they can explain more. The set of this number contains one member - the number. Therefore, this is a countable set. A rational number is a number which can be described as a fraction in which the numerator and the denominator are integers. Jim Choate implied that "infinity" is an integer. This is not correct. The set of integers is said to be infinite. Infiniteness is a property of the set, not a member of the set. All rational numbers are expressible in a decimal form of finite length or in a decimal form which ends in a repeatable string of digits. (Consider the process by which each successive digit is found. It is a fraction of the denominator and some remainder with a zero added. The remainder is less than the denominator multiplied by the base, 10 in this case. When a remainder repeats, the state of the algorithm repeats, and its output will therefore be repeated. Since the remainder is bounded, the algorithm must repeat a state. Note that this holds regardless of the base used.) If our number, 0.1234..., does not repeat then it is not rational. Let's show that it does not repeat. If it repeats, there is a sequence of digits which repeats indefinitely. Such a sequence must be longer than the longest integer. (Because if it was part of an integer, the other parts of the integer would not always be the same and it couldn't repeat.) But, there is no longest integer. Therefore there is no repeating sequence. Therefore our number, 0.1234..., is not a rational number. Math Man From whgiii at amaranth.com Sun Jan 19 13:02:02 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:02:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: e digits random? In-Reply-To: <199701191820.MAA24006@nic.stolaf.edu> Message-ID: <199701192104.PAA11959@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701191820.MAA24006 at nic.stolaf.edu>, on 01/19/97 at 02:20 PM, Sir Robin of Locksley said: > >Also, is it true that the sequence of digits in e is random because the ONLY way to get >to the > >p'th digit is to calculate the p-1'st digits? > > >Exactly! This is called recursive definition. To get the p-th set in the >sequence you need to find p-1 first... This still would not make the digits random since knowing p-1 one can calculate p. In a random series of digits knowing p-1 should not have any effect on the probability of the value of p. With e if you know the value of p-1 is 7 then you can calculate the value of p and know if p is 3 or not. In a random series knowing that p-1 is 7 there should be an equal probability of p being 3 or any other number. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Walk through doors, don't crawl through Windows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMuKM/49Co1n+aLhhAQH2TwP+OovMe7WFhHw6HvSJ+lmXGhpavofpBjCj 9lUdls3Q4L/0Sw8P3GjhaZ7GaKqDlm6ad61WGb7kRFDcurabGT41Imf8S4RWDSfj rDuZFEO1mBeUviJZucLevjcjrVRuCmj54DJIx6PrYtHikFmvdVJqwMzF9FfPeFbM 9w0Qn+Xhv50= =bcQS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From lucifer at dhp.com Sun Jan 19 13:15:59 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:15:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Numbers we cannot talk about Message-ID: <199701192115.QAA07547@dhp.com> At 10:48 PM 1/18/1997, Secret Squirrel wrote: >Is it REALLY true that there are real numbers that cannot be >generated by any algorithm? Some guy said that since the set of >algorithms is countable, but the set of real numbers is more than >countable, there must be some numbers for which there is no >algorithms that generate them. There are sets of real numbers whose existence we can prove, but which we cannot otherwise describe. This is more extreme than being "generated by an algorithm". We can't even tell somebody which numbers to generate! (I take "to generate" here to mean "to compute a decimal approximation.") The set of real numbers is uncountable as is the set of subsets of the real numbers. Yet, we have only countably infinite ways to describe sets of numbers. All sets of numbers which we can describe can be described with a finite set of symbols. (Human beings are unable to distinguish between an infinite number of states.) The set of combinations of this finite set is infinite, but countable. "What we cannot speak about we must pass over in silence." - Ludwig Wittgenstein, closing line of "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus" See the early pages of "Godel's Incompleteness Theorems" by Raymond M. Smullyan for a better exposition. Math Man From frantz at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 13:44:33 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:44:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: KeyKOS related system lecture at Stanford Message-ID: I received the following from Jonathan. Those of you who are interested in KeyKOS should know that his system, EROS, is an architectural descendent of KeyKOS. --------------------------------------------- Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 15:13:11 -0500 From: "Jonathan S. Shapiro" To: ... Subject: Talk info NOTE TIME CORRECTION I'll be giving a talk on Wednesday at Stanford in the EE380 seminar. Details on the seminar can be found at http://www-leland.stanford.edu/class/ee380/ under 'winter 1996'. The location and time are: Wednesday at 4:15pm Hewlett Packard Auditorium (Room B1) Gates Computer Science Building Stanford Univeristy The basic structure of the talk will be: explain what active networking means, and why confinement and fault isolation are required. (the problem) identify the properties needed for confinement and fault isolation proofs, what capabilities are, and why non-capability systems do not have these properties (why we need them) describe the objects named in EROS/KeyKOS, and why these are the right choices for high performance (how to get performance) show how this system might be used to construct an active networking router or endpoint. (how to use them for this problem) I'm still working on the talk, so the order may get rearranged. Hope to some or all of you there. Jonathan From frantz at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 13:44:45 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:44:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net> Message-ID: At 12:16 AM -0800 1/19/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >If you trust me, or someone else, like Prof. Dave Hayes, here's what >we can do: I establish a sendmail alias cypherpunks at algebra.com that >expands to, say, your address and also cypherpunks at toad.com. > >... > >If you indeed notice an impropriety, the digitally signed receipts >will be your proof that articles were submitted. As long as the >other readers trust me (or Dave Hayes, or whoever volunteers), you >will have a strong case even without relying on freudian slips. I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 13:44:49 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:44:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: <853575672.913148.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: At 4:39 AM -0800 1/16/97, Adam Back wrote: >- PIN for phone's RSA signature keys It is not clear you need signatures in the secure phone case. Eric Blossom's 3DES uses straight DH for key exchange with verbal verification that both ends are using the same key. As long as the man in the middle can't imitate a familiar voice, this procedure is reasonably secure. I agree that signatures of some kind are needed to identify the phone to the cell company to prevent an all too familiar technique of stealing phone service. But this protection would not be a 3rd party cell phone upgrade. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From meritassoc at earthlink.net Sun Jan 19 13:48:02 1997 From: meritassoc at earthlink.net (meritassoc at earthlink.net) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:48:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: DO YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU'RE MEANT TO BE HEALTHY, HAPPY AND FINANCIALLY FREE? Message-ID: <199701192147.NAA06869@bulgaria.it.earthlink.net> Hello,^Morons, Do you believe that you�re meant to be healthy, happy and financially free? Nutritionist and other health professionals tell us that we should eat the right foods, to get the appropriate vitamins and minerals in our daily diet and exercise in order to stay healthy, right. RIGHT! We are slowly realizing that the soil from which our fruits & vegetables come from is also being depleted and in spite of the fact that we try to restore those nutrients artificially, we are not really putting everything back in. Several years an amazing discovery was made in the Soviet Union and kept secret from the rest of the world until the fall of the Berlin Wall. This discovery stimulated long term research, funded completely by the Soviet government and headed by the late Dr. I. I. Brekhman, a world renowned & brilliant scientist. His vision and breakthrough research over 45 years revealed many of nature�s most important secrets, which recognized him as the "Father of Adaptogens". Dr. Brekhman, with a team of over 1,200 biologist and physicians, analyzed and investigated adaptogens in one of the most massive programs of human testing in scientific history. [No where else except the Soviet Union could this have taken place.] They produced thousands of dietary studies which definitively validated the safety, benefits and astounding capabilities of adaptogens. The cosmonauts used Dr. Brekhman�s formulas to cope with motion sickness, extended confinements, weightlessness and inherent stress of space travel. The Olympic athletes used Dr. Brekhman�s formulas to improve performance, immune resistance, stamina, endurance, recovery and to cope with the stress of competition. In a broadly-based study of 60,000 truck drivers at an automobile plant in Tolyiaatti for over 10 years revealed that those workers using adaptogens experienced a 25% reduction in lost time as well as a 40% decrease in influenza and a general improvement in their overall health. In another study of 655 flight personnel, adaptogens improved the recovery process after long and tiring flight schedules. We could go on with the results of his research, but I think you get the picture. The secrets of Dr. Brekhman�s work are no longer locked inside Russia. Adaptogens could soon become as American as apple pie. In 1991, Dr. Brekhman joined forces with PrimeQuest in an exclusive collaboration to convert his wisdom into a whole new generation of adaptogenic formulas. The results far exceed his work with cosmonauts and athletes. He designed a total program for well-being...a program which gives you what you have been missing. Before his death in July 1994, Dr. Brekhman was able to complete the goal of his life�s work: "It has always been my dream to create a special formula for life, to make them healthy, stable, happy and to protect them from stress. All of my life I have worked toward this goal - and now, finally I have achieved a breakthrough. It is a complicated preparation of natural plant materials which are the best and most effective ingredients I have studied in all of my years of research...ingredients that work together in a combination that derives additional power from the mixture itself." No other product on the market today has undergone the clinical studies on humans that these products underwent in the 40+ years of research. PrimeQuest products can increase your energy and vitality in the most natural way. You can: � Reduce Stress � Lose body fat � Increase energy � Eliminate A.D.D. � Improve Sex Drive � Reduce P.M.S. To get a FREE TAPE in which a Harvard MD reveals the SECRET and more information about obtaining these products or becoming a distributor yourself. E-mail your name, address & phone # to Meritassoc at earthlink.net or call 1-800-305-6451. From dave at kachina.jetcafe.org Sun Jan 19 13:51:23 1997 From: dave at kachina.jetcafe.org (Dave Hayes) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 13:51:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] Message-ID: <199701192151.NAA11643@kachina.jetcafe.org> > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > have two accounts? You can write a program to read both the censored and uncensored email, and do a diff. You wouldn't have to see it, and it could be done so that a "fake" address subscribes to the censored list. Maybe I should offer this as a service to the uncensored list? ;-) ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave at jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet None should say "I can trust" or "I cannot trust" until they are the master of the option of trusting or not trusting. From snow at smoke.suba.com Sun Jan 19 14:21:59 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:21:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL In-Reply-To: <19970119064820.11000.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Message-ID: <199701192238.QAA05435@smoke.suba.com> > I BEG YOU TO HELP ME!!! > Also, another question for math geniuses here: > Is it REALLY true that there are real numbers that cannot be generated > by any algorithm? Some guy said that since the set of algorithms is > countable, but the set of real numbers is more than countable, there > must be some numbers for which there is no algorithms that generate them. x=0; x1=0; x++; x--; Would give you all int's, the only problem you have is granularity. In practice, there are numbers which you can't get with algorythms, but in theory you should be able to hit all real numbers of given granularity (i.e, 10 digits past the decimal point) with the right hardware and software. as in: x=0.00000000001; y=0.00000000001; x1=x; x=x+y; x1=x1-y; Should give you all real numbers with a granularity of 11 digits to the right of the decimal point. > I AM REAL DESPERATE FOR YOUR ASS ISTANCE. HIBT? From ravage at ssz.com Sun Jan 19 14:29:56 1997 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:29:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: infinity & set membership Message-ID: <199701192236.QAA00745@einstein> Hi all, "The least upper bound of a set of real numbers is often called the supremum, the greatest lower bound its infimum. In general the supremum and infimum of a set ARE MEMBERS OF THE SET or at least LIMITS OF SEQUENCES OF MEMBERS OF THE SET." [capitalization is mine] In this case the suprenum is infinity. Introduction to Calculus and Analysis Courant and John Vol. 1, pp. 97, Section e. 1965 Edition Library of Congress: 65-16403 Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From snow at smoke.suba.com Sun Jan 19 14:35:48 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:35:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Igor@home = Secret Squirrel In-Reply-To: <199701191752.LAA00157@einstein> Message-ID: <199701192252.QAA05467@smoke.suba.com> > Take it for what it's worth. > "An appeal to authority is an appeal to a human being just like yourself > who does not have your best interests at heart. What makes you believe > they are able to resolve your problems better than yourself?" It gives me another perspective to work from. No answers to such appeals are taken as gospel. They are considered, tested where appropriate, and then either implemented, or disgarded. In certain areas I am liable to give certain answers more "weight" depending on various things (usually some sort of reputation calculation), but I only really trust (well to certain levels) myself. From mpd at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 14:40:24 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:40:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STEGO] Sphere packings In-Reply-To: <199701191938.LAA32285@mailmasher.com> Message-ID: <199701192240.OAA03487@netcom23.netcom.com> Someone with Huge Cajones wrote: > Tim C. May will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking > his own mother's dead body. > \|/ > (*,*) Tim C. May > _m_-_m_ Uh, is this the filtered or the unfiltered list? -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From mpd at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 14:55:22 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:55:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701191919.NAA00377@einstein> Message-ID: <199701192255.OAA05514@netcom23.netcom.com> Jim Choate writes: > "If every segment is to have a numerical measure as its length, then a new > domain of numbers is needed, an extension to the domain of rational numbers. > This new domain can no longer be constructed, as in the previous case, by > number pairs. But hints for its construction are provided by a theoretical > analysis of the measuring process for segments." > A mathematicaly rigorous defintion of the class of numbers called 'Real' > is that which equates the members of that set to the possible lengths of an > arbitrary line segment. This seems a tad circular, as the real number line, from which line segments are constructed, is a copy of the set of real numbers. One can construct the reals from the rationals quite easily using any of several well-known methods, such as equivalence classes of Cauchy sequences, or Dedikind cuts. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 19 15:01:24 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 15:01:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: 'Monster' numbers Message-ID: <199701192308.RAA00800@einstein> Hi, In reference to numbers which you can't describe, if you examine the work they are ALL in the Complex domain, none of them are Real's. Complex numbers deal with areas, not with lengths. If there existed a Real for which we could not describe this would imply that we could not draw a line of that length. Something which is clearly contrary to the axiomatic assumptions of lines and their construction (ie points have no dimension, only position, and lines are infinite sequences of points). A clear Complex example of a 'monster' is Sierpenski's Gasket. It fills an area but has no measurable surface area. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Sun Jan 19 15:10:25 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 15:10:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: The NSA's influence on New Zealand crypto policy Message-ID: <85371540122743@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> For nearly a year I've been involved in an ongoing battle with several government departments and the odd intelligence agency in an attempt to clarify NZ's position on the export of crypto software. The whole story has now got about as far as it can go, so I thought I'd share it with others. I've been trying to get the media to take an interest in this, but noone really seems to care... if anyone knows any journalists who might be interested in it, feel free to pass it on. I've got more details including names of contact people and phone numbers in case anyone needs to verify parts of the story. The main players are: The Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB), a New Zealand intelligence agency (for US readers, the GCSB is the NZ subsidiary of the NSA). The foremost authority on the GCSB is Nicky Hager, who recently published the book "Secret Power" which documents their activities. The Defence Signals Directorate (DSD), an Australian intelligence agency (the Australian version of the NSA). The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), a New Zealand government department. New Zealand Customs. Cyphercom Solutions, a New York company which produces financial/online commerce systems. Kiss Audio Video, an Australian video production company. Orion Systems, a New Zealand company which produces medical information and communication systems for transmitting medical information. Myself (Peter Gutmann) and cryptlib, my free encryption library http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/cryptlib.html In April 1996 I got a call from someone who worked for Cyphercom Solutions, a New York company who wanted to use my cryptlib encryption library in a project they were working on. Their lawyers wanted them to obtain an official, physically exported copy so that there wouldn't be any complications later on if the source of the software were ever called into question. The application involved financial transaction processing, and they had received indications from the NSA that it would be looked on favourably in terms of getting export permission. Somewhat strangely though, they were given the distinct impression that to get anywhere, they'd need to play ball with the NSA, even though it was NZ software being exported from NZ, where the NSA should have no jurisdiction. At this point a brief explanation of the export law situation in NZ is in order. The Customs Act of 1996, Section 54, "Prohibited Exports", states that "The Governor-General may from time to time, by Order in Council, prohibit the exportation from New Zealand of any specified goods or goods of a specified class or classes" (followed by a list of specific conditions on prohibitions). There's no further information in the Customs Act, but NZ Customs have a short publication "New Zealand Customs Fact Sheet: Export Prohibitions and Restrictions" which contains, among such curious items as cat skins and a large list of agricultural products which can't be exported without going via the appropriate government department, the item "Strategic goods such as computers, navigation and marine equipment, firearms, ammunition, explosives, military aircraft and vessels". The responsible government department is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT, pronounced "em-fat"). Apparently computer software comes under the same classification as computers (MFAT extends the Customs definition of "Strategic goods" to cover "Computer technology, information security systems, and telecommunications equipment"). The entity within MFAT which handles this is the International Security and Arms Control Division, who are advised by the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB), the New Zealand NSA subsidiary. Once you get past the part where NZ Customs are involved, the whole setup is run like the mafia. Nothing is ever written down, everything is done verbally. Although it took only a paragraph to describe how this works, it took more than two months of work to find out in practice. Unless you know exactly who to ask for information, noone has ever heard of these restrictions. A search of NZ legal databases found nothing. Several IP lawyers had never heard of these restrictions. Noone seemed to know anything about any restrictions. (In an October newsletter, MFAT retroactively gave themselves jurisdiction over this area, this is covered further down). An initial discussion with MFAT revealed that NZ Customs tend to apply restrictions based on the old COCOM rules, which have been superseded by the Wassenaar agreement. For this reason export permits are required for shipments to certain eastern european countries, certain middle eastern countries, and the current UN politically-incorrect-country club. Export to countries other than that would be unlikely to require a permit. In May, Cyphercom therefore decided to try to export the software to the US and Singapore. Initially MFAT said this was OK. Then at the last minute they changed their minds and imposed the following restrictions: - No encryption algorithms except single DES. - Keysize limited to 64 bits (this is peculiar, I assume it's to stop me from using tricks like key-dependant S-boxes and DESX, which I'd discussed in email with people in the US some time ago). - Definitely no triple DES (this was specifically mentioned). - Export limited to object code only (so the key size couldn't be changed). The text of the message (with a few names removed) is: "The Secretary of Foreign Affairs and Trade has no objection to the export of the XXX financial package, as detailed in the following application from YYY, *provided that* the library of encryption algorithms is limited to DES (but not triple DES) and any required hash algorithms, dated 15 May 1996". In the accompanying description of the library, every single algorithm except DES and the hash algorithms have been crossed out. Note that this is for export to the US, which has its own export restrictions anyway (the same thing was done for the Singapore export). Inquiries by lawyers in the US indicated that there had been a flurry of communication between the NSA and the GCSB over this (as one person - not one of the lawyers BTW - I talked to put it, "When the NSA says 'Bend over', the GCSB says 'How far?'"). The NSA might as well have signed the export (non-)permit themselves. The story from the US lawyers was that there was "repeated intervention of the NSA" and that "NZ is out of its depth, it was terrified of offending the US". >From the information I've been able to gather the whole thing seems to have been initiated by the GCSB rather than the NSA, who were afraid to do anything without NSA approval. The GCSB went to the NSA and asked them what they should do, the result was the (non-)permit. A DSD person also later told a reporter that the GCSB had gone to the DSD and asked them "Would you allow the export under these conditions?". The DSD said "No". Shortly before this, the Canadian government, which follows the same export guidelines as New Zealand (dual-use technology under the Wassenaar agreement), had ruled that cryptlib was exportable to anywhere except the previously mentioned restricted countries, with no permit necessary, and no need to apply for a permit: "Application No.278466 covering cryptographic software proposed for export to England, this software is not controlled according to Canada's ECL. Therefore, provided the product noted in this application is not of US origin within the meaning of the ECL item 5400, these goods may be exported to any country, except Libya and Angola, without an export permit. Please note that most goods to Iraq are still prohibited at this time, as well". The interesting thing about the Canadian decision was that I was contacted twice by Canadian export controls people who asked me a number of very detailed questions about the software, whereas MFAT managed to come to their decision without ever examining the encryption software or talking to its author. As far as I've been able to tell MFAT had very little to do with the decision: They have to follow the GCSB's advice, and the GCSB won't do anything without the NSA's permission. The opinion from lawyers in NZ was that they were acting far outside their authority. In any case in late May two copies of the software on 3.5" disks were sent out by a large accounting firm acting for Cyphercom, one to the US and one to Singapore as provided for in the export permit. At about the time the original export appeal was lodged, the GCSB had told another NZ company, Orion Systems, that they couldn't export a product with the encryption necessary to protect patient medical data, lab results, patient referrals, and so on, without obtaining an end user certitificate for each user. To sell a copy to just the one overseas site which the inquiry was about would have required otaining two thousand certifications from all the end users. Larger sites with ten thousand users are not unknown. This meant that Orion would have had to somehow obtain 2000 signed declarations from users just to allow the exchange of medical records (this tactic has also been successfully used by the US government to effectively block certain software exports by US firms). Orion didn't even bother going to MFAT, because if the GCSB required these impossible-to-meet conditions then going to the next level down in the chain of command would make no difference. After chasing my way around a number of government departments I talked to some people in the Ministry of Commerce who advised that the best way to resolve this craziness was to write to MFAT and inform them that the Canadian government had ruled that the library was freely exportable and that there was no reason for them blocking the export, and ask under what authority the export was being blocked. This letter was sent to MFAT in mid-September (incidentally, the way government departments refer to the GCSB is wierd. Noone ever says "the GCSB", it's always "another government department" or "an organisation which I won't name", as if there was some belief that using The Dreaded Name will cause evil to descend upon the person who utters it, much like the use of the work J*h*v* or Lovecraft's "He Who Is Not To Be Named"). Anyway, at this point, things started to get weird. At about the time I wrote the letter, I was FedEx'd an NDA sent from lawyers representing PGP Inc (a US encryption software vendor) to Orion Systems, sent in a standard FedEx letter envelope. It was intercepted by NZ Customs and opened, and the contents examined, before I got it. This wasn't the usual random (and quite rare) "Examined by Customs" spot check, the letter had a large red "Customs - Hold" sticker on it with an LAX flight number, so I assume they knew in advance what they were looking for. NZ Customs couldn't tell me why it was intercepted, but seemed a bit surprised that the letter had been opened. They said that they may have been "acting on information". In early October, about a fortnight after I sent the letter to MFAT questioning the export refusal and asking for clarification on what law they were using to block the export (and many months after the export itself), the Australian parent of the US company who wanted the export got a call from the Australian Ministry of Defence (it was actually the DSD, but they generally identify themselves as Ministry of Defence just like NSA employess are always identified as Department of Defence rather than NSA). This company, Kiss Audio Visual, are a video production house who have nothing at all to do with encryption software (or, in fact, anything but video production and graphics design, which they are very good at). They were called by Alan Owen of the DSD who said that they had been informed that NZ Customs had intercepted a shipment containing a high-security encryption product which was being illegally exported from New Zealand. According to the story, when NZ Customs went back to the party who exported the software, they claimed it was on behalf of Kiss. The Managing Director of Kiss called the Ministry of Defence to make sure this was actually for real, and they confirmed that it was. This story has several very large holes in it: - NZ Customs never intercepted anything. The package containing the disks arrived in the US unopened, there was no "high-security encryption product" on the disks, and a Customs person has verified that NZ Customs have never intercepted any crypto software shipped overseas. - There was no illegal export of any kind. All the necessary permissions had been obtained from MFAT before the disks were shipped. - The export was performed by Cyphercom, not Kiss. Kiss happens to be the parent company, but (apart from a few business discussions carried out over international phone links), there was no other connection between Kiss and Cyphercom. Alan said that this export had very serious consequences, and that they would be coming to Melbourne to talk to Kiss at 2pm the next day. The Kiss Director immediately called Cyphercom in the US, and they discussed having serious quantities of lawyers present at the meeting, and taking the whole story to the media. The visit was cancelled without any explanation. Who says governments never listen to their citizens? (The DSD side of the story is that they were rather busy that day and didn't have time to carry out their investigation). The implications of this are interesting. Despite the fact that MFAT had already (in effect) denied permission for the export, someone with the ability to listen in to international phone conversations had used discussions about the export to fabricate a story about NZ Customs with which the Australian government could harass Kiss, who had done nothing wrong and in fact had nothing to do with the whole affair (unfortunately I don't have any proof of the phone-conversation monitoring, but I can't see how anyone could possibly have connected Kiss with Cyphercom except for the phone conversations - they simply have nothing else in common). Apparently whoever was pulling the strings saw it necessary to bypass MFAT entirely in an attempt to suppress the encryption software (this does not inspire confidence in the working relationship between MFAT and the unnamed agency. The identity of the unnamed agency was later revealed by the DSD - see below). Also in October, an article "Trade in Strategic Goods - An Update" in MFAT's "Business File" publication, Vol.3, No.7 made specific mention that MFAT were in charge of controlling the export of encryption hardware and software. It's pretty certain that this special mention was motivated entirely by attempts to export cryptlib, because MFAT stated in a letter to me that they'd never encountered anything like this before, so the claim that: "..the most commonly affected exports from New Zealand are of encryption hardware and software..." is distinctly peculiar. The last time anyone checked (a KPMG report from mid-1994) NZ had no restrictions on the export of crypto. Some time between mid-94 and October 1996, export controls (or at least some vague mention of controls) appeared, with MFAT having jurisdiction. I suspect this was in October 1996, *after* the whole export/non-export fiasco took place. In any event the article contains some rather curious comments. "Run-of-the mill exports have usually been processed within 48 hours". MFAT have now taken 9 months without showing any results, causing considerable financial hardship for Cyphercom who are unable to ship a product or even obtain a sample copy for demonstration to customers. "New Zealand... is helping to limit the spread of increasingly sophisticated military technology and weapons of mass destruction". Whether software to protect financial transactions and medical records counts as "sophisticated military technology" or "weapons of mass destruction" is unclear. In late October I called MFAT to see what the delay was in replying to my earlier letter, and received a reply the following week. In their reply, MFAT stated that the export (non-)permit was in fact not final, and was still under consideration, which was at odds with what they had told Cyphercom and with the wording of the permit itself (see above). The letter also states: "We made it clear that it would take some time, as the application dealt with a relatively new area in terms of our export controls, and was in a rapidly changing and advancing field. We... are currently discussing it and other issues it raises with relevant government departments". (the "relevant government department" is the GCSB, this has been confirmed by the DSD). I interpret this paragraph to mean "We're making up the rules as we go along". The Canadian government certainly didn't seem to have any of these problems when they covered the same issue. MFAT declined to answer my question as to whether this portion of NZ's foreign trade policy was being controlled by US intelligence agencies. In early January 1997, Kiss were informed by the same Ministry of Defence/DSD person (Alan Owen) that he and an associate would again be flying in from Canberra to talk to them, using as justification the same fictitious story about NZ Customs that they had used before. They spent about two hours at Kiss, saw that they were indeed a video production house (and nothing but a video production house), and left. Before they left, they told the Kiss people that the source of the story about NZ Customs was "their counterparts in NZ" (the GCSB). Kiss had a lawyer present to witness this. The implications of this are pretty scary. The GCSB first used their position to impose impossible-to-meet conditions on Orion and influence MFAT to indefinitely delay export of software which isn't export-restricted anyway (or at least not by any known NZ law) and which the Canadian government had already ruled wasn't export restricted. However, not content with this, they then fed a fictitious story to the Australian government to convince them to begin an investigation into a company which had done nothing wrong, and had very little to do with the whole issue. Foreign competitors of NZ companies will ship their encryption products within 15 minutes of a credit card order being received. The GCSB, by employing all sorts of devious measures, has managed to suppress distribution of the same software by NZ individuals and companies. Under their influence, MFAT have now spent nine solid months brooding over the export of one single copy of equivalent encryption software without showing any results. This has had the effect of protecting overseas markets for exploitation by foreign competitors... by a ministry supposed to be in charge of promoting NZ trade. To summarise, the situation is as follows: 1.There is absolutely no way that anyone could reasonably be expected to find out about what to do with crypto software in New Zealand. NZ Customs have been extremely helpful throughout this affair, but had to keep deferring to MFAT, where everything stops. Even the people charged with enforcing export conditions don't know what it is they're supposed to be enforcing. If it wasn't for a number of lucky coincidences and occasionally knowing or running into the right people, I still wouldn't know any more about the situation. 2.Anyone trying to follow the vaguely-defined, possibly nonexistant rules, at least in New Zealand, is opening themselves up to government harassment, no matter how hard they try to follow whatever rules and regulations someone in the government comes up with. The only safe way to distribute crypto software seems to be to either distribute it over the Internet, or to make sure you have enough media and political contacts to raise hell over any ensuing mail interception, possible phone tapping, government investigations, bogus stories about crimes being committed, and other niceties which may crop up. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 19 15:33:48 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 15:33:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL (fwd) Message-ID: <199701192340.RAA00844@einstein> Forwarded message: > One can construct the reals from the rationals quite easily using any > of several well-known methods, such as equivalence classes of Cauchy > sequences, or Dedikind cuts. So you are saying that the Reals are a subset (ie can be constructed from) of the Rationals? I can create a number which is not representable by the ratio of two integers from two numbers which are representable by ratios of two integers? That's a nifty trick indeed, I am really impressed. Cauchy produced a test for testing convergence. I fail to see the relevance here, but please expound... Dedekind Cut: "Thus a nested sequence of rational intervals give rise to a seperation of all rational numbers into three classes." Just exactly where does this allow us to create Reals? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Sun Jan 19 15:50:56 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 15:50:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) In-Reply-To: <51Rq1D26w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <199701162142.VAA06080@server.test.net> It's occured to me recently that Dimitri's posts are not being read correctly, it is not the content which is the point, nor the superficial lack of crypto relevance. Dimitri is an intelligent guy, and has a high level of crypto expertise (he has a PhD on a cryptography topic). It is my belief that his posts can only be understood in a "meta" sense -- he is engaged in a highly complex cryptographic experiment. People who read and respond to his individual posts are the unwitting subjects in his experiments. His posts and the responses to them are actually the data-set for a thorough cryptanalysis of mailing list threats. His current topic under investigation is Denial of Service (DoS) attacks on mailing lists. Denial of service on mailing lists is a complex business, and requires expert human input to be done properly. Dimitri has systematically explored these types of posting behaviour: 1. Posting only crypto relevant material. 2. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with hand personalised flame bait. 3. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with bot generated flame bait. 4. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with news stories. 5. Posting only non crypto relevant material. The alert reader will recall these phases of posting style (currently we are in sub experiment 5, the other phases have occured over a protracted period of intensive experimentation, and some newer readers may have missed earlier phases). There were other experiments which may or may not have been part of Dimitri's series of DoS experiments: 6. Subscribing the list to itself (testing list resilience to recursion) 7. Forging posts to carefully selected newsgroups with "cypherpunks at toad.com" as the sender (this indirectly adds user "cypherpunks at toad.com" to many direct marketing lists as direct marketers make use of email addresses scanned from newsgroups). 8. The "UNSCRIVE" and other spelling variations of "unsubscribe" epidemic, and ensuing instructions and discussion 9. Subscribing the list to other lists 10. Bot generated flame bait posted anonymously (with ascii art) >From the post I am following up to the reader will observe an oblique reference to the transition from phase 4 of the experiments to the current phase, phase 5 (the reader will also note references to experimental results c and d described below): Dimitri Vulis writes: > One memorable "censorship" incident occurred when the lying cocksucker > John Gilmore (spit) forcibly unsubscribed me from this list because he > didn't like the contents of my submissions - or did you forget already? > Look up Declan's disgraceful writeup on Netly News archives. > > At that time most valuable contributors to this list (such as myself) > resolved not to contribute crypto-relevant content to a censored forum. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ More widely read cypherpunks will know that Dimitri has performed similar experiments in other fora -- his systematic experiments in numerous USENET newsgroups resulted in the his receiving the prestigious KOTM ("Kook Of The Month") award. His main experimental results to date with the cypherpunks mailing list series of experiments have been: a) many cypherpunks publically announcing kill filing him b) numerous cypherpunks suggesting censoring him (a particularly interesting result considering the libertarian leanings of many on this list) c) the outstanding experimental result of being forcibly unsubscribed from the list, and of being barred from resubscribing by John Gilmore. (creator of alt.* USENET newsgroup hierarchy, and well know freespeech advocate) d) another interesting, incidental experimental result was provided by Declan McCullagh in his Netly News piece in prematurely, and entirely unwittingly, publishing some of Dimitri's expermiental data-set. e) the main experimental result: the list shortly moving to a moderated form, seemingly at the request of Sandy Sandfort, with agreement from John Gilmore. These experimental results are quite significant, when taken in the context of the anti-censorship, libertarian, pro-freespeech environment of the cypherpunks mailing list. Dimitri should be congratulated on his outstanding work. I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. My suggestions for interesting experiments during the moderated phase are: 1. Testing the limits of Dale Thorn's anti-censorship sentiments (for those who don't read Dale, he is subscribed to "cypherpunks-unedited" in preparation for the moderation). 2. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection criteria. 3. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection rate for long crypto relevant posts interspersed with irrelevant flame bait. 4. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection rate for posts with flame bait .sigs I hope Dimitri's selfless efforts in furthering understanding of DoS attacks on mailing lists is properly acknowledged when he publishes his findings on completion of his experiments. I also hope that Dimitri will document his recommendations for mailing list configuration and management in light of his experiments. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 I_Love_SPAM, Hello, If you spend time on any of the online services or the internet then I have some exciting news. The Middle Income Financial Independence Club is now excepting new members. We are an online club of Middle Income people who have joined together to pursue our financial future from the information superhighway. If you would like membership information then please email me at jkurfis at interserv.com Start your online future today! From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 19 16:01:35 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:01:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dedikend Cut's and such Message-ID: <199701200008.SAA00943@einstein> Hi, Did a little research, Dedekind Cut's and such use Integers to define a SPECIFIC Real to a arbitrary BUT FIXED resolution. They do not define the set of Reals. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From gbroiles at netbox.com Sun Jan 19 16:06:14 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:06:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970119160951.006c26ac@ricochet.net> (I wrote a pretty long message and decided that the last few paragraphs said what I was really getting at. So I put the long message on the web at and have sent along only the last bit.) This discussion of public perception now finally reaches what finally spurred me to write in the first place, which is the relationship of all of this to the name of the list, and whether the unfiltered list should be called "cypherpunks" or "cypherpunks-unedited" or whatever. I think that the dispute over the name (or, more accurately, grumbling and dissent about John Gilmore's decision about naming) is reducible to a dispute over whether it's more important that the list be perceived as a "free expression zone" where any message is accepted, or if it is perceived as a mailing list with a high signal/noise ratio. At a purely technical level, these are both non-issues; the name "cypherpunks at toad.com" is merely a string of text, and we could all just as easily subscribe to "mxfgfds at toad.com"; and motivated subscribers can use automated tools to tweak the signal/noise ratio to their individual liking. But most people will follow a path of least resistance; they will (remain) subscribe[d] to "cypherpunks at toad.com", and they will not use filters, and what they get is what the world at large will think "cypherpunks" is. While I don't care (and suspect many others don't care) what the perception of "cypherpunks" is, per se, I do care about whether or not interesting people choose to send their thoughts and information to the list. So to the extent that public perception changes that, I'm interested. And we've been doing the "free expression zone" for several years, and what we're ending up with is a mixture that's mostly crap - of the messages I see (and I filter a lot out), a small fraction (10%?) is pure garbage (e.g., the "cocksucker" messages), a large fraction (60%?) is on-topic but uninteresting or not useful, and the rest is useful in that it's got information or a perspective I hadn't been exposed to before I read the message. Other lists which are moderated (either by message or by author) attract people whose messages are frequently useful; many of those people have been on the Cypherpunks list at one time or another and have found it unsuitable. So I'm ready to experiment with a new configuration because I'd like to get more useful information. One approach to the name question would be to eliminate "cypherpunks at toad.com" and force old/new subscribers to choose between "cypherpunks-edited" and "cypherpunks-unedited". The advantage I see is that it provides more accurate feedback about what people want; the present method provides information about the perceived value of unmoderation weighed against the bother of dealing with subscribing & unsubscribing. The disadvantage is that it's likely to eliminate many subscribers, and that it tends to abandon the "cypherpunks at toad.com" history which is, by now, ~5 years old. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From azur at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 16:43:27 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:43:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) Message-ID: For voice calls, it is not possible to merely insert a more secure crypto function (e.g., IDEA) inside the less secure A5 crypto, unless the GSM base station's protocol is aware the subscriber unit is using the more secure crypto. Otherwise, when the GSM base station unwraps the A5 encrypted data stream, which it assumes will contain digitized voice packets in the clear, it will not find what its looking for and will be unable to convert the packets to a circuit-switched voice signal. If, as I have previously stated, the subscriber instead uses the data port of his instrument and establishes a data link with his payload protected by the more the secure crypto this is entirely feasible. -- Steve PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear (N7ZEZ) | Internet: azur at netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet, electronic currency and wireless development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler From paul.elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org Sun Jan 19 16:45:02 1997 From: paul.elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org (Paul Elliott) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 16:45:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Numbers we cannot talk about In-Reply-To: <"Anonymous"@Jan> Message-ID: <32e2a55c.flight@flight.hrnowl.lonestar.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > At 10:48 PM 1/18/1997, Secret Squirrel wrote: > >Is it REALLY true that there are real numbers that cannot be > >generated by any algorithm? Some guy said that since the set of > >algorithms is countable, but the set of real numbers is more than > >countable, there must be some numbers for which there is no > >algorithms that generate them. > > There are sets of real numbers whose existence we can prove, but which > we cannot otherwise describe. This is more extreme than being > "generated by an algorithm". We can't even tell somebody which > numbers to generate! (I take "to generate" here to mean "to compute a > decimal approximation.") > > The set of real numbers is uncountable as is the set of subsets of the > real numbers. Yet, we have only countably infinite ways to describe > sets of numbers. > > All sets of numbers which we can describe can be described with a > finite set of symbols. (Human beings are unable to distinguish > between an infinite number of states.) The set of combinations of > this finite set is infinite, but countable. > Perhaps the axioms in set theory that tells us that the integers have an uncountable number of subsets is, in point of fact, false. Perhaps only those subsets of the integers that can be described by an algorithm exist (actually, contrary to what the usual axioms of set theory assert). We know that the set of axioms which tell us that there are unaccountably many reals can be satisfied by a countable model! (Downward Louwenheim Skolem Tarski theorem.) I know that Standard mathematical axioms yields lots of interesting results, but when it talks of the infinite and we are dealing with a practical subject like cryptography or even physics it should not be taken too seriously. (With respect to uncountable sets.) - -- Paul Elliott Telephone: 1-713-781-4543 Paul.Elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org Address: 3987 South Gessner #224 Houston Texas 77063 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: cp850 iQCVAgUBMuKlNvBUQYbUhJh5AQHZowP/SHm45xKIM5byi4J44tF6ySCilei8ZNC4 f9XgN+VKIQ/Q09tOSnZoRo6e29KKTqV4wxrSCONNu5D691q1atXFw3Z9pdly3INM Qk3NxxLu+NtldkaaIEkt67s7vri6QORw23gyZmIPOLDQPJZk0LG2wcxxZb6cXOIw dO4ry2cGOus= =CJDs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 17:06:54 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:06:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701200101.TAA05711@manifold.algebra.com> Bill Frantz wrote: > > At 12:16 AM -0800 1/19/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >If you trust me, or someone else, like Prof. Dave Hayes, here's what > >we can do: I establish a sendmail alias cypherpunks at algebra.com that > >expands to, say, your address and also cypherpunks at toad.com. > > > >... > > > >If you indeed notice an impropriety, the digitally signed receipts > >will be your proof that articles were submitted. As long as the > >other readers trust me (or Dave Hayes, or whoever volunteers), you > >will have a strong case even without relying on freudian slips. > > I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that > email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to > toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small > fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost. That is correct, although only a very small fraction of mail is lost. If a pattern would appear, however, that would be a strong argument. - Igor. From aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 19 17:37:07 1997 From: aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com (aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:37:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <199701200127.TAA05918@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > i agree with dale thorn that you are sandy sandfort. > > igor Believe what you will. You only prove the old saying that goes simply, "People are stupid." Exactly why, aside from the obvious unwarranted and inaccurate assumption, is left as an exercise to the reader. Think of it as an intelligence test. From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 17:37:48 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:37:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck big dicks] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E2CC4B.22C9@gte.net> aga wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > In other words, can I separate the censored email without having to > > have two accounts? > You can not. You need another account. > I wrote to Steve Case about this censorship problem, and I am waiting > for him to respond. > Do you want another account to get the censored list at? Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. We already get the censored stuff on the alleged-to-be "unedited" list, so by looking at the censored list only, we can do the subtraction more reliably than Sandfort. Just the censored list is needed, not the cut-out stuff, as far as I know. From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Sun Jan 19 17:38:13 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:38:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [CRYPTO] One-time pads Message-ID: <199701200138.SAA05836@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timmy May is a pimply dweeb sitting at a computer chortling at his own imagined cleverness. )))) )) OO Timmy May 6 (_) `____c From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 17:55:05 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:55:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) In-Reply-To: <199701162142.VAA06080@server.test.net> Message-ID: <199701200151.TAA06089@manifold.algebra.com> my predictions: 1) Dale Thorn will become another Kagalenko and will mailbomb mods 2) 90% of cypherpunks-moderated will be about moderation and censorship 3) there will be massive openings of alternative cypherpunks mailing lists, all doomed to fail 4) several alt.* newsgroups like alt.cypherpunks will be created 5) main business of freedom-knights will be shitting and spitting at cypherpunks in alt.cypherpunks 6) moderators will spend increasing amounts of time on their work 7) crossposting between alt.cypherpunks and mail.cypherpunks will be prohibited by alt.cypherpunks FAQ, posted monthly by Dr. John Martin Grubor igor Adam Back wrote: > > > It's occured to me recently that Dimitri's posts are not being read > correctly, it is not the content which is the point, nor the > superficial lack of crypto relevance. > > Dimitri is an intelligent guy, and has a high level of crypto > expertise (he has a PhD on a cryptography topic). It is my belief > that his posts can only be understood in a "meta" sense -- he is > engaged in a highly complex cryptographic experiment. People who read > and respond to his individual posts are the unwitting subjects in his > experiments. His posts and the responses to them are actually the > data-set for a thorough cryptanalysis of mailing list threats. His > current topic under investigation is Denial of Service (DoS) attacks > on mailing lists. > > Denial of service on mailing lists is a complex business, and requires > expert human input to be done properly. > > Dimitri has systematically explored these types of posting behaviour: > > 1. Posting only crypto relevant material. > 2. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with hand personalised flame bait. > 3. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with bot generated flame bait. > 4. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with news stories. > 5. Posting only non crypto relevant material. > > The alert reader will recall these phases of posting style (currently > we are in sub experiment 5, the other phases have occured over a > protracted period of intensive experimentation, and some newer readers > may have missed earlier phases). > > There were other experiments which may or may not have been part of > Dimitri's series of DoS experiments: > > 6. Subscribing the list to itself (testing list resilience to recursion) > > 7. Forging posts to carefully selected newsgroups with > "cypherpunks at toad.com" as the sender (this indirectly adds user > "cypherpunks at toad.com" to many direct marketing lists as direct > marketers make use of email addresses scanned from newsgroups). > > 8. The "UNSCRIVE" and other spelling variations of "unsubscribe" epidemic, > and ensuing instructions and discussion > > 9. Subscribing the list to other lists > > 10. Bot generated flame bait posted anonymously (with ascii art) > > >From the post I am following up to the reader will observe an oblique > reference to the transition from phase 4 of the experiments to the > current phase, phase 5 (the reader will also note references to experimental > results c and d described below): > > Dimitri Vulis writes: > > One memorable "censorship" incident occurred when the lying cocksucker > > John Gilmore (spit) forcibly unsubscribed me from this list because he > > didn't like the contents of my submissions - or did you forget already? > > Look up Declan's disgraceful writeup on Netly News archives. > > > > At that time most valuable contributors to this list (such as myself) > > resolved not to contribute crypto-relevant content to a censored forum. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > More widely read cypherpunks will know that Dimitri has performed > similar experiments in other fora -- his systematic experiments in > numerous USENET newsgroups resulted in the his receiving the > prestigious KOTM ("Kook Of The Month") award. > > His main experimental results to date with the cypherpunks mailing > list series of experiments have been: > > a) many cypherpunks publically announcing kill filing him > > b) numerous cypherpunks suggesting censoring him (a particularly > interesting result considering the libertarian leanings of many on > this list) > > c) the outstanding experimental result of being forcibly unsubscribed > from the list, and of being barred from resubscribing by John Gilmore. > (creator of alt.* USENET newsgroup hierarchy, and well know freespeech > advocate) > > d) another interesting, incidental experimental result was provided by > Declan McCullagh in his Netly News piece in prematurely, and entirely > unwittingly, publishing some of Dimitri's expermiental data-set. > > e) the main experimental result: the list shortly moving to a > moderated form, seemingly at the request of Sandy Sandfort, with > agreement from John Gilmore. > > These experimental results are quite significant, when taken in the > context of the anti-censorship, libertarian, pro-freespeech > environment of the cypherpunks mailing list. Dimitri should be > congratulated on his outstanding work. > > I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when > the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. My suggestions for > interesting experiments during the moderated phase are: > > 1. Testing the limits of Dale Thorn's anti-censorship sentiments (for > those who don't read Dale, he is subscribed to "cypherpunks-unedited" > in preparation for the moderation). > > 2. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection criteria. > > 3. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection rate for long crypto relevant > posts interspersed with irrelevant flame bait. > > 4. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection rate for posts with flame bait .sigs > > I hope Dimitri's selfless efforts in furthering understanding of DoS > attacks on mailing lists is properly acknowledged when he publishes > his findings on completion of his experiments. I also hope that > Dimitri will document his recommendations for mailing list > configuration and management in light of his experiments. > > Adam > -- > print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> > )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 17:58:49 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 17:58:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: AIDAS, SHMADIDAS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701200154.TAA06113@manifold.algebra.com> aidas at ixsrs4.ix.netcom.com wrote: > On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > i agree with dale thorn that you are sandy sandfort. > > > > igor > > Believe what you will. > > You only prove the old saying that goes simply, "People are stupid." > Exactly why, aside from the obvious unwarranted and inaccurate assumption, > is left as an exercise to the reader. Think of it as an intelligence test. My wild guess is, you wanted to say that I am stupid. You think that my stupidity implies that people are stupid. OK. AIDAS will disappear next day, but Sandy will not. I would love to hear Sandy's statement as to whether AIDAS is Sandy Sandfort or not. If Sandy says no, I will believe him, because his reputation has a longer time span than AIDAS's. In case Sandy says that AIDAS is not him, I will publicly retract my statement, which by the way I made to AIDAS privately (I have no idea why he posted it to the mailing list, although I do not really mind). If Sandy chooses not to comment, I will understand. - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 18:01:46 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:01:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) In-Reply-To: <199701162142.VAA06080@server.test.net> Message-ID: <32E2D1E7.7DAC@gte.net> Adam Back wrote: This was an utterly fascinating post, if y'all don't mind my saying so. I certainly can't vouch for the details (or the theories), but whether any of the details are deliberate experiments on Dimitri's part or not, the totality of what has taken place would make an excellent source for a post-graduate study. Am I right? I would suggest, however, if you're looking for a likely candidate for really advanced social manipulation/experimentation, you should be looking at the list owner(s), not the gadflys. There's this silly theory some people have, that once in a while the little people (the good guys?) win enough points to set the bad guys back a ways. Not in 20th century Amerika. Read Carl Oglesby's article "Paranoia As A Way Of Knowing", and think: "Paranoia As A Way Of Knowing Who We Are." [much text deleted below] > It's occured to me recently that Dimitri's posts are not being read > correctly, it is not the content which is the point, nor the > superficial lack of crypto relevance. > I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when > the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. My suggestions for > interesting experiments during the moderated phase are: > I hope Dimitri's selfless efforts in furthering understanding of DoS > attacks on mailing lists is properly acknowledged when he publishes > his findings on completion of his experiments. I also hope that > Dimitri will document his recommendations for mailing list > configuration and management in light of his experiments. From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 18:07:29 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:07:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E2D346.1370@gte.net> AIDAS wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed with the > > > > > spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons that > > > > > can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so forth. > > > > Not sure about "all", but someone whose name sounds like AIDS, and who > > > > advocates censorship, most likely is one.[snip] > Ah, very strong response indeed. I feel as if shot down in flames, > and my mind aches from the slice of your wit. Deliver us, oh Vulis, > for we are in need! It still looks like Sandy to me. Writing style for one, unwillingness to drop an argument for two, and the use of the name AIDAS is *very* suspicious. From mycroft at actrix.gen.nz Sun Jan 19 18:12:17 1997 From: mycroft at actrix.gen.nz (Paul Foley) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:12:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL In-Reply-To: <199701191820.MAA24006@nic.stolaf.edu> Message-ID: <199701200208.PAA21232@mycroft.actrix.gen.nz> On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:20:45 -0600, Sir Robin of Locksley wrote: >Is it possible to prove that number 0.1234567891011121314151617181920... >iz irrational? Most definately. All you need to do is prove that the set of this number is uncountable, ergo is irrational. If you have friend who have done math in real analysis they can explain more. This makes no sense at all. Presumably "the set of this number" means the cardinality of the set {1, 2, 3, ...} which is quite obviously countable! The definition of countable is that it can be put in one to one correspondence with exactly this set! The number is, nevertheless, irrational. A rational number is one that can be written as a ratio of two integers (and infinity is _not_ an integer...or any kind of number, for that matter. Else there would be no irrational numbers). Any rational number will end with a repeating series of digits (which may be 0s, of course). This number clearly has no such repeating sequence. >Is it REALLY true that there are real numbers that cannot be generated >by any algorithm? Some guy said that since the set of algorithms is >countable, but the set of real numbers is more than countable, there >must be some numbers for which there is no algorithms that generate them. If you show me an algorythm that calculates the real number TT (=3.14.....) I'll give you a Nobel Prize personally! Some things are too easy. How about pi = 4(1 - 1/3 + 1/5 - 1/7 + ...) Evaluate. The prize should probably go to Liebniz, though... To answer the original question, yes, there are numbers (the vast majority of numbers, in fact) which cannot be calculated by an algorithm. The computable numbers (those which can be generated algorithmically) are countable (because a universal Turing machine can emulate any other Turing machine given the appropriate input (program), you can give each possible algorithm a number corresponding to the program that implements it. Such numbers are integers, hence countable, so the number of algorithms is countable. Since the real numbers are not countable, it's obvious that there are real numbers which are not computable.) >But I still do not believe him. > >Also, is it true that the sequence of digits in e is random because the ONLY way to get to the >p'th digit is to calculate the p-1'st digits? > Exactly! This is called recursive definition. To get the p-th set in the sequence you need to find p-1 first... The sequence of digits in e is not random! You mean the distribution of digits looks random (is it?). e is certainly computable, which implies there is an algorithm that generates successive digits of e given inputs of 0, 1, 2, 3, ... I have no idea whether every such algorithm must generate all preceding digits in doing so. >Also, is it the correct definition of a real number: > >``A real number is the class of numbers which can represent the length of >an arbitrary line.'' Well, that is not entirely true... The length of any arbitrary line can be any number, rational, natural, etc. Real numbers are the numbers that defy all other categorization (they are not rational, irrational, natural, etc.) They are complex and despite any instinctual perception, there are a lot of them! No, the original definition is perfectly good. Natural numbers are rational, and rational numbers are real numbers. Irrational numbers are also real numbers. The last sentence is correct, though -- real numbers are complex numbers (although that's not what you meant, I think) and there are a lot of them (an infinite number, of course, but a "bigger" infinity than the countable sets of naturals or rationals). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 What's version 4.5? -- Paul Foley --- PGPmail preferred PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33 C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- November, n.: The eleventh twelfth of a weariness. -- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary" From mpd at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 18:23:19 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:23:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] Message-ID: <199701200223.SAA17184@netcom19.netcom.com> Jim Choate writes: > In reference to numbers which you can't describe, if you > examine the work they are ALL in the Complex domain, none of > them are Real's. Only countably many real numbers, or members of any uncountable set, are denumerable. It is the property of being uncountable, rather than of being real or complex, which is important here. In general, only countably many members of any uncountable set can be precisely specified within any formal system, given names comprised of strings of symbols, or other similar things. > Complex numbers deal with areas, not with lengths. It is often convenient, such as when drawing contour maps, to consider the complex numbers to be in 1-1 correspondence with the points of the plane. However, I wouldn't necessarily consider regions of the complex plane to have "area" in the Euclidian sense. > If there existed a Real for which we could not describe > this would imply that we could not draw a line of that > length. We can't physically draw a line segment to arbitrary high precision. We can conceive of the notion of line segments being in 1-1 correspondence with the reals, but we can specify at most countably many "finitely denumerable" line segments if we wish to discuss their lengths individually. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 18:25:49 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:25:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970119160951.006c26ac@ricochet.net> Message-ID: <32E2D795.4B0D@gte.net> Greg Broiles wrote: > One approach to the name question would be to eliminate > "cypherpunks at toad.com" and force old/new subscribers to choose between > "cypherpunks-edited" and "cypherpunks-unedited". The advantage I see is > that it provides more accurate feedback about what people want; the present > method provides information about the perceived value of unmoderation > weighed against the bother of dealing with subscribing & unsubscribing. The > disadvantage is that it's likely to eliminate many subscribers, and that it > tends to abandon the "cypherpunks at toad.com" history which is, by now, ~5 > years old. A good thought, Greg. One problem, though. My suspicion is that Gilmore/Sandfort really wanted to have all the current subscribers to the old unedited list to automatically be part of the new edited list. I don't think your possible approach would be acceptable to anyone I know, forcing people to re-subscribe (and implying that those who don't do anything would be unsubscribed, which would freak the list owners out for sure). From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 18:29:04 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:29:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STEGO] Sphere packings In-Reply-To: <199701191938.LAA32285@mailmasher.com> Message-ID: <32E2D857.34EC@gte.net> Huge Cajones Remailer wrote: I haven't saved any of these posts, and after all this time, it occurs to me that a complete collection of the caricatures, doable on a standard keyboard, would make a nice children's playbook. Has anyone thought of this? > Tim C. May will..... > \|/ > (*,*) Tim C. May > _m_-_m_ From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 18:38:55 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:38:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Numbers we cannot talk about In-Reply-To: <32e2a55c.flight@flight.hrnowl.lonestar.org> Message-ID: <199701200234.UAA06387@manifold.algebra.com> Paul Elliott wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > At 10:48 PM 1/18/1997, Secret Squirrel wrote: > > >Is it REALLY true that there are real numbers that cannot be > > >generated by any algorithm? Some guy said that since the set of > > >algorithms is countable, but the set of real numbers is more than > > >countable, there must be some numbers for which there is no > > >algorithms that generate them. > > > > There are sets of real numbers whose existence we can prove, but which > > we cannot otherwise describe. This is more extreme than being > > "generated by an algorithm". We can't even tell somebody which > > numbers to generate! (I take "to generate" here to mean "to compute a > > decimal approximation.") > > > > The set of real numbers is uncountable as is the set of subsets of the > > real numbers. Yet, we have only countably infinite ways to describe > > sets of numbers. > > > > All sets of numbers which we can describe can be described with a > > finite set of symbols. (Human beings are unable to distinguish > > between an infinite number of states.) The set of combinations of > > this finite set is infinite, but countable. > > > > Perhaps the axioms in set theory that tells us that the integers > have an uncountable number of subsets is, in point of fact, false. > Perhaps only those subsets of the integers that can be described > by an algorithm exist (actually, contrary to what the usual axioms of > set theory assert). It is very interesting. My limited understanding of this approach is that they say that only things that can be constructed by some positive method exist (please correct me if I am mistaken). But the question is, where do they stop and what exactly is "construction?" Say, does sqrt(2) "exist" in their sense of the world? We know we can calculate any given number of digits in it, is that enough? > We know that the set of axioms which tell us that there are unaccountably > many reals can be satisfied by a countable model! > (Downward Louwenheim Skolem Tarski theorem.) > > I know that Standard mathematical axioms yields lots of interesting > results, but when it talks of the infinite and we are dealing > with a practical subject like cryptography or even physics it > should not be taken too seriously. (With respect to uncountable sets.) Some of the applications of these theories are very relevant. For example, a theorem that proves that it is impossible to write a program that would determine if any other program would stop or loop forever, is very relevant and interesting. - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 18:43:23 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:43:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E2DBA6.12D8@gte.net> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Your/Gilmore's *renaming* of the original list, and co-opting of the > > *original* name for the edited list is prima facie evidence of bad > > faith,... > Sophist, paranoid nonsense. This one-month test is of a > moderated *Cypherpunks* list. So there was no renaming. > The unedited list was a gimme for cry babies such as Dale. Lookie here, folks. This is the flaming jerk who'll be editing your posts to the list. Note that we have a NEW admission from the Sandy man: the unedited list was NOT in fact a given. BTW, John Gilmore says just the opposite. > When the test is complete, things will go back to the previous > status if that's what folks want. If not, Cypherpunks will > continue as a moderated list (of some sort, further test may be > conducted if list members want). Again, contrary to Gilmore's statement(s). Who is this guy, and is he taking over Gilmore's persona or something? From cyberdude at iname.com Sun Jan 19 18:49:50 1997 From: cyberdude at iname.com (cyberdude at iname.com) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 18:49:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: 'Making Money Fast" Message-ID: <199701200249.SAA27748@toad.com> I took YOUR address from this news group, because it's obvious that you are aggressive and " WANT TO MAKE MONEY FAST ' For more information contact cyberdude at iname.com From sandfort at crl.com Sun Jan 19 19:03:04 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:03:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: AIDAS, SHMADIDAS In-Reply-To: <199701200154.TAA06113@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > I would love to hear Sandy's statement as to whether AIDAS is Sandy > Sandfort or not. If Sandy says no, I will believe him, because his > reputation has a longer time span than AIDAS's. > > In case Sandy says that AIDAS is not him, I will publicly retract my > statement, which by the way I made to AIDAS privately (I have no idea > why he posted it to the mailing list, although I do not really mind). Normally, I would not comment one way or the other on this sort of thing. We have a whole alphabet soup of aliases out there and I don't intend to waste time with denials. Heck, it helps keep an air of mystery about the list. But Igor has been a fair and reasoned contributor to this list, so as a personal favor I will admit that I AM NOT AIDAS. Sorry, but that's the truth. S a n d y P.S. I'm not Igor either. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From gnu at toad.com Sun Jan 19 19:07:17 1997 From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:07:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: THIS IS THE LAST UNMODERATED MESSAGE TO CYPHERPUNKS Message-ID: <199701200306.TAA28191@toad.com> OK, I think we're finally ready to go live with a moderated cypherpunks list (modulo glitches). Operators (well, Sandy) are standing by! John Gilmore From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 19:10:37 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:10:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Numbers we cannot talk about Message-ID: <199701200310.TAA28307@toad.com> Paul Elliott wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > At 10:48 PM 1/18/1997, Secret Squirrel wrote: > > >Is it REALLY true that there are real numbers that cannot be > > >generated by any algorithm? Some guy said that since the set of > > >algorithms is countable, but the set of real numbers is more than > > >countable, there must be some numbers for which there is no > > >algorithms that generate them. > > > > There are sets of real numbers whose existence we can prove, but which > > we cannot otherwise describe. This is more extreme than being > > "generated by an algorithm". We can't even tell somebody which > > numbers to generate! (I take "to generate" here to mean "to compute a > > decimal approximation.") > > > > The set of real numbers is uncountable as is the set of subsets of the > > real numbers. Yet, we have only countably infinite ways to describe > > sets of numbers. > > > > All sets of numbers which we can describe can be described with a > > finite set of symbols. (Human beings are unable to distinguish > > between an infinite number of states.) The set of combinations of > > this finite set is infinite, but countable. > > > > Perhaps the axioms in set theory that tells us that the integers > have an uncountable number of subsets is, in point of fact, false. > Perhaps only those subsets of the integers that can be described > by an algorithm exist (actually, contrary to what the usual axioms of > set theory assert). It is very interesting. My limited understanding of this approach is that they say that only things that can be constructed by some positive method exist (please correct me if I am mistaken). But the question is, where do they stop and what exactly is "construction?" Say, does sqrt(2) "exist" in their sense of the world? We know we can calculate any given number of digits in it, is that enough? > We know that the set of axioms which tell us that there are unaccountably > many reals can be satisfied by a countable model! > (Downward Louwenheim Skolem Tarski theorem.) > > I know that Standard mathematical axioms yields lots of interesting > results, but when it talks of the infinite and we are dealing > with a practical subject like cryptography or even physics it > should not be taken too seriously. (With respect to uncountable sets.) Some of the applications of these theories are very relevant. For example, a theorem that proves that it is impossible to write a program that would determine if any other program would stop or loop forever, is very relevant and interesting. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 19:10:49 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:10:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: AIDAS, SHMADIDAS In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701200305.VAA06634@manifold.algebra.com> alright, i retract my statement. Thank you, Sandy. igor Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, > > On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > > I would love to hear Sandy's statement as to whether AIDAS is Sandy > > Sandfort or not. If Sandy says no, I will believe him, because his > > reputation has a longer time span than AIDAS's. > > > > In case Sandy says that AIDAS is not him, I will publicly retract my > > statement, which by the way I made to AIDAS privately (I have no idea > > why he posted it to the mailing list, although I do not really mind). > > Normally, I would not comment one way or the other on this sort > of thing. We have a whole alphabet soup of aliases out there and > I don't intend to waste time with denials. Heck, it helps keep > an air of mystery about the list. But Igor has been a fair and > reasoned contributor to this list, so as a personal favor I will > admit that I AM NOT AIDAS. Sorry, but that's the truth. > > > S a n d y > > P.S. I'm not Igor either. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > - Igor. From gnu at toad.com Sun Jan 19 19:21:22 1997 From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:21:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: THIS IS THE FIRST MESSAGE TO THE MODERATED CYPHERPUNKS LIST Message-ID: <199701200321.TAA28578@toad.com> If you see this, Sandy has approved it and forwarded it to the list. Of course, this is modulo glitches and bugs. It may take a few days to get everything 100% right. And the messages will undoubtedly arrive on your site in a different order than the order in which they were sent (due to queueing at various places, mostly on toad.com). Welcome to (what I hope is) a more useful and less confrontative cypherpunks list. Now, can we get back to talking about cryptography? John Gilmore From mpd at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 19:30:38 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:30:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] Message-ID: <199701200330.TAA25727@netcom22.netcom.com> Jim Choate writes: >> One can construct the reals from the rationals quite easily >> using any of several well-known methods, such as >> equivalence classes of Cauchy sequences, or Dedikind cuts. > So you are saying that the Reals are a subset (ie can be > constructed from) of the Rationals? Yes, the Reals can be constructed from the Rationals. No, the Reals are not a subset of the Rationals. Fortunately, construction in mathematics is not simply limited to the taking of subsets. The Rationals can be constructed from the Integers, for instance, by multiplication and the taking of appropriate equivalence classes. In fact, everything can be built out of two sets and the axioms of Set Theory. > I can create a number which is not representable by the > ratio of two integers from two numbers which are > representable by ratios of two integers? Er, no. But you can create a number which is not representable as a fraction as a limit point of very many fractions. > That's a nifty trick indeed, I am really impressed. Thank-you. :) > Cauchy produced a test for testing convergence. I fail to > see the relevance here, but please expound... Cauchy sequences are useful for adding limit points to a set of things because their convergence criteria is very simple, and it is conceptually easy to take all Cauchy sequences whose elements come from a given set. If we then consider equivalence classes of those Cauchy sequences which converge to the same limit, and consider an element of the original set to correspond to the class containing the sequence all of whose members are that element, we can consider the classes to form a "completion" of the original set by addition of all its limit points. Similarly, the Reals are the completion of the Rationals. > Dedekind Cut: > "Thus a nested sequence of rational intervals give rise to > a seperation of all rational numbers into three classes." > Just exactly where does this allow us to create Reals? Finite ordered sets have maximum elements. Bounded infinite ordered sets have Least Upper Bounds, which may be a limit point as opposed to being an actual member of the set. Dedekind Cuts are a simple abstraction, often used to construct the Reals from the Rationals in undergraduate calculus courses. Conceptually, one makes a single "cut" in the set of Rationals, dividing it into two parts, all of the members of one part being greater than all of the members of the other. The number of ways of doing this correspond to the Reals. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From gnu at toad.com Sun Jan 19 19:40:55 1997 From: gnu at toad.com (John Gilmore) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:40:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: THIS IS THE FIRST MESSAGE TO THE MODERATED CYPHERPUNKS LIST Message-ID: <199701200340.TAA29072@toad.com> If you see this, Sandy has approved it and forwarded it to the list. Of course, this is modulo glitches and bugs. It may take a few days to get everything 100% right. And the messages will undoubtedly arrive on your site in a different order than the order in which they were sent (due to queueing at various places, mostly on toad.com). Welcome to (what I hope is) a more useful and less confrontative cypherpunks list. Now, can we get back to talking about cryptography? John Gilmore From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 19:42:01 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:42:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: AIDAS, SHMADIDAS Message-ID: <199701200342.TAA29111@toad.com> alright, i retract my statement. Thank you, Sandy. igor Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, > > On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > > I would love to hear Sandy's statement as to whether AIDAS is Sandy > > Sandfort or not. If Sandy says no, I will believe him, because his > > reputation has a longer time span than AIDAS's. > > > > In case Sandy says that AIDAS is not him, I will publicly retract my > > statement, which by the way I made to AIDAS privately (I have no idea > > why he posted it to the mailing list, although I do not really mind). > > Normally, I would not comment one way or the other on this sort > of thing. We have a whole alphabet soup of aliases out there and > I don't intend to waste time with denials. Heck, it helps keep > an air of mystery about the list. But Igor has been a fair and > reasoned contributor to this list, so as a personal favor I will > admit that I AM NOT AIDAS. Sorry, but that's the truth. > > > S a n d y > > P.S. I'm not Igor either. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 19:43:46 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:43:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Numbers we cannot talk about Message-ID: <199701200343.TAA29149@toad.com> Paul Elliott wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > At 10:48 PM 1/18/1997, Secret Squirrel wrote: > > >Is it REALLY true that there are real numbers that cannot be > > >generated by any algorithm? Some guy said that since the set of > > >algorithms is countable, but the set of real numbers is more than > > >countable, there must be some numbers for which there is no > > >algorithms that generate them. > > > > There are sets of real numbers whose existence we can prove, but which > > we cannot otherwise describe. This is more extreme than being > > "generated by an algorithm". We can't even tell somebody which > > numbers to generate! (I take "to generate" here to mean "to compute a > > decimal approximation.") > > > > The set of real numbers is uncountable as is the set of subsets of the > > real numbers. Yet, we have only countably infinite ways to describe > > sets of numbers. > > > > All sets of numbers which we can describe can be described with a > > finite set of symbols. (Human beings are unable to distinguish > > between an infinite number of states.) The set of combinations of > > this finite set is infinite, but countable. > > > > Perhaps the axioms in set theory that tells us that the integers > have an uncountable number of subsets is, in point of fact, false. > Perhaps only those subsets of the integers that can be described > by an algorithm exist (actually, contrary to what the usual axioms of > set theory assert). It is very interesting. My limited understanding of this approach is that they say that only things that can be constructed by some positive method exist (please correct me if I am mistaken). But the question is, where do they stop and what exactly is "construction?" Say, does sqrt(2) "exist" in their sense of the world? We know we can calculate any given number of digits in it, is that enough? > We know that the set of axioms which tell us that there are unaccountably > many reals can be satisfied by a countable model! > (Downward Louwenheim Skolem Tarski theorem.) > > I know that Standard mathematical axioms yields lots of interesting > results, but when it talks of the infinite and we are dealing > with a practical subject like cryptography or even physics it > should not be taken too seriously. (With respect to uncountable sets.) Some of the applications of these theories are very relevant. For example, a theorem that proves that it is impossible to write a program that would determine if any other program would stop or loop forever, is very relevant and interesting. - Igor. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 19 19:53:22 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:53:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701200400.WAA01432@einstein> Forwarded message: > Only countably many real numbers, or members of any uncountable > set, are denumerable. It is the property of being uncountable, > rather than of being real or complex, which is important here. In short you are saying there are Reals which can not be expressed in the format: AmEm + Am-1Em-1 + ... + A0E0 . B0E-1 + B1E-2 + ... + BnE-n+1 where m and n -> infinity. Another way of saying this is that there are Reals for which membership in a set of Reals, because they are uncountable and therefore unrepresentable, is not possible. From a set perspective this means, R = [[-infinity, ..., m] [n, ..., 0] [0, ..., p] [q, ..., +infinity]] such that there are uncountable numbers between m,n or p,q; etc. Clearly in contradiction with the base axioms of mathematics as described by Euclid in defining a line. > In general, only countably many members of any uncountable set > can be precisely specified within any formal system, given names > comprised of strings of symbols, or other similar things. And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be expressed by the decimal expansion above. Which clearly qualifies as a formal system. There are three ways of looking at the total of mathematics, symbolic set theory (Bourbaki School) geometric (Euclidian) While it is true the 3 are equivalent, the choice of approach does have a relevance on how difficult, if even tractible, the proof is for any particular concept. > It is often convenient, such as when drawing contour maps, to > consider the complex numbers to be in 1-1 correspondence with the > points of the plane. However, I wouldn't necessarily consider > regions of the complex plane to have "area" in the Euclidian > sense. The Euclidian plane IS a complex plane. The -j or -i used in Complex symboligy simply means 'rotate the second axis of measure 90 degree counter-clockwise (by agreement) to the axis of the first measure'. If it requires 2 or more numbers (integer or real) taken as a set to represent the quantity it is a Complex. Regions of a Complex plane are directly comparable (1-to-1) with the concept of 'area' on the Euclidian plane. > We can't physically draw a line segment to arbitrary high > precision. Irrelevant. If the hole in my approach is that I can't draw a line of arbitrary precision in practice then your own 'uncountable numbers' argument falls for the same reason because if it is truly uncountable you can't point to it on a number line and say "there is an uncountable". This discussion is one of principles, not one of practice. > We can conceive of the notion of line segments being > in 1-1 correspondence with the reals, but we can specify at most > countably many "finitely denumerable" line segments if we wish to > discuss their lengths individually. To say there are Reals for which there is no linear representation is the same as saying there are lengths which can't be measured. Now since a line is nothing but a set of points, which don't have size, but only position this obviously holds no water, unless you are saying it is not possible to place two points arbitrarily close together, which would imply that points have some sort of width, clearly against the definition of a point. This all goes back to what I said in a earlier post, the problem comes from our axiomatic (ie taken on faith, unprovable) use of infinity. Without a clear and precise dilineation of those axioms prior to the proof such conclusions are worthless. Several of you have said "infinity is not a number", this is an axiom. Change the axioms and the whole structure changes. I am simply saying that perhaps we should look at the "infinity is not a number" axiom, much as geometers look at Euclids Fifth Postulate. There is nothing inherent in nature that prefers one axiomatic expression of infinity over the other. By changing our axiomatic definition of infinity we reduce the sets we have to work with from [Integer, Irrational, Real, Complex] to [Integer, Real, Complex]. Now, whether it is worth the trouble is at this time unanswerable because nobody has ever done the research. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com "The laws of mathematics, as far as they refer to reality, are not certain, and as far as they are certain, do not refer to reality." Albert Einstein From mpd at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 19:55:29 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 19:55:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] Message-ID: <199701200355.TAA29371@toad.com> Jim Choate writes: >> One can construct the reals from the rationals quite easily >> using any of several well-known methods, such as >> equivalence classes of Cauchy sequences, or Dedikind cuts. > So you are saying that the Reals are a subset (ie can be > constructed from) of the Rationals? Yes, the Reals can be constructed from the Rationals. No, the Reals are not a subset of the Rationals. Fortunately, construction in mathematics is not simply limited to the taking of subsets. The Rationals can be constructed from the Integers, for instance, by multiplication and the taking of appropriate equivalence classes. In fact, everything can be built out of two sets and the axioms of Set Theory. > I can create a number which is not representable by the > ratio of two integers from two numbers which are > representable by ratios of two integers? Er, no. But you can create a number which is not representable as a fraction as a limit point of very many fractions. > That's a nifty trick indeed, I am really impressed. Thank-you. :) > Cauchy produced a test for testing convergence. I fail to > see the relevance here, but please expound... Cauchy sequences are useful for adding limit points to a set of things because their convergence criteria is very simple, and it is conceptually easy to take all Cauchy sequences whose elements come from a given set. If we then consider equivalence classes of those Cauchy sequences which converge to the same limit, and consider an element of the original set to correspond to the class containing the sequence all of whose members are that element, we can consider the classes to form a "completion" of the original set by addition of all its limit points. Similarly, the Reals are the completion of the Rationals. > Dedekind Cut: > "Thus a nested sequence of rational intervals give rise to > a seperation of all rational numbers into three classes." > Just exactly where does this allow us to create Reals? Finite ordered sets have maximum elements. Bounded infinite ordered sets have Least Upper Bounds, which may be a limit point as opposed to being an actual member of the set. Dedekind Cuts are a simple abstraction, often used to construct the Reals from the Rationals in undergraduate calculus courses. Conceptually, one makes a single "cut" in the set of Rationals, dividing it into two parts, all of the members of one part being greater than all of the members of the other. The number of ways of doing this correspond to the Reals. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 19 20:27:14 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:27:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701200434.WAA01500@einstein> Forwarded message: > Yes, the Reals can be constructed from the Rationals. No, the > Reals are not a subset of the Rationals. An arbitrary Real can be constructed from the Rationals. If we accept the proposition, as posed apparently by you and others, of uncountable Reals then your 'assumption' fails, otherwise the 'uncountable' members would be countable. > Er, no. But you can create a number which is not representable > as a fraction as a limit point of very many fractions. A 'limit point' is not the same as 'equal to'. Arbitrarily close is not equivalent, inherent in the definition of a limit point is the concept of 'little o' and 'big o', or worded differently our axiomatic definition of infinity. > If we then consider equivalence classes of those Cauchy sequences > which converge to the same limit, and consider an element of the > original set to correspond to the class containing the sequence > all of whose members are that element, we can consider the > classes to form a "completion" of the original set by addition of > all its limit points. We can, but there is no fundamental rule in mathematics that requires me to ignore the small but distinct difference between the element in the original set and the sequences used to approximate it. It is something that must be agreed upon by accepting a particular axiomatic definition of infinity. > Dedekind Cuts are a simple abstraction, often used to construct > the Reals from the Rationals in undergraduate calculus courses. > Conceptually, one makes a single "cut" in the set of Rationals, > dividing it into two parts, all of the members of one part being > greater than all of the members of the other. The number of ways > of doing this correspond to the Reals. The number of cuts are 1-to-1 with the Reals, they are not the Reals. There is no way I can make a cut which is 3.1527, only 1-to-1 with the number(s). Important distinction. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." Yeats From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 20:38:54 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:38:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STEGO] Sphere packings In-Reply-To: <32E2D857.34EC@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701200433.WAA00474@manifold.algebra.com> i have all of them archived. igor Dale Thorn wrote: > > Huge Cajones Remailer wrote: > > I haven't saved any of these posts, and after all this time, it > occurs to me that a complete collection of the caricatures, doable > on a standard keyboard, would make a nice children's playbook. > > Has anyone thought of this? > > > Tim C. May will..... > > \|/ > > (*,*) Tim C. May > > _m_-_m_ > - Igor. From dsmith at prairienet.org Sun Jan 19 20:50:39 1997 From: dsmith at prairienet.org (David E. Smith) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:50:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Don't send this to the moderated list... Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970119225041.0069931c@midwest.net> Send this message to cp-flames and cp-unedited, not to the moderated list. Not only is is devoid of crypto content, but it'll allow me to verify that I've been subscrived :) to the appropriate list (also to see if the headers are changed to the point where I have to modify my filters, etc.) dave ----- David E. Smith, P O Box 324, Cape Girardeau MO USA 63702 dsmith at prairienet.org http://www.prairienet.org/~dsmith send mail with subject of "send pgp-key" for my PGP public key " . . . but I'm an AMERICAN criminal lunatic!" --- The Joker From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 20:55:41 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:55:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <199701200455.UAA00369@toad.com> AIDAS wrote: > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed with the > > > > > spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons that > > > > > can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so forth. > > > > Not sure about "all", but someone whose name sounds like AIDS, and who > > > > advocates censorship, most likely is one.[snip] > Ah, very strong response indeed. I feel as if shot down in flames, > and my mind aches from the slice of your wit. Deliver us, oh Vulis, > for we are in need! It still looks like Sandy to me. Writing style for one, unwillingness to drop an argument for two, and the use of the name AIDAS is *very* suspicious. From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 20:55:42 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:55:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes Message-ID: <199701200455.UAA00370@toad.com> Greg Broiles wrote: > One approach to the name question would be to eliminate > "cypherpunks at toad.com" and force old/new subscribers to choose between > "cypherpunks-edited" and "cypherpunks-unedited". The advantage I see is > that it provides more accurate feedback about what people want; the present > method provides information about the perceived value of unmoderation > weighed against the bother of dealing with subscribing & unsubscribing. The > disadvantage is that it's likely to eliminate many subscribers, and that it > tends to abandon the "cypherpunks at toad.com" history which is, by now, ~5 > years old. A good thought, Greg. One problem, though. My suspicion is that Gilmore/Sandfort really wanted to have all the current subscribers to the old unedited list to automatically be part of the new edited list. I don't think your possible approach would be acceptable to anyone I know, forcing people to re-subscribe (and implying that those who don't do anything would be unsubscribed, which would freak the list owners out for sure). From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 19 20:55:52 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:55:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) Message-ID: <199701200455.UAA00391@toad.com> Adam Back wrote: This was an utterly fascinating post, if y'all don't mind my saying so. I certainly can't vouch for the details (or the theories), but whether any of the details are deliberate experiments on Dimitri's part or not, the totality of what has taken place would make an excellent source for a post-graduate study. Am I right? I would suggest, however, if you're looking for a likely candidate for really advanced social manipulation/experimentation, you should be looking at the list owner(s), not the gadflys. There's this silly theory some people have, that once in a while the little people (the good guys?) win enough points to set the bad guys back a ways. Not in 20th century Amerika. Read Carl Oglesby's article "Paranoia As A Way Of Knowing", and think: "Paranoia As A Way Of Knowing Who We Are." [much text deleted below] > It's occured to me recently that Dimitri's posts are not being read > correctly, it is not the content which is the point, nor the > superficial lack of crypto relevance. > I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when > the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. My suggestions for > interesting experiments during the moderated phase are: > I hope Dimitri's selfless efforts in furthering understanding of DoS > attacks on mailing lists is properly acknowledged when he publishes > his findings on completion of his experiments. I also hope that > Dimitri will document his recommendations for mailing list > configuration and management in light of his experiments. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 19 20:56:01 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:56:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701200456.UAA00404@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Yes, the Reals can be constructed from the Rationals. No, the > Reals are not a subset of the Rationals. An arbitrary Real can be constructed from the Rationals. If we accept the proposition, as posed apparently by you and others, of uncountable Reals then your 'assumption' fails, otherwise the 'uncountable' members would be countable. > Er, no. But you can create a number which is not representable > as a fraction as a limit point of very many fractions. A 'limit point' is not the same as 'equal to'. Arbitrarily close is not equivalent, inherent in the definition of a limit point is the concept of 'little o' and 'big o', or worded differently our axiomatic definition of infinity. > If we then consider equivalence classes of those Cauchy sequences > which converge to the same limit, and consider an element of the > original set to correspond to the class containing the sequence > all of whose members are that element, we can consider the > classes to form a "completion" of the original set by addition of > all its limit points. We can, but there is no fundamental rule in mathematics that requires me to ignore the small but distinct difference between the element in the original set and the sequences used to approximate it. It is something that must be agreed upon by accepting a particular axiomatic definition of infinity. > Dedekind Cuts are a simple abstraction, often used to construct > the Reals from the Rationals in undergraduate calculus courses. > Conceptually, one makes a single "cut" in the set of Rationals, > dividing it into two parts, all of the members of one part being > greater than all of the members of the other. The number of ways > of doing this correspond to the Reals. The number of cuts are 1-to-1 with the Reals, they are not the Reals. There is no way I can make a cut which is 3.1527, only 1-to-1 with the number(s). Important distinction. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." Yeats From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 20:56:07 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:56:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) Message-ID: <199701200456.UAA00406@toad.com> my predictions: 1) Dale Thorn will become another Kagalenko and will mailbomb mods 2) 90% of cypherpunks-moderated will be about moderation and censorship 3) there will be massive openings of alternative cypherpunks mailing lists, all doomed to fail 4) several alt.* newsgroups like alt.cypherpunks will be created 5) main business of freedom-knights will be shitting and spitting at cypherpunks in alt.cypherpunks 6) moderators will spend increasing amounts of time on their work 7) crossposting between alt.cypherpunks and mail.cypherpunks will be prohibited by alt.cypherpunks FAQ, posted monthly by Dr. John Martin Grubor igor Adam Back wrote: > > > It's occured to me recently that Dimitri's posts are not being read > correctly, it is not the content which is the point, nor the > superficial lack of crypto relevance. > > Dimitri is an intelligent guy, and has a high level of crypto > expertise (he has a PhD on a cryptography topic). It is my belief > that his posts can only be understood in a "meta" sense -- he is > engaged in a highly complex cryptographic experiment. People who read > and respond to his individual posts are the unwitting subjects in his > experiments. His posts and the responses to them are actually the > data-set for a thorough cryptanalysis of mailing list threats. His > current topic under investigation is Denial of Service (DoS) attacks > on mailing lists. > > Denial of service on mailing lists is a complex business, and requires > expert human input to be done properly. > > Dimitri has systematically explored these types of posting behaviour: > > 1. Posting only crypto relevant material. > 2. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with hand personalised flame bait. > 3. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with bot generated flame bait. > 4. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with news stories. > 5. Posting only non crypto relevant material. > > The alert reader will recall these phases of posting style (currently > we are in sub experiment 5, the other phases have occured over a > protracted period of intensive experimentation, and some newer readers > may have missed earlier phases). > > There were other experiments which may or may not have been part of > Dimitri's series of DoS experiments: > > 6. Subscribing the list to itself (testing list resilience to recursion) > > 7. Forging posts to carefully selected newsgroups with > "cypherpunks at toad.com" as the sender (this indirectly adds user > "cypherpunks at toad.com" to many direct marketing lists as direct > marketers make use of email addresses scanned from newsgroups). > > 8. The "UNSCRIVE" and other spelling variations of "unsubscribe" epidemic, > and ensuing instructions and discussion > > 9. Subscribing the list to other lists > > 10. Bot generated flame bait posted anonymously (with ascii art) > > >From the post I am following up to the reader will observe an oblique > reference to the transition from phase 4 of the experiments to the > current phase, phase 5 (the reader will also note references to experimental > results c and d described below): > > Dimitri Vulis writes: > > One memorable "censorship" incident occurred when the lying cocksucker > > John Gilmore (spit) forcibly unsubscribed me from this list because he > > didn't like the contents of my submissions - or did you forget already? > > Look up Declan's disgraceful writeup on Netly News archives. > > > > At that time most valuable contributors to this list (such as myself) > > resolved not to contribute crypto-relevant content to a censored forum. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > More widely read cypherpunks will know that Dimitri has performed > similar experiments in other fora -- his systematic experiments in > numerous USENET newsgroups resulted in the his receiving the > prestigious KOTM ("Kook Of The Month") award. > > His main experimental results to date with the cypherpunks mailing > list series of experiments have been: > > a) many cypherpunks publically announcing kill filing him > > b) numerous cypherpunks suggesting censoring him (a particularly > interesting result considering the libertarian leanings of many on > this list) > > c) the outstanding experimental result of being forcibly unsubscribed > from the list, and of being barred from resubscribing by John Gilmore. > (creator of alt.* USENET newsgroup hierarchy, and well know freespeech > advocate) > > d) another interesting, incidental experimental result was provided by > Declan McCullagh in his Netly News piece in prematurely, and entirely > unwittingly, publishing some of Dimitri's expermiental data-set. > > e) the main experimental result: the list shortly moving to a > moderated form, seemingly at the request of Sandy Sandfort, with > agreement from John Gilmore. > > These experimental results are quite significant, when taken in the > context of the anti-censorship, libertarian, pro-freespeech > environment of the cypherpunks mailing list. Dimitri should be > congratulated on his outstanding work. > > I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when > the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. My suggestions for > interesting experiments during the moderated phase are: > > 1. Testing the limits of Dale Thorn's anti-censorship sentiments (for > those who don't read Dale, he is subscribed to "cypherpunks-unedited" > in preparation for the moderation). > > 2. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection criteria. > > 3. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection rate for long crypto relevant > posts interspersed with irrelevant flame bait. > > 4. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection rate for posts with flame bait .sigs > > I hope Dimitri's selfless efforts in furthering understanding of DoS > attacks on mailing lists is properly acknowledged when he publishes > his findings on completion of his experiments. I also hope that > Dimitri will document his recommendations for mailing list > configuration and management in light of his experiments. > > Adam > -- > print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> > )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 - Igor. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 19 20:57:46 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 20:57:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701200457.UAA00416@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Only countably many real numbers, or members of any uncountable > set, are denumerable. It is the property of being uncountable, > rather than of being real or complex, which is important here. In short you are saying there are Reals which can not be expressed in the format: AmEm + Am-1Em-1 + ... + A0E0 . B0E-1 + B1E-2 + ... + BnE-n+1 where m and n -> infinity. Another way of saying this is that there are Reals for which membership in a set of Reals, because they are uncountable and therefore unrepresentable, is not possible. From a set perspective this means, R = [[-infinity, ..., m] [n, ..., 0] [0, ..., p] [q, ..., +infinity]] such that there are uncountable numbers between m,n or p,q; etc. Clearly in contradiction with the base axioms of mathematics as described by Euclid in defining a line. > In general, only countably many members of any uncountable set > can be precisely specified within any formal system, given names > comprised of strings of symbols, or other similar things. And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be expressed by the decimal expansion above. Which clearly qualifies as a formal system. There are three ways of looking at the total of mathematics, symbolic set theory (Bourbaki School) geometric (Euclidian) While it is true the 3 are equivalent, the choice of approach does have a relevance on how difficult, if even tractible, the proof is for any particular concept. > It is often convenient, such as when drawing contour maps, to > consider the complex numbers to be in 1-1 correspondence with the > points of the plane. However, I wouldn't necessarily consider > regions of the complex plane to have "area" in the Euclidian > sense. The Euclidian plane IS a complex plane. The -j or -i used in Complex symboligy simply means 'rotate the second axis of measure 90 degree counter-clockwise (by agreement) to the axis of the first measure'. If it requires 2 or more numbers (integer or real) taken as a set to represent the quantity it is a Complex. Regions of a Complex plane are directly comparable (1-to-1) with the concept of 'area' on the Euclidian plane. > We can't physically draw a line segment to arbitrary high > precision. Irrelevant. If the hole in my approach is that I can't draw a line of arbitrary precision in practice then your own 'uncountable numbers' argument falls for the same reason because if it is truly uncountable you can't point to it on a number line and say "there is an uncountable". This discussion is one of principles, not one of practice. > We can conceive of the notion of line segments being > in 1-1 correspondence with the reals, but we can specify at most > countably many "finitely denumerable" line segments if we wish to > discuss their lengths individually. To say there are Reals for which there is no linear representation is the same as saying there are lengths which can't be measured. Now since a line is nothing but a set of points, which don't have size, but only position this obviously holds no water, unless you are saying it is not possible to place two points arbitrarily close together, which would imply that points have some sort of width, clearly against the definition of a point. This all goes back to what I said in a earlier post, the problem comes from our axiomatic (ie taken on faith, unprovable) use of infinity. Without a clear and precise dilineation of those axioms prior to the proof such conclusions are worthless. Several of you have said "infinity is not a number", this is an axiom. Change the axioms and the whole structure changes. I am simply saying that perhaps we should look at the "infinity is not a number" axiom, much as geometers look at Euclids Fifth Postulate. There is nothing inherent in nature that prefers one axiomatic expression of infinity over the other. By changing our axiomatic definition of infinity we reduce the sets we have to work with from [Integer, Irrational, Real, Complex] to [Integer, Real, Complex]. Now, whether it is worth the trouble is at this time unanswerable because nobody has ever done the research. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com "The laws of mathematics, as far as they refer to reality, are not certain, and as far as they are certain, do not refer to reality." Albert Einstein From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Sun Jan 19 21:13:27 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:13:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Debt (calling) Cards Re: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701200513.VAA00653@toad.com> At 04:58 PM 1/17/97 -0800, Rich Graves wrote: >What does concern me is personal privacy. I don't want people tracking >my movements or purchasing patterns, so I prefer to use cash or >pseudonymous debit cards. This reminds me, I got a sprint 5 minute sample calling card when I got my college texts. I suspect that other people on this list got one as well. Mine is completely unused and although transferring the actual cards would cost, (the stamp and envelope), would anyone be interested in trading the numbers? This one is registered as being handed out in Weatherford Okla. Five minutes of long distance is trivial, so I would be willing to trade in regular e-mail, as opposed to through a middleman. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Sun Jan 19 21:13:29 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:13:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701200513.VAA00660@toad.com> At 08:04 PM 1/17/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis wrote: >snow writes: > >> > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). >> >> >>shudder<< >> >> No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > >Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on... > Wouldn't work. A sworn member of the holy order of the restitution for the crimes of my enemies, has an explosive device buried within h[is/er] bowels. When (s)he goes up, alone, (s)he will take 100+ enemies with h[im/er]. Of course (s)he has to be willing to die, or be duped into thinking that (s)he really has appendicitis. So a courier would still be easy to find. Or, a cancer infected member of said religious cult, knowing that (s)he will soon die anyway, and probably atone for h[is/er] many sins, ((s)he hasn't really done anything rightous, like kill one of the enemy), chooses to have h[is/er] cancerous bowels, up to the stomache, removed, and replaced with a bomb. (s)he then heals up a little while, being fed intraveinously, until the time of h[is/er] atonement. A makeup artist erases the signs of disease that (s)he carries and a large dose of pain killer is given to h[im/er] to take right before entering the airport. (s)he dies knowing that (s)he is going straight past heaven to an even higher level. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Sun Jan 19 21:15:12 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:15:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701200513.VAA00645@toad.com> At 03:44 PM 1/17/97 -0600, Igor Chudov wrote: >It is my understanding that an ordinary banking consumer that >uses "pay bills by phone" service cannot transfer $$ to any arbitrary >account. There is a limited list of permitted accounts, such as utility >companies. Therefore, the risk of unauthorized transfer is very >limited. It is limited, both accounts have to have the same password, (four character, numeric.) If I want to transfer funds from another persons account to one that I control, all I have to do is change the password on one of them to that of the other, transfer funds, and change the password back. By the time that my victim found out, (via the little letter "per your request, $xxx was transferred to accnt#123456 from accnt#7890"), I would be long gone. From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Sun Jan 19 21:18:37 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:18:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701200518.VAA12162@sirius.infonex.com> Bill Frantz writes: > I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that > email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to > toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small > fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost. Failing something catastrophic like a disk failure or a host down for more than a week, this should not be the case. Almost every site running sendmail has the Os ("SuperSafe") option set. That means sendmail will not respond to a "." at the end of a DATA command with SMTP code 250 until it has written the incoming message (and queue info) to disk and called fsync. Thus, you may get 2 copies of a message, but mail messages should not just disappear regularly at all, even if the network goes down or a machine crashes. Non-sendmail MTA's tend to be even more strict about this, not even allowing this behavior to be disabled. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 21:19:05 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:19:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <32E2D346.1370@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701200515.XAA00924@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > AIDAS wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed with the > > > > > > spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons that > > > > > > can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so forth. > > > > > > Not sure about "all", but someone whose name sounds like AIDS, and who > > > > > advocates censorship, most likely is one.[snip] > > Ah, very strong response indeed. I feel as if shot down in flames, > > and my mind aches from the slice of your wit. Deliver us, oh Vulis, > > for we are in need! > > It still looks like Sandy to me. Writing style for one, unwillingness > to drop an argument for two, and the use of the name AIDAS is *very* > suspicious. But Sandy gave his word publicly that he was not AIDAS! - Igor. From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Sun Jan 19 21:24:28 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:24:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: 'Monster' numbers Message-ID: <199701200524.VAA12384@sirius.infonex.com> At 5:08 PM 1/19/1997, Jim Choate wrote: >In reference to numbers which you can't describe, if you examine the work >they are ALL in the Complex domain, none of them are Real's. This is incorrect. The argument outlined applied to real numbers only. If you wish to refute the argument please do so. You might find it helpful to review the reference in Smullyan's book. >If there existed a Real for which we could not describe this would imply >that we could not draw a line of that length. The subtlety of the idea lies in the fact that you can't make a statement like "$foo is not describable" where $foo means anything. Any number for which you can say, "I can draw a line which is $bar units long" is describable. Math Man From kent at songbird.com Sun Jan 19 21:48:18 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:48:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dedikend Cut's and such In-Reply-To: <199701200008.SAA00943@einstein> Message-ID: <199701200650.WAA07301@songbird.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > > > Hi, > > Did a little research, Dedekind Cut's and such use Integers to define a > SPECIFIC Real to a arbitrary BUT FIXED resolution. They do not define the > set of Reals. They do. The set of all numbers representable by a DC is precisely the set of reals. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From nobody at huge.cajones.com Sun Jan 19 21:54:33 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 21:54:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: infinity & set membership Message-ID: <199701200554.VAA31722@mailmasher.com> At 4:36 PM 1/19/1997, Jim Choate wrote: >"The least upper bound of a set of real numbers is often called the >supremum, the greatest lower bound its infimum. In general the supremum and >infimum of a set ARE MEMBERS OF THE SET or at least LIMITS OF SEQUENCES OF >MEMBERS OF THE SET." > >[capitalization is mine] > >In this case the suprenum is infinity. > >Introduction to Calculus and Analysis >Courant and John >Vol. 1, pp. 97, Section e. >1965 Edition >Library of Congress: 65-16403 I presume this is a reference to Jim's earlier post: At 1:19 PM 1/19/1997, Jim Choate wrote: >Forwarded message: > >> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:20:45 -0600 >> From: Sir Robin of Locksley > >> >Is it possible to prove that number 0.1234567891011121314151617181920... >> >iz irrational? >> >> Most definately. All you need to do is prove that the set of this number is >> uncountable, ergo is irrational. If you have friend who have done math in real >> analysis they can explain more. > >irrational means 'not expressible as the ratio of two integers', this does >not imply uncountable. > >Whether 0.12345678910111213... is irrational or not depends on how we choose >to define a rational number where the denominator and numerator are both >approaching infinity and how quickly those approaches occur. > >[ What is your definition of infinity/infinity ?] > >As alluded to before, > > 0.12345678910111213 = 12345678910111213.... / n > > (where n = infinity) > >0.123456789101112... is certainly countable because by the definition of >countable it must be 1-to-1 with the counting numbers (ie non-negative >integers), which this one clearly is since it contains each positive >non-zero integer (ie the set of numbers required to produce the number are >clearly less, 1 less to be exact, than the counting numbers). Of course this same argument could be used to claim that pi is also rational. pi = 314159.... / n (where n=infinity). What could be the problem here? One problem might be that an integer (not including infinity) divided by "infinity" should be 0. The p/q definition of rational numbers does not rely on "infinity" being a member of the set of integers. Also, we rarely hear this dialogue: "Give me an integer." "Okay - infinity!" Still, let's define a set which contains the integers as well as positive and negative "infinity". I will call this set the "Choate-integers." Let's add some reasonable rules for working with +inf and -inf. n is a non-zero positive traditional integer. a. -inf = +inf * -1 b. +inf * n = +inf c. +inf + n = +inf d. +inf / +inf = 1 Operations involving multiplication or division of +inf and zero are undefined. Using these definitions, you will find that the p/q definition of rational numbers operates as expected on the set of Choate-integers. The argument I supplied earlier for the rational nature of 0.1234... still holds. Math Man From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Sun Jan 19 22:02:23 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:02:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math Message-ID: <199701200602.WAA14162@sirius.infonex.com> Will all those people who are talking about set theory and the countability of various number systems take their discussion to sci.math, please? 'Cuz 1) All that stuff is irrelevant to crypto, its science or politics. 2) Not a single math comment made by anybody on any of those threads is even remotely correct. 3) You will recieve your proper chewing out on sci.math and 4) This bullshit is extremely annoying to those of us who has some real training in math, even more so than the regular bullshit on this list. Hey Sandy, you gonna censor these creeps once you start censoring? From kent at songbird.com Sun Jan 19 22:10:45 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:10:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dedikend Cut's and such Message-ID: <199701200610.WAA01640@toad.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > > > Hi, > > Did a little research, Dedekind Cut's and such use Integers to define a > SPECIFIC Real to a arbitrary BUT FIXED resolution. They do not define the > set of Reals. They do. The set of all numbers representable by a DC is precisely the set of reals. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Sun Jan 19 22:11:02 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:11:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701200611.WAA01690@toad.com> At 03:44 PM 1/17/97 -0600, Igor Chudov wrote: >It is my understanding that an ordinary banking consumer that >uses "pay bills by phone" service cannot transfer $$ to any arbitrary >account. There is a limited list of permitted accounts, such as utility >companies. Therefore, the risk of unauthorized transfer is very >limited. It is limited, both accounts have to have the same password, (four character, numeric.) If I want to transfer funds from another persons account to one that I control, all I have to do is change the password on one of them to that of the other, transfer funds, and change the password back. By the time that my victim found out, (via the little letter "per your request, $xxx was transferred to accnt#123456 from accnt#7890"), I would be long gone. From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Sun Jan 19 22:11:04 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:11:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: 'Monster' numbers Message-ID: <199701200611.WAA01691@toad.com> At 5:08 PM 1/19/1997, Jim Choate wrote: >In reference to numbers which you can't describe, if you examine the work >they are ALL in the Complex domain, none of them are Real's. This is incorrect. The argument outlined applied to real numbers only. If you wish to refute the argument please do so. You might find it helpful to review the reference in Smullyan's book. >If there existed a Real for which we could not describe this would imply >that we could not draw a line of that length. The subtlety of the idea lies in the fact that you can't make a statement like "$foo is not describable" where $foo means anything. Any number for which you can say, "I can draw a line which is $bar units long" is describable. Math Man From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 22:11:06 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:11:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <199701200611.WAA01692@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > AIDAS wrote: > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed with the > > > > > > spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons that > > > > > > can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so forth. > > > > > > Not sure about "all", but someone whose name sounds like AIDS, and who > > > > > advocates censorship, most likely is one.[snip] > > Ah, very strong response indeed. I feel as if shot down in flames, > > and my mind aches from the slice of your wit. Deliver us, oh Vulis, > > for we are in need! > > It still looks like Sandy to me. Writing style for one, unwillingness > to drop an argument for two, and the use of the name AIDAS is *very* > suspicious. But Sandy gave his word publicly that he was not AIDAS! - Igor. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Sun Jan 19 22:11:27 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:11:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: infinity & set membership Message-ID: <199701200611.WAA01701@toad.com> At 4:36 PM 1/19/1997, Jim Choate wrote: >"The least upper bound of a set of real numbers is often called the >supremum, the greatest lower bound its infimum. In general the supremum and >infimum of a set ARE MEMBERS OF THE SET or at least LIMITS OF SEQUENCES OF >MEMBERS OF THE SET." > >[capitalization is mine] > >In this case the suprenum is infinity. > >Introduction to Calculus and Analysis >Courant and John >Vol. 1, pp. 97, Section e. >1965 Edition >Library of Congress: 65-16403 I presume this is a reference to Jim's earlier post: At 1:19 PM 1/19/1997, Jim Choate wrote: >Forwarded message: > >> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 12:20:45 -0600 >> From: Sir Robin of Locksley > >> >Is it possible to prove that number 0.1234567891011121314151617181920... >> >iz irrational? >> >> Most definately. All you need to do is prove that the set of this number is >> uncountable, ergo is irrational. If you have friend who have done math in real >> analysis they can explain more. > >irrational means 'not expressible as the ratio of two integers', this does >not imply uncountable. > >Whether 0.12345678910111213... is irrational or not depends on how we choose >to define a rational number where the denominator and numerator are both >approaching infinity and how quickly those approaches occur. > >[ What is your definition of infinity/infinity ?] > >As alluded to before, > > 0.12345678910111213 = 12345678910111213.... / n > > (where n = infinity) > >0.123456789101112... is certainly countable because by the definition of >countable it must be 1-to-1 with the counting numbers (ie non-negative >integers), which this one clearly is since it contains each positive >non-zero integer (ie the set of numbers required to produce the number are >clearly less, 1 less to be exact, than the counting numbers). Of course this same argument could be used to claim that pi is also rational. pi = 314159.... / n (where n=infinity). What could be the problem here? One problem might be that an integer (not including infinity) divided by "infinity" should be 0. The p/q definition of rational numbers does not rely on "infinity" being a member of the set of integers. Also, we rarely hear this dialogue: "Give me an integer." "Okay - infinity!" Still, let's define a set which contains the integers as well as positive and negative "infinity". I will call this set the "Choate-integers." Let's add some reasonable rules for working with +inf and -inf. n is a non-zero positive traditional integer. a. -inf = +inf * -1 b. +inf * n = +inf c. +inf + n = +inf d. +inf / +inf = 1 Operations involving multiplication or division of +inf and zero are undefined. Using these definitions, you will find that the p/q definition of rational numbers operates as expected on the set of Choate-integers. The argument I supplied earlier for the rational nature of 0.1234... still holds. Math Man From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Sun Jan 19 22:12:39 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:12:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Debt (calling) Cards Re: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701200612.WAA01710@toad.com> At 04:58 PM 1/17/97 -0800, Rich Graves wrote: >What does concern me is personal privacy. I don't want people tracking >my movements or purchasing patterns, so I prefer to use cash or >pseudonymous debit cards. This reminds me, I got a sprint 5 minute sample calling card when I got my college texts. I suspect that other people on this list got one as well. Mine is completely unused and although transferring the actual cards would cost, (the stamp and envelope), would anyone be interested in trading the numbers? This one is registered as being handed out in Weatherford Okla. Five minutes of long distance is trivial, so I would be willing to trade in regular e-mail, as opposed to through a middleman. From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Sun Jan 19 22:12:47 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:12:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math Message-ID: <199701200612.WAA01712@toad.com> Will all those people who are talking about set theory and the countability of various number systems take their discussion to sci.math, please? 'Cuz 1) All that stuff is irrelevant to crypto, its science or politics. 2) Not a single math comment made by anybody on any of those threads is even remotely correct. 3) You will recieve your proper chewing out on sci.math and 4) This bullshit is extremely annoying to those of us who has some real training in math, even more so than the regular bullshit on this list. Hey Sandy, you gonna censor these creeps once you start censoring? From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Sun Jan 19 22:12:49 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:12:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc Message-ID: <199701200612.WAA01713@toad.com> Bill Frantz writes: > I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that > email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to > toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small > fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost. Failing something catastrophic like a disk failure or a host down for more than a week, this should not be the case. Almost every site running sendmail has the Os ("SuperSafe") option set. That means sendmail will not respond to a "." at the end of a DATA command with SMTP code 250 until it has written the incoming message (and queue info) to disk and called fsync. Thus, you may get 2 copies of a message, but mail messages should not just disappear regularly at all, even if the network goes down or a machine crashes. Non-sendmail MTA's tend to be even more strict about this, not even allowing this behavior to be disabled. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Sun Jan 19 22:14:32 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:14:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701200614.WAA01733@toad.com> At 08:04 PM 1/17/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis wrote: >snow writes: > >> > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ;). >> >> >>shudder<< >> >> No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease... > >Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with clothes on... > Wouldn't work. A sworn member of the holy order of the restitution for the crimes of my enemies, has an explosive device buried within h[is/er] bowels. When (s)he goes up, alone, (s)he will take 100+ enemies with h[im/er]. Of course (s)he has to be willing to die, or be duped into thinking that (s)he really has appendicitis. So a courier would still be easy to find. Or, a cancer infected member of said religious cult, knowing that (s)he will soon die anyway, and probably atone for h[is/er] many sins, ((s)he hasn't really done anything rightous, like kill one of the enemy), chooses to have h[is/er] cancerous bowels, up to the stomache, removed, and replaced with a bomb. (s)he then heals up a little while, being fed intraveinously, until the time of h[is/er] atonement. A makeup artist erases the signs of disease that (s)he carries and a large dose of pain killer is given to h[im/er] to take right before entering the airport. (s)he dies knowing that (s)he is going straight past heaven to an even higher level. From sandfort at crl.com Sun Jan 19 22:25:29 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:25:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math In-Reply-To: <199701200602.WAA14162@sirius.infonex.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, WinSock Remailer wrote: > > Will all those people who are talking about set theory and > the countability of various number systems take their discussion > to sci.math, please? 'Cuz > ... > Hey Sandy, you gonna censor these creeps once you start censoring? I won't be censoring anyone. I will, however, be sorting posts into the three lists. As I work my way into moderation mode, I don't expect to sort math or other off-topic posts into the flam (flames & spam) list. In retrospect, the previous "creeps" comment should probably have gotten the post sorted to the flam list. Oh well, I'll get up to speed pretty soon, I hope. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From rwright at adnetsol.com Sun Jan 19 22:36:50 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:36:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck Message-ID: <199701200636.WAA21133@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> On or About 19 Jan 97 at 17:37, Dale Thorn wrote: > Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. We already get the censored stuff > on the alleged-to-be "unedited" list, so by looking at the censored > list only, we can do the subtraction more reliably than Sandfort. > > Just the censored list is needed, not the cut-out stuff, as far as I > know. I disagree. Or I don't quite understand what you are saying. I want to see the moderated list and I want to see what was removed. So since I was automatically given the Moderated List, I just put in a subscription, under a different address, so I can easily see what was removed. Of the three lists that now exist: unedited, edited, and removed posts, I would chose to remove the unedited version so that I can keep my eye on what the moderators decide I should not see. That gives me an insight into what they think. Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From sandfort at crl3.crl.com Sun Jan 19 22:40:27 1997 From: sandfort at crl3.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:40:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math Message-ID: <199701200640.WAA02127@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, WinSock Remailer wrote: > > Will all those people who are talking about set theory and > the countability of various number systems take their discussion > to sci.math, please? 'Cuz > ... > Hey Sandy, you gonna censor these creeps once you start censoring? I won't be censoring anyone. I will, however, be sorting posts into the three lists. As I work my way into moderation mode, I don't expect to sort math or other off-topic posts into the flam (flames & spam) list. In retrospect, the previous "creeps" comment should probably have gotten the post sorted to the flam list. Oh well, I'll get up to speed pretty soon, I hope. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 19 22:49:35 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:49:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701200457.UAA00416@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701200640.AAA01502@manifold.algebra.com> Jim Choate wrote: > Forwarded message: > > > Only countably many real numbers, or members of any uncountable > > set, are denumerable. It is the property of being uncountable, > > rather than of being real or complex, which is important here. > > In short you are saying there are Reals which can not be expressed in the > format: > > AmEm + Am-1Em-1 + ... + A0E0 . B0E-1 + B1E-2 + ... + BnE-n+1 All reals are equivalent to sequences of digits, but there are reals such that there is no algorithm to generate their digits. It happens because there are "more" real numbers than algorithms. > > In general, only countably many members of any uncountable set > > can be precisely specified within any formal system, given names > > comprised of strings of symbols, or other similar things. > > And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be expressed by the decimal > expansion above. Which clearly qualifies as a formal system. I suggest the following mental exercise. FORGET FOR A MOMENT ABOUT REAL NUMBERS. Let's deal with mummies: DEFINITION: I define a mummy as possibly infinite sequence of characters, separated by one dot, such that only characters abcdefghij are allowed. Also, mummies that are represented by finite sequences of characters are by this definition equivalent to mummies that end with an infinite sequence of letters "a". END DEFINITION. Examples: dce.abdefhaabdaaa ae.cacacacacacaca... and so on. Obviously, some of the mummies, such as c.cccccc... (with an ininite sequence of "c") CAN be generated by algorithms. The interesting fact, that i will prove below, is that some of them cannot be generated by any algorithm. THEOREM: The set of mummies is more than countable PROOF: if it is countable, we can construct a mummy that is not counted. it is easy. THEOREM: there are mummies such that there is no algorithm that can print them. PROOF: the set of mummies is more than countable, the set of algorithms is countable, therefore there is no way to construct a one-to-one correspondence between mummies and algorithms. Do you agree? Now let's back to the original problem of real numbers: the only difference between mummies and real numbers is that digits 0123456789 are replaced by characters abcdefghij. Not a whole lot of difference, so everything that applies to mummies applies to real numbers. - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 19 23:10:37 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 23:10:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT In-Reply-To: <199701200515.XAA00924@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <41eT1D66w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > AIDAS wrote: > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > Personally, I wish they'd hurry up. I'm getting rather annoyed wi > > > > > > > spam, the "you're all homosexuals" postings, the posts by morons > > > > > > > can't figure out Majordomo or their mailers, and so on and so for > > > > > > > > Not sure about "all", but someone whose name sounds like AIDS, and > > > > > > advocates censorship, most likely is one.[snip] > > > Ah, very strong response indeed. I feel as if shot down in flames, > > > and my mind aches from the slice of your wit. Deliver us, oh Vulis, > > > for we are in need! > > > > It still looks like Sandy to me. Writing style for one, unwillingness > > to drop an argument for two, and the use of the name AIDAS is *very* > > suspicious. > > But Sandy gave his word publicly that he was not AIDAS! Sandy is a proven liar. However the AIDStwit sounds more like Ray Arachelian. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 19 23:30:13 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 23:30:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) In-Reply-To: <199701162142.VAA06080@server.test.net> Message-ID: <32E31D35.52B9@sk.sympatico.ca> Adam Back wrote: > Dimitri is an intelligent guy, and has a high level of crypto > expertise (he has a PhD on a cryptography topic). It is my belief > that his posts can only be understood in a "meta" sense -- he is > engaged in a highly complex cryptographic experiment. People who read > and respond to his individual posts are the unwitting subjects in his > experiments. His posts and the responses to them are actually the > data-set for a thorough cryptanalysis of mailing list threats. Your post gives food for thought...much more so than the one in which I proposed my "No, he's just an asshole." theory. BTW, the results of my poll regarding this theory were: "Is Too" -- 4% "Is Not" -- 3% "Hey, leave me out of this--'they' may be watching!" -- 9% "Make Big $$Money$$ Licking Your Own Dick!!!" -- 74% "Unscribirbe" -- 10% Toto From mpd at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 23:35:25 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 23:35:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701200456.UAA00404@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701200735.XAA17096@netcom19.netcom.com> Jim Choate writes: > An arbitrary Real can be constructed from the Rationals. If > we accept the proposition, as posed apparently by you and > others, of uncountable Reals then your 'assumption' fails, > otherwise the 'uncountable' members would be countable. We can construct the Reals from the Rationals without having to speak of each specific Real while doing so. A formal system, having only a countable number of strings of symbols from its alphabet, can speak of "The Real Numbers" even though it cannot speak of "The Real Number X" for every single X in the Reals. > A 'limit point' is not the same as 'equal to'. Arbitrarily > close is not equivalent, inherent in the definition of a > limit point is the concept of 'little o' and 'big o', or > worded differently our axiomatic definition of infinity. In standard analysis, the limit of a sequence A[n] is a value x such that given any positive epsilon, no matter how small, we can find a point in the sequence such that all its members after that point are within epsilon of x. Such a limit, if it exists, is unique and exactly defined. "Little o" and "big o" are concepts from complexity theory and I am not precisely sure why you feel they need to be mentioned. > I can, but there is no fundamental rule in mathematics > that requires me to ignore the small but distinct > difference between the element in the original set and the > sequences used to approximate it. In the general case, the limit point will not be a member of the sequence which approximates it. Although every member of the sequence is a finite distance away from the limit, the limit itself is, as I previously mentioned, exactly known without any ambiguity. > It is something that must be agreed upon by accepting a > particular axiomatic definition of infinity. An "infinity" is simply the property of being able to be put in 1-1 correspondence with a proper subset of oneself. > The number of cuts are 1-to-1 with the Reals, they are not > the Reals. There is no way I can make a cut which is > 3.1527, only 1-to-1 with the number(s). Important > distinction. Mathematical objects are sets with structure. We generally consider two mathematical objects equivalent if there exists a 1-1 correspondence between the respective sets which is structure preserving. What the actual members of the set are, and how they were constructed, is usually unimportant. For all practical purposes we may refer to any mathematical object isomorphic to the Reals as "The Reals", without any confusion. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From mpd at netcom.com Sun Jan 19 23:36:57 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 23:36:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701200457.UAA00416@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701200736.XAA17188@netcom19.netcom.com> Jim Choate writes: > In short you are saying there are Reals which can not be > expressed in the format: > AmEm + Am-1Em-1 + ... + A0E0 . B0E-1 + B1E-2 + ... + BnE-n+1 > where m and n -> infinity. Another way of saying this is > that there are Reals for which membership in a set of Reals, > because they are uncountable and therefore unrepresentable, > is not possible. From a set perspective this means, Again, we may speak of a representation for the Reals within a formal system, although we may not speak of "The Representation of X" for every single Real X. We cannot assign to every Real a finite representation, but we can talk about the infinite representation all Reals have within a formal system without running out of space. The inability of a formal system to talk about each Real individually, or equivalently, that there are Real numbers which are not finitely denumerable, does not mean that there are Reals which do not have an representation as a non-ending sequence of symbols. > R = [[-infinity, ..., m] [n, ..., 0] [0, ..., p] [q, ..., +infinity]] > such that there are uncountable numbers between m,n or p,q; etc. Infinity does not have a predecessor, so it makes no sense to count back from it a finite number of steps. > Clearly in contradiction with the base axioms of > mathematics as described by Euclid in defining a line. This point completely escapes me. > And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be > expressed by the decimal expansion above. Which clearly > qualifies as a formal system. Useful formal systems employ finite strings from some alphabet. The set of all possible such strings is countable. The set of all sequences from the same alphabet is uncountable, but not particularly useful for theorem-proving, at least in a finite amount of time. > To say there are Reals for which there is no linear > representation is the same as saying there are lengths which > can't be measured. Now since a line is nothing but a set of > points, which don't have size, but only position this > obviously holds no water, unless you are saying it is not > possible to place two points arbitrarily close together, > which would imply that points have some sort of width, > clearly against the definition of a point. No. Points do not have width. > This all goes back to what I said in a earlier post, the > problem comes from our axiomatic (ie taken on faith, > unprovable) use of infinity. Without a clear and precise > dilineation of those axioms prior to the proof such > conclusions are worthless. In Axiomatic Set Theory, it is necessary to postulate (either implicitly or explicitly) the existance of one infinite set. This is an act of faith. Whether any infinities really exist is a matter for philosophy. > Several of you have said "infinity is not a number", this > is an axiom. Change the axioms and the whole structure > changes. I am simply saying that perhaps we should look at > the "infinity is not a number" axiom, much as geometers look > at Euclids Fifth Postulate. There is nothing inherent in > nature that prefers one axiomatic expression of infinity > over the other. If one constructs the Ordinals, which are isomorphism classes of well-ordered sets, and the Cardinals, which are equivalence classes of equipotent sets, one will automatically end up with all sorts of transfinite numbers. We normally don't include infinities when we build the rationals, the reals, or the complex numbers, unless we need them for a particular application, such as in using the extended real number line in defining measures. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From haystack at holy.cow.net Mon Jan 20 00:03:37 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 00:03:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701200745.CAA29925@holy.cow.net> Tim C[reep] May likes to lick the semen-shit mixture that accumulates in the crack of his mother's ass. ,_ o / //\, Tim C[reep] May \>> | \\, From lucifer at dhp.com Mon Jan 20 00:20:06 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 00:20:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math Message-ID: <199701200819.DAA06807@dhp.com> At 1:01 AM 1/20/1997, WinSock Remailer wrote: >Will all those people who are talking about set theory and >the countability of various number systems take their discussion >to sci.math, please? 'Cuz What a joke! Of all the messages to whine about this guy picks the math thread. Somehow that wouldn't have been my first choice. >1) All that stuff is irrelevant to crypto, its science or politics. No, but it's interesting to many readers of this list and it builds community. >2) Not a single math comment made by anybody on any of those > threads is even remotely correct. >3) You will recieve your proper chewing out on sci.math > >and > >4) This bullshit is extremely annoying to those of us who has some real > training in math, even more so than the regular bullshit on this list. I don't get this at all. You have particular knowledge in the field, but instead of sharing the information with the rest of us, you find our (apparently) pathetic attempts to gain understanding to be "extremely annoying" and imply we need to be chewed out. Commander Zero From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Mon Jan 20 01:01:31 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 01:01:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701162341.XAA06364@server.test.net> Bill Frantz writes: > At 4:39 AM -0800 1/16/97, Adam Back wrote: > >- PIN for phone's RSA signature keys > > It is not clear you need signatures in the secure phone case. Eric > Blossom's 3DES uses straight DH for key exchange with verbal verification > that both ends are using the same key. How does Eric's box display the negotiated key to the user? (I don't recall the pair I saw having displays). > As long as the man in the middle can't imitate a familiar voice, > this procedure is reasonably secure. This is the approach taken by PGPfone also. If the value of the conversations was high (>$100,000?) passable voice imitation wouldn't be that hard I suspect. Also I thought it would be kind of cute if there were some way for phones to exchange their signature keys `face to face' as well. > I agree that signatures of some kind are needed to identify the phone to > the cell company to prevent an all too familiar technique of stealing phone > service. But this protection would not be a 3rd party cell phone upgrade. It's about time something was done about that problem. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Message-ID: <32e33114.flight@flight.hrnowl.lonestar.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Some of the applications of these theories are very relevant. For > example, a theorem that proves that it is impossible to write a program > that would determine if any other program would stop or loop forever, is > very relevant and interesting. > > - Igor. Well, yes, but a scientist can only make a finite number of measurements. A computer used for crypto can only have a finite number of states. All this talk about transfinite numbers does not have any effect on arithemetic truths. What good is an axiom system which asserts (internally) that there are uncountably many reals if that same axiom system has a countable model? - -- Paul Elliott Telephone: 1-713-781-4543 Paul.Elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org Address: 3987 South Gessner #224 Houston Texas 77063 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: cp850 iQCVAgUBMuMw8vBUQYbUhJh5AQFJYgP/a05CTNOG7zYJxcLBFU6JdzNItGUik7pi fbor6p9l6FDgCwSSRIB59ApRIwKFscGLHVT/mAIi5Ofbnbn/wsm9p35ZNlY0YeDd nPf171quOh7d91W6FXOUwhKSfehbAACbsapN5yaf2vtldpTb/LpdA+xvKTFgiRvg 4/8+yhyfp34= =npw2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mycroft at actrix.gen.nz Mon Jan 20 02:14:17 1997 From: mycroft at actrix.gen.nz (Paul Foley) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 02:14:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701200456.UAA00404@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701200959.WAA24235@mycroft.actrix.gen.nz> On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:34:05 -0600 (CST), Jim Choate wrote: Forwarded message: > Yes, the Reals can be constructed from the Rationals. No, the > Reals are not a subset of the Rationals. An arbitrary Real can be constructed from the Rationals. If we accept the proposition, as posed apparently by you and others, of uncountable Reals then your 'assumption' fails, otherwise the 'uncountable' members would be countable. There are no "uncountable" numbers -- uncountability is a property of the set, not an individual member of the set. The set of reals cannot be placed in one-to-one correspondence with the integers (strictly, positive integers, but it amounts to the same thing). > Dedekind Cuts are a simple abstraction, often used to construct > the Reals from the Rationals in undergraduate calculus courses. > Conceptually, one makes a single "cut" in the set of Rationals, > dividing it into two parts, all of the members of one part being > greater than all of the members of the other. The number of ways > of doing this correspond to the Reals. The number of cuts are 1-to-1 with the Reals, they are not the Reals. There is no way I can make a cut which is 3.1527, only 1-to-1 with the number(s). Important distinction. Cut the rational numbers into two sets, A containing all the negative rationals and all those that have squares less than 2, and B containing all the positive rationals that have squares greater than 2. There you have a cut which is 1.41421... (i.e., sqrt(2)). So you can define irrational numbers from the rationals (an irrational number is a cut such that the first set (A) has no largest member and the second set (B) has no smallest member). -- Paul Foley --- PGPmail preferred PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33 C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sometimes a feeling is all we humans have to go on. -- Kirk, "A Taste of Armageddon", stardate 3193.9 From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 02:36:20 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 02:36:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net> Message-ID: <32E35EC9.2E6@sk.sympatico.ca> Bill Frantz wrote: > I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that > email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to > toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small > fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost. Are there any critereon established, yet, as to what type of content will be necessary for a letter to get 'lost'? From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Mon Jan 20 02:45:26 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 02:45:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701170904.JAA00524@server.test.net> Steve Shear writes: > For voice calls, it is not possible to merely insert a more secure crypto > function (e.g., IDEA) inside the less secure A5 crypto, unless the GSM base > station's protocol is aware the subscriber unit is using the more secure > crypto. Otherwise, when the GSM base station unwraps the A5 encrypted data > stream, which it assumes will contain digitized voice packets in the clear, > it will not find what its looking for and will be unable to convert the > packets to a circuit-switched voice signal. The circuit-switched voice signal is digital also, and the voice packet payload is transferred byte for byte into the circuit switched link right? So to insert IDEA encryption inside the A5 layer, you'd need to packetize the IDEA ciphertext so that it conforms to the voice packet spec (to fool the unwrapping the GSM station performs into thinking the packets are voice packets). Is that possible? Is the packet switched protocol non-error corrected? (ie Is packet dropping expected?) If so you need to use an IDEA mode which does not rely on previous packets. > If, as I have previously stated, the subscriber instead uses the data port > of his instrument and establishes a data link with his payload protected by > the more the secure crypto this is entirely feasible. If the above is infeasible. Probably this is a more practical approach anyway, as the data port has been already engineered to solve some of problems that would be encountered, and you would be duplicating effort. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Message-ID: <199701170931.JAA00539@server.test.net> Steve Shear writes: > [very useful explanation of GSM TDMA, and the new HSCSD] 64 kbit/s tied to ISDN is very nice technology. > ENCRYPTED GSM LINKS > If the GSM phone includes a data port, as some already do, just connect > your laptop, dial your ISP and 'push' the encrypted traffic over that link > (e.g., using TCP/IP and PGPfone). This would obviously be possible, but to my mind reduces the appeal of the system. Not every one has a laptop. Even if the potential user does have a laptop, booting windows95, and starting up PGPfone is an onerous task compared to just dialing a number on a mobile phone. It's a user friendliness issue, and a question of ergonomics. A mobile phone is more portable than a GSM phone with a laptop plugged into the data port. You can't fit the laptop and GSM phone combination into your shirt pocket. What are you going to use for a handset? Radio operators headphone (with mike attached to the headset) plugged into the laptop? That's more dangling wires, and makes the system less portable, and even more onerous to setup (take laptop from carry bag, plug in headphones, plug in phone data port, wait for laptop to boot, etc). Even for crypto enthousiasts, I would submit that many would neglect to go through the hassle of going through PGPfone for most conversations, and would instead just use the mobile phone in the clear (or with A5 encryption). This for similar reasons to the situation with PGP itself, many people rarely use PGP, even though there is abundant software available to use it seamlessly with most mail readers. (I can vouch for mailcrypt.el the emacs interface to PGP, and use it for to anyone who has a PGP key, and does not express displeasure at receiving encrypted email). Also, the cell phone tarriffs may be higher if you need higher bandwidth to get the software only voice codec implementations in PGPfone to produce equivalent full-duplex voice quality to that expected from a digital mobile phone. Not knocking the mobile phone and laptop combination for the purpose of having mobile TCP/IP access from a laptop, I know several people who have this combination, though only at 9.6kbits, and even at that speed it is very neat. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Do you need to supplement your income? Are you paying out in bills more than you make? Have you thought about a second job but wondered when you would have time? What if you could supplement your income in only 5-6 hours a week and if you could do it in the privacy of your own home at your computer? Would you try it? Find out how you can supplement and eventually replace your current job. We are looking for 6 new people willing to take a new opportunity and make it their goldmine. If you are open-minded, have internet access at home, and are ready to change your life don't pass on this opportunity. Help us change families financial futures for the better. Get more info from our autoresponder - info at structuremg.com or from our website - http://www.structuremg.com (signup here too!) ************************************************************** If you wish to be removed from our future mailings simply reply with "REMOVE" in the subject and place your email address in the body. You must do this correctly to be removed. ************************************************************** From SButler at chemson.com Mon Jan 20 03:53:37 1997 From: SButler at chemson.com (Butler, Scott) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 03:53:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: THIS IS THE FIRST MESSAGE TO THE MODERATED CYPHERPUNKS LIST Message-ID: John Gilmore wrote: > >>Welcome to (what I hope is) a more useful and less confrontative >>cypherpunks list. Now, can we get back to talking about cryptography? > > "can we get 'BACK' to talking about cryptography?" You seem to have misspelled START. >Scott From SButler at chemson.com Mon Jan 20 04:17:07 1997 From: SButler at chemson.com (Butler, Scott) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 04:17:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: FW: AUTO ANSWER MESSAGE. Message-ID: I have set up an autoresponder to bounce back all of this jerks responses. Like a game of e-mail tennis ! I'm sure that he will get sick before I do ! Scott >---------- >From: Gerardo_NUNO at bourns.com[SMTP:Gerardo_NUNO at bourns.com] >Sent: 17 January 1997 18:38 >To: Butler, Scott >Subject: AUTO ANSWER MESSAGE. > > > > ���From : "Gerardo NUNO"@[PRCL/01] Please check the name and e-mail address of the person that you're looking. Since gerardo_nuno is out of the system temporary. attn. System Administration. From hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de Mon Jan 20 05:40:05 1997 From: hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de (hjk) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 05:40:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970119160951.006c26ac@ricochet.net> Message-ID: Just one thing about the names of the different lists: I received a mail listing the changes to come. It was very easy to understand that I am going to get the moderated list if I do not change my subscription.I'll find out if I will miss something. We'll see. I wonder who is so brainless, not to understand what's going on. Do you really think the subscribers are pure Idiots? Heinz-Juergen Keller email: hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 20 06:06:29 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 06:06:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: test message Message-ID: <199701201406.GAA17086@mailmasher.com> This is sent to cypherpunks-outgoing-ksiuw. Will it make it to the cypherpunks list? From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Mon Jan 20 06:41:47 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 06:41:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: One time pads and randomness? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970120094053.00970880@gateway.grumman.com> >[Blurb on OTPs ...] I realize this has a limited amount of >messages before it is used up. But would this be secure? >Any suggestions, complaints, big gapping holes I missed? TMK, this is as close to a perfectly secure system as can be achieved. *AS LONG AS* the disks/discs are never compromised and never reused. As an interesting sidenote, if you read Tom Clancy's "Sum of All Fears" this is the type of system the CIA wants to implement even though the NSA doesn't want to back them because they think their (compromised) sytem is secure. Don't we all wish... _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ "I thought your patience was infinte?" 'Since space and time are curved, the infinite sooner or later bends back upon itself and ends up where it began and so have I.' From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Mon Jan 20 06:45:57 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 06:45:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology In-Reply-To: <199701170931.JAA00539@server.test.net> Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Adam Back wrote: > > Steve Shear writes: > > [very useful explanation of GSM TDMA, and the new HSCSD] > > 64 kbit/s tied to ISDN is very nice technology. Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? > > ENCRYPTED GSM LINKS > > If the GSM phone includes a data port, as some already do, just connect > > your laptop, dial your ISP and 'push' the encrypted traffic over that link > > (e.g., using TCP/IP and PGPfone). [...] From iverson at usa.net Mon Jan 20 06:52:01 1997 From: iverson at usa.net (Casey Iverson) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 06:52:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) Message-ID: <3.0.16.19970120094321.429718ae@pop.netaddress.com> Dimitri is a low life piece of Russan shit who is trying to distroy this list because he has serious mental problems or he is a tool of the NSA. What part of his vicious personal and anomyous attacks against members of the list 'are not being read correctly'? What part of his calling everyone on this list that won't put up with his deliberate abuse, "fagots", 'are not being read correctly'? If you don't get it, you are a *really dumb fuck* or a KTOM tool. At 09:42 PM 1/16/97 GMT, you wrote: > >It's occured to me recently that Dimitri's posts are not being read >correctly, it is not the content which is the point, nor the >superficial lack of crypto relevance. > >Dimitri is an intelligent guy, and has a high level of crypto >expertise (he has a PhD on a cryptography topic). It is my belief >that his posts can only be understood in a "meta" sense -- he is >engaged in a highly complex cryptographic experiment. People who read >and respond to his individual posts are the unwitting subjects in his >experiments. His posts and the responses to them are actually the >data-set for a thorough cryptanalysis of mailing list threats. His >current topic under investigation is Denial of Service (DoS) attacks >on mailing lists. > >Denial of service on mailing lists is a complex business, and requires >expert human input to be done properly. > >Dimitri has systematically explored these types of posting behaviour: > >1. Posting only crypto relevant material. >2. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with hand personalised flame bait. >3. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with bot generated flame bait. >4. Interspersing crypto relevant posts with news stories. >5. Posting only non crypto relevant material. > >The alert reader will recall these phases of posting style (currently >we are in sub experiment 5, the other phases have occured over a >protracted period of intensive experimentation, and some newer readers >may have missed earlier phases). > >There were other experiments which may or may not have been part of >Dimitri's series of DoS experiments: > >6. Subscribing the list to itself (testing list resilience to recursion) > >7. Forging posts to carefully selected newsgroups with >"cypherpunks at toad.com" as the sender (this indirectly adds user >"cypherpunks at toad.com" to many direct marketing lists as direct >marketers make use of email addresses scanned from newsgroups). > >8. The "UNSCRIVE" and other spelling variations of "unsubscribe" epidemic, >and ensuing instructions and discussion > >9. Subscribing the list to other lists > >10. Bot generated flame bait posted anonymously (with ascii art) > >>From the post I am following up to the reader will observe an oblique >reference to the transition from phase 4 of the experiments to the >current phase, phase 5 (the reader will also note references to experimental >results c and d described below): > >Dimitri Vulis writes: >> One memorable "censorship" incident occurred when the lying cocksucker >> John Gilmore (spit) forcibly unsubscribed me from this list because he >> didn't like the contents of my submissions - or did you forget already? >> Look up Declan's disgraceful writeup on Netly News archives. >> >> At that time most valuable contributors to this list (such as myself) >> resolved not to contribute crypto-relevant content to a censored forum. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >More widely read cypherpunks will know that Dimitri has performed >similar experiments in other fora -- his systematic experiments in >numerous USENET newsgroups resulted in the his receiving the >prestigious KOTM ("Kook Of The Month") award. > >His main experimental results to date with the cypherpunks mailing >list series of experiments have been: > >a) many cypherpunks publically announcing kill filing him > >b) numerous cypherpunks suggesting censoring him (a particularly >interesting result considering the libertarian leanings of many on >this list) > >c) the outstanding experimental result of being forcibly unsubscribed >from the list, and of being barred from resubscribing by John Gilmore. >(creator of alt.* USENET newsgroup hierarchy, and well know freespeech >advocate) > >d) another interesting, incidental experimental result was provided by >Declan McCullagh in his Netly News piece in prematurely, and entirely >unwittingly, publishing some of Dimitri's expermiental data-set. > >e) the main experimental result: the list shortly moving to a >moderated form, seemingly at the request of Sandy Sandfort, with >agreement from John Gilmore. > >These experimental results are quite significant, when taken in the >context of the anti-censorship, libertarian, pro-freespeech >environment of the cypherpunks mailing list. Dimitri should be >congratulated on his outstanding work. > >I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when >the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. My suggestions for >interesting experiments during the moderated phase are: > >1. Testing the limits of Dale Thorn's anti-censorship sentiments (for >those who don't read Dale, he is subscribed to "cypherpunks-unedited" >in preparation for the moderation). > >2. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection criteria. > >3. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection rate for long crypto relevant >posts interspersed with irrelevant flame bait. > >4. Testing Sandy Sandforts rejection rate for posts with flame bait .sigs > >I hope Dimitri's selfless efforts in furthering understanding of DoS >attacks on mailing lists is properly acknowledged when he publishes >his findings on completion of his experiments. I also hope that >Dimitri will document his recommendations for mailing list >configuration and management in light of his experiments. > >Adam >-- >print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> >)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 > From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU Mon Jan 20 06:53:22 1997 From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 06:53:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: List of reliable remailers Message-ID: <199701201450.GAA21618@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu> I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = " cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{'alpha'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{'nymrod'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle ?"; $remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"death"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent post"; $remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; catalyst at netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth at ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura at replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 20 Jan 97 6:47:59 PST remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- nym config at nym.alias.net +#+-*******# 4:38 99.99% weasel config at weasel.owl.de +++++-+++++ 1:34:36 99.95% lucifer lucifer at dhp.com +++++-++++++ 36:32 99.94% balls remailer at huge.cajones.com *+ ********* 3:01 99.94% cyber alias at alias.cyberpass.net * +*++++*+** 35:08 99.88% exon remailer at remailer.nl.com * ++##*###*# 1:14 99.86% winsock winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net ----------- 2:02:21 99.86% dustbin dustman at athensnet.com -++--+.--+- 3:01:52 99.74% squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de ++ + ++ +++ 1:35:05 99.41% lead mix at zifi.genetics.utah.edu +++++-++*+*+ 39:30 99.35% extropia remail at miron.vip.best.com ----------- 5:06:43 98.93% haystack haystack at holy.cow.net +* .-####+# 2:24:43 98.64% replay remailer at replay.com +*+******* 15:38 98.25% reno middleman at cyberpass.net + + -+-- 1:51:15 92.61% middle middleman at jpunix.com ++ -+ .-- 1:48:09 67.78% mix mixmaster at remail.obscura.com .-++-+. 4:35:20 50.49% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 07:11:18 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:11:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dedikend Cut's and such (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201518.JAA02060@einstein> Forwarded message: > > Did a little research, Dedekind Cut's and such use Integers to define a > > SPECIFIC Real to a arbitrary BUT FIXED resolution. They do not define the > > set of Reals. > > They do. The set of all numbers representable by a DC is precisely > the set of reals. Then you are saying that using Dedekind Cut's it is possible to define the ENTIRE set of Reals? I am assuming that entire includes all those Reals which aren't representable by any algorithm and of which we can't even speak (even though we are). Another pretty nifty trick. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 20 07:16:46 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:16:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfort In-Reply-To: <199701200636.WAA21133@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> Message-ID: <32E38C37.7D69@gte.net> Ross Wright wrote: > On or About 19 Jan 97 at 17:37, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. We already get the censored stuff > > on the alleged-to-be "unedited" list, so by looking at the censored > > list only, we can do the subtraction more reliably than Sandfort. > > Just the censored list is needed, not the cut-out stuff, as far as I know. > I disagree. Or I don't quite understand what you are saying. I > want to see the moderated list and I want to see what was removed. > So since I was automatically given the Moderated List, I just put in > a subscription, under a different address, so I can easily see what was > removed. Of the three lists that now exist: unedited, edited, and > removed posts, I would chose to remove the unedited version so that I > can keep my eye on what the moderators decide I should not see. That > gives me an insight into what they think. Ross, I agree in principle, but not in fact. If the "removed" list was accurate, I'd say yes, but not only is it suspect, Sandy admitted personally that some items could "fall thru the cracks" and not make it to either the edited or removed list. The only way to guarantee the removed list is to subtract the censored list from the uncensored list, and hope that the uncensored list is complete. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 07:22:46 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:22:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201529.JAA02276@einstein> > Infinity does not have a predecessor, so it makes no sense to > count back from it a finite number of steps. If infinity does not have predecessors (ie is immune to normal arithmetic operations) then it is not possible for a sequence to approach it by adding a finite amount to succesive terms in order to approach it. This means that a sequence can not meaningfuly be asymptotic with infinity (meaning I have to be able to draw a asymptote, at least in theory, in order to demonstrate the limit). > If one constructs the Ordinals, which are isomorphism classes of > well-ordered sets, and the Cardinals, which are equivalence > classes of equipotent sets, one will automatically end up with > all sorts of transfinite numbers. If infinity is not a number, how is it possible to have a definite number (ie transfinite) which is larger than it? My contention is that number theory as you present it is playing fast and loose with the concept of infinity not being a number or visa versa. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From kent at songbird.com Mon Jan 20 07:26:19 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:26:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701200457.UAA00416@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701201628.IAA11672@songbird.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > > > Forwarded message: > > > Only countably many real numbers, or members of any uncountable > > set, are denumerable. It is the property of being uncountable, > > rather than of being real or complex, which is important here. > > In short you are saying there are Reals which can not be expressed in the > format: > > AmEm + Am-1Em-1 + ... + A0E0 . B0E-1 + B1E-2 + ... + BnE-n+1 No, that's not what he is saying. What you have written does not represent a *specific* number. He is saying that IF you have a particular scheme for representing *specific* numbers, you can only represent countably many -- for any given scheme, there are numbers you can't represent. To put it another way a scheme that says "you can represent numbers as half infinite strings of digits with a single period somewhere" doesn't actually *specify* any numbers. A scheme that says "start with the number 1 and increment it 400 times" actually specifies a number. > And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be expressed by the decimal > expansion above. Which clearly qualifies as a formal system. To be a formal system of the type required, you would also have to specify deterministic rules that could generate the "Ai" values. The key distinction is between "expressed by" and "generated by". -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca Mon Jan 20 07:27:27 1997 From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:27:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: infinity & set membership Message-ID: <9700208537.AA853784822@smtplink.alis.ca> >The argument I supplied earlier for the rational nature of 0.1234... >still holds. >Math Man Aleph-Naught bottles of beer on the wall. Aleph-Naught bottles of beer. If some finite subset should happen to fall, There'll be Aleph-Naught bottles of beer on the wall. For those really long road trips, or when you choose to read all the cypherpunks traffic. James Q 1. Describe the history of the papacy from its origins to the present day, commenting specifically but not exclusively on its effects on the development of 14th century South America. Describe in detail. Be brief concise and specific. Give examples. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 07:29:19 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:29:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201536.JAA02298@einstein> > > And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be expressed by the decimal > > expansion above. Which clearly qualifies as a formal system. > > To be a formal system of the type required, you would also have to > specify deterministic rules that could generate the "Ai" values. The > key distinction is between "expressed by" and "generated by". But we do have a formal system for generating those terms. Dedekind Cuts used to enumerate the value of an arbitrary length compared to the unit length. From kent at songbird.com Mon Jan 20 07:32:08 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:32:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701200456.UAA00404@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701201634.IAA11748@songbird.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > [...] > The number of cuts are 1-to-1 with the Reals, they are not the Reals. > There is no way I can make a cut which is 3.1527, only 1-to-1 with the > number(s). Important distinction. They are 1-1 with the Reals, you can define all the operations on them that are defined for reals, for every representable real (like 3.1527) there exists a DC. You have some idea, perhaps that there are "real" reals, as opposed to the various constructs for defining them? Perhaps you could define what a "real" real would be? -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jan 20 07:33:23 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:33:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNS_top Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970120152824.0068df5c@pop.pipeline.com> 01-16-97. Reuters: "Unstoppable Internet will defy controls" Governments which seek to restrain the freedom of speech and tax the vast electronic commerce spawned by the Internet will almost certainly be wasting their time, experts say, and that any attempt to control traffic over the Internet will be futile. Governments in China, Burma and Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with minimal success. Dr Bob Glass of Sun Microsystems Inc said any attempt by governments to curtail any of this would be a waste of time. Not even the most powerful computers will be able to effectively patrol the world's telephone lines. Individual computer experts will always be one step ahead. "Big brother is out there trying to monitor this, but I don't think they're competent enough," he said. "Government is not really aware of the magnitude of money exchange on the web, but there's really not much they can do about it." Professor Patrick Purcell from London's Imperial College describes the Internet as a highly subversive phenomenom for international telecommunications, for a nation's state security and for international commerce. ----- UNS_top From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 07:33:51 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 07:33:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: infinity & set membership (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201540.JAA02315@einstein> > What could be the problem here? One problem might be that an integer > (not including infinity) divided by "infinity" should be 0. This ratio has one of 3 outcomes in my system depending on the rate of approach to infinity of the defining functions, oo/oo = 0 if the denominator grows faster than the numerator oo/oo = oo if the numerator grows faster than the denominator oo/oo = 1 if the two functions grow at equal rates Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 08:11:37 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:11:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc Message-ID: <199701201611.IAA12321@toad.com> Bill Frantz wrote: > I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that > email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to > toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small > fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost. Are there any critereon established, yet, as to what type of content will be necessary for a letter to get 'lost'? From rwright at adnetsol.com Mon Jan 20 08:11:51 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:11:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfart suck Message-ID: <199701201611.IAA12370@toad.com> On or About 19 Jan 97 at 17:37, Dale Thorn wrote: > Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. We already get the censored stuff > on the alleged-to-be "unedited" list, so by looking at the censored > list only, we can do the subtraction more reliably than Sandfort. > > Just the censored list is needed, not the cut-out stuff, as far as I > know. I disagree. Or I don't quite understand what you are saying. I want to see the moderated list and I want to see what was removed. So since I was automatically given the Moderated List, I just put in a subscription, under a different address, so I can easily see what was removed. Of the three lists that now exist: unedited, edited, and removed posts, I would chose to remove the unedited version so that I can keep my eye on what the moderators decide I should not see. That gives me an insight into what they think. Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From lucifer at dhp.com Mon Jan 20 08:11:59 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:11:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math Message-ID: <199701201611.IAA12389@toad.com> At 1:01 AM 1/20/1997, WinSock Remailer wrote: >Will all those people who are talking about set theory and >the countability of various number systems take their discussion >to sci.math, please? 'Cuz What a joke! Of all the messages to whine about this guy picks the math thread. Somehow that wouldn't have been my first choice. >1) All that stuff is irrelevant to crypto, its science or politics. No, but it's interesting to many readers of this list and it builds community. >2) Not a single math comment made by anybody on any of those > threads is even remotely correct. >3) You will recieve your proper chewing out on sci.math > >and > >4) This bullshit is extremely annoying to those of us who has some real > training in math, even more so than the regular bullshit on this list. I don't get this at all. You have particular knowledge in the field, but instead of sharing the information with the rest of us, you find our (apparently) pathetic attempts to gain understanding to be "extremely annoying" and imply we need to be chewed out. Commander Zero From paul.elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org Mon Jan 20 08:12:07 1997 From: paul.elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org (Paul Elliott) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:12:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Numbers we cannot talk about Message-ID: <199701201612.IAA12423@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Some of the applications of these theories are very relevant. For > example, a theorem that proves that it is impossible to write a program > that would determine if any other program would stop or loop forever, is > very relevant and interesting. > > - Igor. Well, yes, but a scientist can only make a finite number of measurements. A computer used for crypto can only have a finite number of states. All this talk about transfinite numbers does not have any effect on arithemetic truths. What good is an axiom system which asserts (internally) that there are uncountably many reals if that same axiom system has a countable model? - -- Paul Elliott Telephone: 1-713-781-4543 Paul.Elliott at hrnowl.lonestar.org Address: 3987 South Gessner #224 Houston Texas 77063 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: cp850 iQCVAgUBMuMw8vBUQYbUhJh5AQFJYgP/a05CTNOG7zYJxcLBFU6JdzNItGUik7pi fbor6p9l6FDgCwSSRIB59ApRIwKFscGLHVT/mAIi5Ofbnbn/wsm9p35ZNlY0YeDd nPf171quOh7d91W6FXOUwhKSfehbAACbsapN5yaf2vtldpTb/LpdA+xvKTFgiRvg 4/8+yhyfp34= =npw2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Mon Jan 20 08:12:11 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:12:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) Message-ID: <199701201612.IAA12435@toad.com> Bill Frantz writes: > At 4:39 AM -0800 1/16/97, Adam Back wrote: > >- PIN for phone's RSA signature keys > > It is not clear you need signatures in the secure phone case. Eric > Blossom's 3DES uses straight DH for key exchange with verbal verification > that both ends are using the same key. How does Eric's box display the negotiated key to the user? (I don't recall the pair I saw having displays). > As long as the man in the middle can't imitate a familiar voice, > this procedure is reasonably secure. This is the approach taken by PGPfone also. If the value of the conversations was high (>$100,000?) passable voice imitation wouldn't be that hard I suspect. Also I thought it would be kind of cute if there were some way for phones to exchange their signature keys `face to face' as well. > I agree that signatures of some kind are needed to identify the phone to > the cell company to prevent an all too familiar technique of stealing phone > service. But this protection would not be a 3rd party cell phone upgrade. It's about time something was done about that problem. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Steve Shear writes: > For voice calls, it is not possible to merely insert a more secure crypto > function (e.g., IDEA) inside the less secure A5 crypto, unless the GSM base > station's protocol is aware the subscriber unit is using the more secure > crypto. Otherwise, when the GSM base station unwraps the A5 encrypted data > stream, which it assumes will contain digitized voice packets in the clear, > it will not find what its looking for and will be unable to convert the > packets to a circuit-switched voice signal. The circuit-switched voice signal is digital also, and the voice packet payload is transferred byte for byte into the circuit switched link right? So to insert IDEA encryption inside the A5 layer, you'd need to packetize the IDEA ciphertext so that it conforms to the voice packet spec (to fool the unwrapping the GSM station performs into thinking the packets are voice packets). Is that possible? Is the packet switched protocol non-error corrected? (ie Is packet dropping expected?) If so you need to use an IDEA mode which does not rely on previous packets. > If, as I have previously stated, the subscriber instead uses the data port > of his instrument and establishes a data link with his payload protected by > the more the secure crypto this is entirely feasible. If the above is infeasible. Probably this is a more practical approach anyway, as the data port has been already engineered to solve some of problems that would be encountered, and you would be duplicating effort. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Jim Choate writes: > In short you are saying there are Reals which can not be > expressed in the format: > AmEm + Am-1Em-1 + ... + A0E0 . B0E-1 + B1E-2 + ... + BnE-n+1 > where m and n -> infinity. Another way of saying this is > that there are Reals for which membership in a set of Reals, > because they are uncountable and therefore unrepresentable, > is not possible. From a set perspective this means, Again, we may speak of a representation for the Reals within a formal system, although we may not speak of "The Representation of X" for every single Real X. We cannot assign to every Real a finite representation, but we can talk about the infinite representation all Reals have within a formal system without running out of space. The inability of a formal system to talk about each Real individually, or equivalently, that there are Real numbers which are not finitely denumerable, does not mean that there are Reals which do not have an representation as a non-ending sequence of symbols. > R = [[-infinity, ..., m] [n, ..., 0] [0, ..., p] [q, ..., +infinity]] > such that there are uncountable numbers between m,n or p,q; etc. Infinity does not have a predecessor, so it makes no sense to count back from it a finite number of steps. > Clearly in contradiction with the base axioms of > mathematics as described by Euclid in defining a line. This point completely escapes me. > And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be > expressed by the decimal expansion above. Which clearly > qualifies as a formal system. Useful formal systems employ finite strings from some alphabet. The set of all possible such strings is countable. The set of all sequences from the same alphabet is uncountable, but not particularly useful for theorem-proving, at least in a finite amount of time. > To say there are Reals for which there is no linear > representation is the same as saying there are lengths which > can't be measured. Now since a line is nothing but a set of > points, which don't have size, but only position this > obviously holds no water, unless you are saying it is not > possible to place two points arbitrarily close together, > which would imply that points have some sort of width, > clearly against the definition of a point. No. Points do not have width. > This all goes back to what I said in a earlier post, the > problem comes from our axiomatic (ie taken on faith, > unprovable) use of infinity. Without a clear and precise > dilineation of those axioms prior to the proof such > conclusions are worthless. In Axiomatic Set Theory, it is necessary to postulate (either implicitly or explicitly) the existance of one infinite set. This is an act of faith. Whether any infinities really exist is a matter for philosophy. > Several of you have said "infinity is not a number", this > is an axiom. Change the axioms and the whole structure > changes. I am simply saying that perhaps we should look at > the "infinity is not a number" axiom, much as geometers look > at Euclids Fifth Postulate. There is nothing inherent in > nature that prefers one axiomatic expression of infinity > over the other. If one constructs the Ordinals, which are isomorphism classes of well-ordered sets, and the Cardinals, which are equivalence classes of equipotent sets, one will automatically end up with all sorts of transfinite numbers. We normally don't include infinities when we build the rationals, the reals, or the complex numbers, unless we need them for a particular application, such as in using the extended real number line in defining measures. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From Butler Mon Jan 20 08:13:29 1997 From: Butler (Butler) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:13:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: THIS IS THE FIRST MESSAGE TO THE MODERATED CYPHERPUNKS LIST Message-ID: <199701201613.IAA12456@toad.com> John Gilmore wrote: > >>Welcome to (what I hope is) a more useful and less confrontative >>cypherpunks list. Now, can we get back to talking about cryptography? > > "can we get 'BACK' to talking about cryptography?" You seem to have misspelled START. >Scott From mycroft at actrix.gen.nz Mon Jan 20 08:13:56 1997 From: mycroft at actrix.gen.nz (Paul Foley) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:13:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201613.IAA12458@toad.com> On Sun, 19 Jan 1997 22:34:05 -0600 (CST), Jim Choate wrote: Forwarded message: > Yes, the Reals can be constructed from the Rationals. No, the > Reals are not a subset of the Rationals. An arbitrary Real can be constructed from the Rationals. If we accept the proposition, as posed apparently by you and others, of uncountable Reals then your 'assumption' fails, otherwise the 'uncountable' members would be countable. There are no "uncountable" numbers -- uncountability is a property of the set, not an individual member of the set. The set of reals cannot be placed in one-to-one correspondence with the integers (strictly, positive integers, but it amounts to the same thing). > Dedekind Cuts are a simple abstraction, often used to construct > the Reals from the Rationals in undergraduate calculus courses. > Conceptually, one makes a single "cut" in the set of Rationals, > dividing it into two parts, all of the members of one part being > greater than all of the members of the other. The number of ways > of doing this correspond to the Reals. The number of cuts are 1-to-1 with the Reals, they are not the Reals. There is no way I can make a cut which is 3.1527, only 1-to-1 with the number(s). Important distinction. Cut the rational numbers into two sets, A containing all the negative rationals and all those that have squares less than 2, and B containing all the positive rationals that have squares greater than 2. There you have a cut which is 1.41421... (i.e., sqrt(2)). So you can define irrational numbers from the rationals (an irrational number is a cut such that the first set (A) has no largest member and the second set (B) has no smallest member). -- Paul Foley --- PGPmail preferred PGP key ID 0x1CA3386D available from keyservers fingerprint = 4A 76 83 D8 99 BC ED 33 C5 02 81 C9 BF 7A 91 E8 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Sometimes a feeling is all we humans have to go on. -- Kirk, "A Taste of Armageddon", stardate 3193.9 From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 20 08:13:58 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:13:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201613.IAA12459@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: > Forwarded message: > > > Only countably many real numbers, or members of any uncountable > > set, are denumerable. It is the property of being uncountable, > > rather than of being real or complex, which is important here. > > In short you are saying there are Reals which can not be expressed in the > format: > > AmEm + Am-1Em-1 + ... + A0E0 . B0E-1 + B1E-2 + ... + BnE-n+1 All reals are equivalent to sequences of digits, but there are reals such that there is no algorithm to generate their digits. It happens because there are "more" real numbers than algorithms. > > In general, only countably many members of any uncountable set > > can be precisely specified within any formal system, given names > > comprised of strings of symbols, or other similar things. > > And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be expressed by the decimal > expansion above. Which clearly qualifies as a formal system. I suggest the following mental exercise. FORGET FOR A MOMENT ABOUT REAL NUMBERS. Let's deal with mummies: DEFINITION: I define a mummy as possibly infinite sequence of characters, separated by one dot, such that only characters abcdefghij are allowed. Also, mummies that are represented by finite sequences of characters are by this definition equivalent to mummies that end with an infinite sequence of letters "a". END DEFINITION. Examples: dce.abdefhaabdaaa ae.cacacacacacaca... and so on. Obviously, some of the mummies, such as c.cccccc... (with an ininite sequence of "c") CAN be generated by algorithms. The interesting fact, that i will prove below, is that some of them cannot be generated by any algorithm. THEOREM: The set of mummies is more than countable PROOF: if it is countable, we can construct a mummy that is not counted. it is easy. THEOREM: there are mummies such that there is no algorithm that can print them. PROOF: the set of mummies is more than countable, the set of algorithms is countable, therefore there is no way to construct a one-to-one correspondence between mummies and algorithms. Do you agree? Now let's back to the original problem of real numbers: the only difference between mummies and real numbers is that digits 0123456789 are replaced by characters abcdefghij. Not a whole lot of difference, so everything that applies to mummies applies to real numbers. - Igor. From aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk Mon Jan 20 08:13:59 1997 From: aba at dcs.ex.ac.uk (Adam Back) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:13:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701201613.IAA12460@toad.com> Steve Shear writes: > [very useful explanation of GSM TDMA, and the new HSCSD] 64 kbit/s tied to ISDN is very nice technology. > ENCRYPTED GSM LINKS > If the GSM phone includes a data port, as some already do, just connect > your laptop, dial your ISP and 'push' the encrypted traffic over that link > (e.g., using TCP/IP and PGPfone). This would obviously be possible, but to my mind reduces the appeal of the system. Not every one has a laptop. Even if the potential user does have a laptop, booting windows95, and starting up PGPfone is an onerous task compared to just dialing a number on a mobile phone. It's a user friendliness issue, and a question of ergonomics. A mobile phone is more portable than a GSM phone with a laptop plugged into the data port. You can't fit the laptop and GSM phone combination into your shirt pocket. What are you going to use for a handset? Radio operators headphone (with mike attached to the headset) plugged into the laptop? That's more dangling wires, and makes the system less portable, and even more onerous to setup (take laptop from carry bag, plug in headphones, plug in phone data port, wait for laptop to boot, etc). Even for crypto enthousiasts, I would submit that many would neglect to go through the hassle of going through PGPfone for most conversations, and would instead just use the mobile phone in the clear (or with A5 encryption). This for similar reasons to the situation with PGP itself, many people rarely use PGP, even though there is abundant software available to use it seamlessly with most mail readers. (I can vouch for mailcrypt.el the emacs interface to PGP, and use it for to anyone who has a PGP key, and does not express displeasure at receiving encrypted email). Also, the cell phone tarriffs may be higher if you need higher bandwidth to get the software only voice codec implementations in PGPfone to produce equivalent full-duplex voice quality to that expected from a digital mobile phone. Not knocking the mobile phone and laptop combination for the purpose of having mobile TCP/IP access from a laptop, I know several people who have this combination, though only at 9.6kbits, and even at that speed it is very neat. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 Jim Choate writes: > An arbitrary Real can be constructed from the Rationals. If > we accept the proposition, as posed apparently by you and > others, of uncountable Reals then your 'assumption' fails, > otherwise the 'uncountable' members would be countable. We can construct the Reals from the Rationals without having to speak of each specific Real while doing so. A formal system, having only a countable number of strings of symbols from its alphabet, can speak of "The Real Numbers" even though it cannot speak of "The Real Number X" for every single X in the Reals. > A 'limit point' is not the same as 'equal to'. Arbitrarily > close is not equivalent, inherent in the definition of a > limit point is the concept of 'little o' and 'big o', or > worded differently our axiomatic definition of infinity. In standard analysis, the limit of a sequence A[n] is a value x such that given any positive epsilon, no matter how small, we can find a point in the sequence such that all its members after that point are within epsilon of x. Such a limit, if it exists, is unique and exactly defined. "Little o" and "big o" are concepts from complexity theory and I am not precisely sure why you feel they need to be mentioned. > I can, but there is no fundamental rule in mathematics > that requires me to ignore the small but distinct > difference between the element in the original set and the > sequences used to approximate it. In the general case, the limit point will not be a member of the sequence which approximates it. Although every member of the sequence is a finite distance away from the limit, the limit itself is, as I previously mentioned, exactly known without any ambiguity. > It is something that must be agreed upon by accepting a > particular axiomatic definition of infinity. An "infinity" is simply the property of being able to be put in 1-1 correspondence with a proper subset of oneself. > The number of cuts are 1-to-1 with the Reals, they are not > the Reals. There is no way I can make a cut which is > 3.1527, only 1-to-1 with the number(s). Important > distinction. Mathematical objects are sets with structure. We generally consider two mathematical objects equivalent if there exists a 1-1 correspondence between the respective sets which is structure preserving. What the actual members of the set are, and how they were constructed, is usually unimportant. For all practical purposes we may refer to any mathematical object isomorphic to the Reals as "The Reals", without any confusion. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From marc at deepsea.sys.web-uk.net Mon Jan 20 08:23:42 1997 From: marc at deepsea.sys.web-uk.net (Marc) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:23:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: how to get off this list Message-ID: How on earth an i meant to get off this mailing list??? have tried loadz of the un scribe says its undone it but it bloody hasnt someone help me From hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de Mon Jan 20 08:25:44 1997 From: hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de (hjk) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:25:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes Message-ID: <199701201625.IAA12728@toad.com> Just one thing about the names of the different lists: I received a mail listing the changes to come. It was very easy to understand that I am going to get the moderated list if I do not change my subscription.I'll find out if I will miss something. We'll see. I wonder who is so brainless, not to understand what's going on. Do you really think the subscribers are pure Idiots? Heinz-Juergen Keller email: hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Mon Jan 20 08:25:49 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:25:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701201625.IAA12747@toad.com> On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Adam Back wrote: > > Steve Shear writes: > > [very useful explanation of GSM TDMA, and the new HSCSD] > > 64 kbit/s tied to ISDN is very nice technology. Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? > > ENCRYPTED GSM LINKS > > If the GSM phone includes a data port, as some already do, just connect > > your laptop, dial your ISP and 'push' the encrypted traffic over that link > > (e.g., using TCP/IP and PGPfone). [...] From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 08:25:53 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:25:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201625.IAA12764@toad.com> > > And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be expressed by the decimal > > expansion above. Which clearly qualifies as a formal system. > > To be a formal system of the type required, you would also have to > specify deterministic rules that could generate the "Ai" values. The > key distinction is between "expressed by" and "generated by". But we do have a formal system for generating those terms. Dedekind Cuts used to enumerate the value of an arbitrary length compared to the unit length. From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Mon Jan 20 08:26:09 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:26:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: One time pads and randomness? Message-ID: <199701201626.IAA12827@toad.com> >[Blurb on OTPs ...] I realize this has a limited amount of >messages before it is used up. But would this be secure? >Any suggestions, complaints, big gapping holes I missed? TMK, this is as close to a perfectly secure system as can be achieved. *AS LONG AS* the disks/discs are never compromised and never reused. As an interesting sidenote, if you read Tom Clancy's "Sum of All Fears" this is the type of system the CIA wants to implement even though the NSA doesn't want to back them because they think their (compromised) sytem is secure. Don't we all wish... _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ "I thought your patience was infinte?" 'Since space and time are curved, the infinite sooner or later bends back upon itself and ends up where it began and so have I.' From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 08:26:15 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:26:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dedikend Cut's and such (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201626.IAA12828@toad.com> Forwarded message: > > Did a little research, Dedekind Cut's and such use Integers to define a > > SPECIFIC Real to a arbitrary BUT FIXED resolution. They do not define the > > set of Reals. > > They do. The set of all numbers representable by a DC is precisely > the set of reals. Then you are saying that using Dedekind Cut's it is possible to define the ENTIRE set of Reals? I am assuming that entire includes all those Reals which aren't representable by any algorithm and of which we can't even speak (even though we are). Another pretty nifty trick. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From kent at songbird.com Mon Jan 20 08:26:21 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:26:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201626.IAA12830@toad.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > [...] > The number of cuts are 1-to-1 with the Reals, they are not the Reals. > There is no way I can make a cut which is 3.1527, only 1-to-1 with the > number(s). Important distinction. They are 1-1 with the Reals, you can define all the operations on them that are defined for reals, for every representable real (like 3.1527) there exists a DC. You have some idea, perhaps that there are "real" reals, as opposed to the various constructs for defining them? Perhaps you could define what a "real" real would be? -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From Butler Mon Jan 20 08:26:24 1997 From: Butler (Butler) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:26:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: FW: AUTO ANSWER MESSAGE. Message-ID: <199701201626.IAA12832@toad.com> I have set up an autoresponder to bounce back all of this jerks responses. Like a game of e-mail tennis ! I'm sure that he will get sick before I do ! Scott >---------- >From: Gerardo_NUNO at bourns.com[SMTP:Gerardo_NUNO at bourns.com] >Sent: 17 January 1997 18:38 >To: Butler, Scott >Subject: AUTO ANSWER MESSAGE. > > > > ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC06CB.51582470 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; NAME="/HPOFFICE/NETMAIL/C1738354.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Content-ID: =8C=8D=8AFrom : "Gerardo NUNO"@[PRCL/01] ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC06CB.51582470 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; NAME="/HPOFFICE/NETMAIL/C1738355.txt" Content-ID: Please check the name and e-mail address of the person that you're looking. Since gerardo_nuno is out of the system temporary. attn. System Administration. ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC06CB.51582470-- From frantz at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 08:26:27 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:26:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Server Authentication Message-ID: <199701201626.IAA12835@toad.com> I recently came aware of an interesting problem in server authentication. I.e. How does a browser plugin validate the server it is working for. There are many reasons for a plugin to want to validate its web server including contractual relations, but the one that most appeals to me is that the plugin provides access to confidential data which is used in an application distributed between the client machine and the server. Since the data is confidential, the plugin doesn't want to send it to just any server who can serve up a web page in the correct format, so it needs to authenticate the server. Now the obvious way to validate the server would be through the certificates exchanged when the SSL session was set up. (I am assuming a SSL session here because you shouldn't send confidential data over a non-encrypted link.) However, I haven't found an API where the plugin can discover the certificate used by the server, so it appears you have to roll your own. Rolling your own seems to come up against the problem mentioned by the IPSEC people, i.e. if you separate authentication and encryption the places you can end up are: (1) Encrypted and authenticated. (2) Encrypted but not authenticated. (3) Not encrypted and subject to a man in the middle authentication attack. (i.e. If an IP router can route your authentication packets, so can one running Mallory's special code. In the case above, the hostile server acts as a router for authentication.) (4) Unauthenticated and unencrypted. Does anyone have a solution to this authentication problem? Are signed applets discriminating enough to differentiate between different validated hosts and adjust local permissions differently (at the file level at least) for each? (Or is it more like, "Oh this applet is from marketspam.com which is signed by the US Post Office, it can read or write anything on the machine." Yea, right :-( ) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca Mon Jan 20 08:27:50 1997 From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:27:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: infinity & set membership Message-ID: <199701201627.IAA12857@toad.com> >The argument I supplied earlier for the rational nature of 0.1234... >still holds. >Math Man Aleph-Naught bottles of beer on the wall. Aleph-Naught bottles of beer. If some finite subset should happen to fall, There'll be Aleph-Naught bottles of beer on the wall. For those really long road trips, or when you choose to read all the cypherpunks traffic. James Q 1. Describe the history of the papacy from its origins to the present day, commenting specifically but not exclusively on its effects on the development of 14th century South America. Describe in detail. Be brief concise and specific. Give examples. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 08:27:55 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:27:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: infinity & set membership (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201627.IAA12858@toad.com> > What could be the problem here? One problem might be that an integer > (not including infinity) divided by "infinity" should be 0. This ratio has one of 3 outcomes in my system depending on the rate of approach to infinity of the defining functions, oo/oo = 0 if the denominator grows faster than the numerator oo/oo = oo if the numerator grows faster than the denominator oo/oo = 1 if the two functions grow at equal rates Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 08:28:04 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:28:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201628.IAA12866@toad.com> > Infinity does not have a predecessor, so it makes no sense to > count back from it a finite number of steps. If infinity does not have predecessors (ie is immune to normal arithmetic operations) then it is not possible for a sequence to approach it by adding a finite amount to succesive terms in order to approach it. This means that a sequence can not meaningfuly be asymptotic with infinity (meaning I have to be able to draw a asymptote, at least in theory, in order to demonstrate the limit). > If one constructs the Ordinals, which are isomorphism classes of > well-ordered sets, and the Cardinals, which are equivalence > classes of equipotent sets, one will automatically end up with > all sorts of transfinite numbers. If infinity is not a number, how is it possible to have a definite number (ie transfinite) which is larger than it? My contention is that number theory as you present it is playing fast and loose with the concept of infinity not being a number or visa versa. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 20 08:28:08 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:28:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors [Was: Gilmore and Sandfort Message-ID: <199701201628.IAA12867@toad.com> Ross Wright wrote: > On or About 19 Jan 97 at 17:37, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. We already get the censored stuff > > on the alleged-to-be "unedited" list, so by looking at the censored > > list only, we can do the subtraction more reliably than Sandfort. > > Just the censored list is needed, not the cut-out stuff, as far as I know. > I disagree. Or I don't quite understand what you are saying. I > want to see the moderated list and I want to see what was removed. > So since I was automatically given the Moderated List, I just put in > a subscription, under a different address, so I can easily see what was > removed. Of the three lists that now exist: unedited, edited, and > removed posts, I would chose to remove the unedited version so that I > can keep my eye on what the moderators decide I should not see. That > gives me an insight into what they think. Ross, I agree in principle, but not in fact. If the "removed" list was accurate, I'd say yes, but not only is it suspect, Sandy admitted personally that some items could "fall thru the cracks" and not make it to either the edited or removed list. The only way to guarantee the removed list is to subtract the censored list from the uncensored list, and hope that the uncensored list is complete. From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jan 20 08:29:46 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:29:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: 1997 Mac Crypto Conf registration Message-ID: <199701201629.IAA12901@toad.com> --- begin forwarded text Sender: mac-crypto at thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Vinnie Moscaritolo Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Tue, 14 Jan 1997 11:33:11 -0800 From: Vinnie Moscaritolo To: Multiple recipients of Subject: 1997 Mac Crypto Conf registration -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- hey all; I have posted a registration webpage for the 1997 Mac Crypto Conf at http://www.vmeng.com/mc/conf.html If you plan to give a talk there, I am looking for abtracts by end of Jan thanks Vinnie Moscaritolo http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A - ------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: Pretty Safe Mail 1.0 iQCVAwUBMtvcsfMF2+rAU+UdAQFOogP/R1/WmmAi3oEgLsC1il1OKf+7jR9j4L5U tAvhZIB6nyYpuHdP1fZ+/KfyCi4fYDmHIO4wVJo1BfbUtYL0YkIqzw/00JM8zfHR Zm9pcjSo70EDZPuypYyH+t0RlXJZj1eU0KjhAtRGeeWxAhP686wWCvz8hW4f2VfX uiLObXiqXiw= =faEk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From kent at songbird.com Mon Jan 20 08:29:50 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:29:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201629.IAA12902@toad.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > > > Forwarded message: > > > Only countably many real numbers, or members of any uncountable > > set, are denumerable. It is the property of being uncountable, > > rather than of being real or complex, which is important here. > > In short you are saying there are Reals which can not be expressed in the > format: > > AmEm + Am-1Em-1 + ... + A0E0 . B0E-1 + B1E-2 + ... + BnE-n+1 No, that's not what he is saying. What you have written does not represent a *specific* number. He is saying that IF you have a particular scheme for representing *specific* numbers, you can only represent countably many -- for any given scheme, there are numbers you can't represent. To put it another way a scheme that says "you can represent numbers as half infinite strings of digits with a single period somewhere" doesn't actually *specify* any numbers. A scheme that says "start with the number 1 and increment it 400 times" actually specifies a number. > And I contend that ANY number which is Real can be expressed by the decimal > expansion above. Which clearly qualifies as a formal system. To be a formal system of the type required, you would also have to specify deterministic rules that could generate the "Ai" values. The key distinction is between "expressed by" and "generated by". -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jan 20 08:31:31 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:31:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNS_top Message-ID: <199701201631.IAA12930@toad.com> 01-16-97. Reuters: "Unstoppable Internet will defy controls" Governments which seek to restrain the freedom of speech and tax the vast electronic commerce spawned by the Internet will almost certainly be wasting their time, experts say, and that any attempt to control traffic over the Internet will be futile. Governments in China, Burma and Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with minimal success. Dr Bob Glass of Sun Microsystems Inc said any attempt by governments to curtail any of this would be a waste of time. Not even the most powerful computers will be able to effectively patrol the world's telephone lines. Individual computer experts will always be one step ahead. "Big brother is out there trying to monitor this, but I don't think they're competent enough," he said. "Government is not really aware of the magnitude of money exchange on the web, but there's really not much they can do about it." Professor Patrick Purcell from London's Imperial College describes the Internet as a highly subversive phenomenom for international telecommunications, for a nation's state security and for international commerce. ----- UNS_top From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU Mon Jan 20 08:31:34 1997 From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 08:31:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: List of reliable remailers Message-ID: <199701201631.IAA12931@toad.com> I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = " cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{'alpha'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{'nymrod'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle ?"; $remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"death"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent post"; $remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; catalyst at netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth at ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura at replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 20 Jan 97 6:47:59 PST remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- nym config at nym.alias.net +#+-*******# 4:38 99.99% weasel config at weasel.owl.de +++++-+++++ 1:34:36 99.95% lucifer lucifer at dhp.com +++++-++++++ 36:32 99.94% balls remailer at huge.cajones.com *+ ********* 3:01 99.94% cyber alias at alias.cyberpass.net * +*++++*+** 35:08 99.88% exon remailer at remailer.nl.com * ++##*###*# 1:14 99.86% winsock winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net ----------- 2:02:21 99.86% dustbin dustman at athensnet.com -++--+.--+- 3:01:52 99.74% squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de ++ + ++ +++ 1:35:05 99.41% lead mix at zifi.genetics.utah.edu +++++-++*+*+ 39:30 99.35% extropia remail at miron.vip.best.com ----------- 5:06:43 98.93% haystack haystack at holy.cow.net +* .-####+# 2:24:43 98.64% replay remailer at replay.com +*+******* 15:38 98.25% reno middleman at cyberpass.net + + -+-- 1:51:15 92.61% middle middleman at jpunix.com ++ -+ .-- 1:48:09 67.78% mix mixmaster at remail.obscura.com .-++-+. 4:35:20 50.49% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Mon Jan 20 09:04:20 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:04:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) In-Reply-To: <3.0.16.19970120094321.429718ae@pop.netaddress.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Casey Iverson wrote: > Dimitri is a low life piece of Russan shit who is trying to distroy this > list because he has serious mental > problems or he is a tool of the NSA. > > What part of his vicious personal and anomyous attacks against members of > the list 'are not being read > correctly'? > > What part of his calling everyone on this list that won't put up with his > deliberate abuse, "fagots", 'are not being read correctly'? > > If you don't get it, you are a *really dumb fuck* or a KTOM tool. > You seem to not get it...and most likely a "really dumb ****". Have a nice day. From mpd at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 09:04:25 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:04:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Slow Cypherpunk Day Message-ID: <199701201704.JAA04094@netcom21.netcom.com> Is cypherpunks-outgoing-ksiuw at toad.com where articles should be sent to bypass the censors? Testing 1 2 3... Cocksucker Armenian Mayonaise Gilmore Faggot Crypto Testing 1 2 3... We now return you to your regular programming... -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From hallam at ai.mit.edu Mon Jan 20 09:15:19 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:15:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701201715.JAA13616@toad.com> Sean Roach wrote in article <5bv7g8$fhl at life.ai.mit.edu>... > At 03:44 PM 1/17/97 -0600, Igor Chudov wrote: > > It is limited, both accounts have to have the same password, (four > character, numeric.) If I want to transfer funds from another persons > account to one that I control, all I have to do is change the password on > one of them to that of the other, transfer funds, and change the password > back. By the time that my victim found out, (via the little letter "per > your request, $xxx was transferred to accnt#123456 from accnt#7890"), I > would be long gone. Depending on the country and bank you can probably perform almost any transfer you like by fax. I moved my pension from one bank to another simply by sending a fax. I have done similar transactions with Swiss, German and UK banks. For some reason the fax is considered to be a practically infallible authentication device. Quite why is beyond me since it should be obvious to anyone that all one needs to fake a fax is a photocopier, document signed by account holder, paste and scissors. You get everything needed on a signed cheque. Phill. From hallam at ai.mit.edu Mon Jan 20 09:31:14 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:31:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Using the political opportunity Was: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701201730.JAA14060@toad.com> Sarah L. Green wrote in article <5bo2df$7ui at life.ai.mit.edu>... > On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > > It was a conference call but over a cellular phone. Martin had hacked his > > Radio Shack Scanner using a well known technique. He had a radio ham > > license. > > > Phill > Actually I'd love to see this go to court & have the law itself > tossed out. How many years have the airwaves been free? Now it is > illegal to listen on the cellular frequencies. Well I would love to see the case go to court but I prefer to see someone else being harassed. I don't imagine for a minute that anyone will want to take it to court though. Newt can hardly want his crookery to continue to be before the public eye. He wants it buried as soon as possible so he can make similarly "arcane" charges "nobody understands" against Clinton. Interestingly the tax law that Newt broke was the use of non profit funds for political purposes. Newt should know all about these since the Republicans used these laws to shut down political comment by the likes of the Sierra club etc under Reagan. I know several people who used to be involved in non-profits who either resigned or changed the status of the group because the cost of administration and risk of politically motivated prosecution was not worth the tax advantages. Given the "butterfly under the wheel" nature of the Republican attack I would expect jury nullification in a big way. Meanwhile there would be several weeks of questions asking why Newt is not being prosecuted, only the Martins. Despite the fact that I don't think the Democrats are smart enough to mount such a conspiracy it would be a bloody good one if they had done. I think that the challenge the crypto lobby must take on is to use the event to raise public consciousness for crypto rights. What we probably need is a single issue lobby group that the media can call on for this and only this issue and nothing else. The energies of the CDT and EFF are inevitably spread between this and other issues such as the CDA. The problem is that a journalist does not immediately think EFF or CDT when a cellphone case comes up. A single issue crypto lobby could fill that purpose. Phill From blancw at MICROSOFT.com Mon Jan 20 09:40:09 1997 From: blancw at MICROSOFT.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:40:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math Message-ID: From: someone using WinSock Remailer Will all those people who are talking about set theory and the countability of various number systems take their discussion to sci.math, please? 'Cuz 1) All that stuff is irrelevant to crypto, its science or politics. .................................................. And as everyone on this list acutely knows, neither math, science, nor politics has anything to do with crypto. In fact, history bears out the fact cryptologists have neither cause nor reason for what they do. It is a useless by-product of excess mental activity for which only a few can find application, while fewer yet have any concern for its ramifications in a globally connected society of lightning communication. .. Blanc From hallam at ai.mit.edu Mon Jan 20 09:40:44 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:40:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701201740.JAA14417@toad.com> Sean Roach wrote in article <5bv7g8$fhl at life.ai.mit.edu>... > At 03:44 PM 1/17/97 -0600, Igor Chudov wrote: > > It is limited, both accounts have to have the same password, (four > character, numeric.) If I want to transfer funds from another persons > account to one that I control, all I have to do is change the password on > one of them to that of the other, transfer funds, and change the password > back. By the time that my victim found out, (via the little letter "per > your request, $xxx was transferred to accnt#123456 from accnt#7890"), I > would be long gone. Depending on the country and bank you can probably perform almost any transfer you like by fax. I moved my pension from one bank to another simply by sending a fax. I have done similar transactions with Swiss, German and UK banks. For some reason the fax is considered to be a practically infallible authentication device. Quite why is beyond me since it should be obvious to anyone that all one needs to fake a fax is a photocopier, document signed by account holder, paste and scissors. You get everything needed on a signed cheque. Phill. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 20 09:45:29 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:45:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: One time pads and randomness? Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970119220225.00653a30@popd.ix.netcom.com> Welcome! You've asked a Frequently Asked Question, so you're obviously new here, but you're also thinking, so we'll cut you some slack :-) A good book on cryptography that you should read is Bruce Schneier's "Applied Cryptography", which talks about both math and practical issues. At 09:51 AM 1/18/97 -0500, AaronH4321 at aol.com wrote: >I want to use a one time pad pased crypto system. I understand that the >randomness of the pad genorator is key to security (other than lossing >the keys). What I want to know is if I use a psuedo-RNG that .... Pseudo-Randomness isn't Real Randomness, and OTPs need Real Randomness. [Von Neumann said that anyone using mathematical methods to generate random numbers "is, of course, in a state of sin."] If you've got a Pseudo-RNG, your random number generator has some state at step 1 that totally determines the output at steps 2...infinity. This means that anybody who can determine the state of the PRNG at step n can decode all messages for steps n+1, n+2, ...., and often for steps 1....n-1 as well (depending on the particular PRNG.) If you're got Real Randomness*, even if you know the value of the pad at step n, it tells you entirely nothing about any other step. To make it worse, the popular PRNGs turn out to be annoyingly easy to crack, i.e. to determine the state from a small number of samples. >Say I create a 1 million character one time pad that passes all of the >randomness tests. It is "truely random". Unfortunately, passing randomness tests doesn't tell you a pad is "truly random" - it just eliminates the blatantly easy stuff. For instance, x[n+1] = Hash( x[n] ) or X[n+1] = Encrypt( x[n] ) for a cryptographically strong hash function or encryption like MD5 or SHA or 3-DES will pass randomness tests just fine, but it's still totally deterministic. Still not a OTP. However, say you create the pad from really random sources like flipping lots of coins or counting gamma rays, and haul it to your computers by well-armed guys with briefcases handcuffed to their wrists. >"A" grabs a chunk of the one time pad starting at a random point and >encrypts it....There "B" moves to the random point and begins decryption. If the pad is _really_ random, and you're sure nobody's seen any of it, then there's no difference between starting at a random point and starting at the beginning, and the bookkeeping is much cleaner. >During to process both computers mark that section of the OTP used so >that they don't retransmit with it. I realize this has a limited amount >of messages before it is used up. But would this be secure? Yeah, you've got it (once you remember to use a really random pad so there's entirely no relationship between bits n and n+1.) And you've also hit one of the basic difficulties with using OTPs, which is making sure you only use the once, and that this means that sometimes you run out AND YOU STILL CAN'T USE THE PAD AGAIN. [*Some philosophers will argue that there isn't any Real Randomness, that there's just a deterministic State Of The Universe that's more complex than you happen to know, and some will rant about Quantum Mechanics, and others who actually have some clue about Quantum will tell you that it doesn't get you off the hook; in any case, as long as the universe is messy enough it's be close enough for government work.] The NSA was able to crack a bunch of Russian OTP transmissions back in the 50s (the project name was Venona, and it was recently announced) because the Russians did two major things wrong: They used pads more than once when they were sloppy or out of new pads, and they didn't use very good randomness - clerks banging "randomly" on typewriters generate data with more correlation and less even distribution than they'd expect, and in nearly-pre-computer days they weren't able # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 20 09:45:29 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:45:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Eudora PGP Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970120085423.04f5b050@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 02:07 AM 1/18/97 -0800, Some Anonymous Remailer User wrote: >If somebody wants to play with the new Eudora PGP >but don't have Eudora Pro 3.0, it is available at >ftp://ftp.catalog.com/aussie/biscoe/Eudora30.zip Rather than ripping off a commercial product, from a company that's nice enough to give away free versions, you can get Eudora Lite 3.0.1 from www.eudora.com; I haven't yet installed PGPmail with it, but it should work, and meanwhile it's nicely junking the more common flamers. It is a beta version, but there should be another out soon. >Btw, is it legal for a moderator to let messages >like this one through to the list...? This list isn't currently moderated. The legality if it were is unclear. > > > # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 20 09:47:14 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:47:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970119222010.00653b68@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 03:34 AM 1/19/97, pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz wrote: >I was talking to someone recently about the feasibilty of >keyword-scanning phone conversations. He thought it was probably still >beyond the reach of current technology, I thought it wasn't I'd guess it's in-between, and it depends a _lot_ on how error-tolerant you are - do you want to catch them _all_, or just reduce the set of tapes that you'll have humans listen to later, since you're trolling for leads but don't mind missing the occasional one? Speaker-dependent isolated-word recognition is pretty doable. Speaker-independent small-vocabulary isolated-word is also pretty good (though the AT&T calling-card bot does a better job when I read it numbers than when I rapidly tell it "calling card" early in its dialog.) Connected-word is a lot harder. But word-scanning isn't the only thing "They" would troll for - it's probably easier to look for possible matches for specific voices, since you don't have to be too accurate. You want to catch Big Joey's calls from Vinnie, but don't care about his wife's calls. Some of the problems are with modeling speech well enough to do good algorithms; some are just getting enough horsepower to do it in real time. Can "They" afford enough DSP chips to do the job? They certainly can't follow a significant fraction of domestic traffic, and probably not even of US-to-overseas international traffic, but they may be able to pick out calls to/from phones of usual suspects, at least if they're mainly trying to filter for what tapes to listen to. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From haystack at holy.cow.net Mon Jan 20 10:03:16 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:03:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Gilmore and Sandfart (spit) died of AIDS Message-ID: <199701201745.MAA03130@holy.cow.net> that's why there is no traffic. From blancw at microsoft.com Mon Jan 20 10:10:52 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:10:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math Message-ID: <199701201810.KAA14866@toad.com> From: someone using WinSock Remailer Will all those people who are talking about set theory and the countability of various number systems take their discussion to sci.math, please? 'Cuz 1) All that stuff is irrelevant to crypto, its science or politics. .................................................. And as everyone on this list acutely knows, neither math, science, nor politics has anything to do with crypto. In fact, history bears out the fact cryptologists have neither cause nor reason for what they do. It is a useless by-product of excess mental activity for which only a few can find application, while fewer yet have any concern for its ramifications in a globally connected society of lightning communication. .. Blanc From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 20 10:10:52 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:10:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Eudora PGP Message-ID: <199701201810.KAA14867@toad.com> At 02:07 AM 1/18/97 -0800, Some Anonymous Remailer User wrote: >If somebody wants to play with the new Eudora PGP >but don't have Eudora Pro 3.0, it is available at >ftp://ftp.catalog.com/aussie/biscoe/Eudora30.zip Rather than ripping off a commercial product, from a company that's nice enough to give away free versions, you can get Eudora Lite 3.0.1 from www.eudora.com; I haven't yet installed PGPmail with it, but it should work, and meanwhile it's nicely junking the more common flamers. It is a beta version, but there should be another out soon. >Btw, is it legal for a moderator to let messages >like this one through to the list...? This list isn't currently moderated. The legality if it were is unclear. > > > # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From amanda at intercon.com Mon Jan 20 10:12:41 1997 From: amanda at intercon.com (Amanda Walker) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:12:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Question on Diffie-Hellman patent Message-ID: <199701201812.KAA14890@toad.com> Please excuse if this is a FAQ. I'd been operating under the assumption that the Diffie-Hellman patent (4200770) will expire on April 29, 1997 (17 years after the date of issue). Several people have recently told me it doesn't expire until September, evidently confusing the date of issue with the filing date. However, does anyone know of another patent (Hellman-Merkle, perhaps?) that would hve an impact on software that does D-H key exchange? We've got some planned uses of DH; while it doesn't seem cost effective to pay to license DH at this point, that six-month difference is something I need to plan around if necessary. Thanks, Amanda Walker Senior Software Engineer InterCon Systems Corporation From hallam at ai.mit.edu Mon Jan 20 10:12:43 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:12:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Using the political opportunity Was: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701201812.KAA14891@toad.com> Sarah L. Green wrote in article <5bo2df$7ui at life.ai.mit.edu>... > On Thu, 16 Jan 1997, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > > It was a conference call but over a cellular phone. Martin had hacked his > > Radio Shack Scanner using a well known technique. He had a radio ham > > license. > > > Phill > Actually I'd love to see this go to court & have the law itself > tossed out. How many years have the airwaves been free? Now it is > illegal to listen on the cellular frequencies. Well I would love to see the case go to court but I prefer to see someone else being harassed. I don't imagine for a minute that anyone will want to take it to court though. Newt can hardly want his crookery to continue to be before the public eye. He wants it buried as soon as possible so he can make similarly "arcane" charges "nobody understands" against Clinton. Interestingly the tax law that Newt broke was the use of non profit funds for political purposes. Newt should know all about these since the Republicans used these laws to shut down political comment by the likes of the Sierra club etc under Reagan. I know several people who used to be involved in non-profits who either resigned or changed the status of the group because the cost of administration and risk of politically motivated prosecution was not worth the tax advantages. Given the "butterfly under the wheel" nature of the Republican attack I would expect jury nullification in a big way. Meanwhile there would be several weeks of questions asking why Newt is not being prosecuted, only the Martins. Despite the fact that I don't think the Democrats are smart enough to mount such a conspiracy it would be a bloody good one if they had done. I think that the challenge the crypto lobby must take on is to use the event to raise public consciousness for crypto rights. What we probably need is a single issue lobby group that the media can call on for this and only this issue and nothing else. The energies of the CDT and EFF are inevitably spread between this and other issues such as the CDA. The problem is that a journalist does not immediately think EFF or CDT when a cellphone case comes up. A single issue crypto lobby could fill that purpose. Phill From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 20 10:12:55 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:12:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: One time pads and randomness? Message-ID: <199701201812.KAA14899@toad.com> Welcome! You've asked a Frequently Asked Question, so you're obviously new here, but you're also thinking, so we'll cut you some slack :-) A good book on cryptography that you should read is Bruce Schneier's "Applied Cryptography", which talks about both math and practical issues. At 09:51 AM 1/18/97 -0500, AaronH4321 at aol.com wrote: >I want to use a one time pad pased crypto system. I understand that the >randomness of the pad genorator is key to security (other than lossing >the keys). What I want to know is if I use a psuedo-RNG that .... Pseudo-Randomness isn't Real Randomness, and OTPs need Real Randomness. [Von Neumann said that anyone using mathematical methods to generate random numbers "is, of course, in a state of sin."] If you've got a Pseudo-RNG, your random number generator has some state at step 1 that totally determines the output at steps 2...infinity. This means that anybody who can determine the state of the PRNG at step n can decode all messages for steps n+1, n+2, ...., and often for steps 1....n-1 as well (depending on the particular PRNG.) If you're got Real Randomness*, even if you know the value of the pad at step n, it tells you entirely nothing about any other step. To make it worse, the popular PRNGs turn out to be annoyingly easy to crack, i.e. to determine the state from a small number of samples. >Say I create a 1 million character one time pad that passes all of the >randomness tests. It is "truely random". Unfortunately, passing randomness tests doesn't tell you a pad is "truly random" - it just eliminates the blatantly easy stuff. For instance, x[n+1] = Hash( x[n] ) or X[n+1] = Encrypt( x[n] ) for a cryptographically strong hash function or encryption like MD5 or SHA or 3-DES will pass randomness tests just fine, but it's still totally deterministic. Still not a OTP. However, say you create the pad from really random sources like flipping lots of coins or counting gamma rays, and haul it to your computers by well-armed guys with briefcases handcuffed to their wrists. >"A" grabs a chunk of the one time pad starting at a random point and >encrypts it....There "B" moves to the random point and begins decryption. If the pad is _really_ random, and you're sure nobody's seen any of it, then there's no difference between starting at a random point and starting at the beginning, and the bookkeeping is much cleaner. >During to process both computers mark that section of the OTP used so >that they don't retransmit with it. I realize this has a limited amount >of messages before it is used up. But would this be secure? Yeah, you've got it (once you remember to use a really random pad so there's entirely no relationship between bits n and n+1.) And you've also hit one of the basic difficulties with using OTPs, which is making sure you only use the once, and that this means that sometimes you run out AND YOU STILL CAN'T USE THE PAD AGAIN. [*Some philosophers will argue that there isn't any Real Randomness, that there's just a deterministic State Of The Universe that's more complex than you happen to know, and some will rant about Quantum Mechanics, and others who actually have some clue about Quantum will tell you that it doesn't get you off the hook; in any case, as long as the universe is messy enough it's be close enough for government work.] The NSA was able to crack a bunch of Russian OTP transmissions back in the 50s (the project name was Venona, and it was recently announced) because the Russians did two major things wrong: They used pads more than once when they were sloppy or out of new pads, and they didn't use very good randomness - clerks banging "randomly" on typewriters generate data with more correlation and less even distribution than they'd expect, and in nearly-pre-computer days they weren't able # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 20 10:18:27 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:18:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNS_top Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970120101512.04f5d958@popd.ix.netcom.com> # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 20 10:21:13 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:21:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: INV_ade Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970120101722.04f5a7c0@popd.ix.netcom.com> # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From ericm at lne.com Mon Jan 20 10:25:49 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:25:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Server Authentication Message-ID: <199701201825.KAA15083@toad.com> Bill Frantz writes: > > I recently came aware of an interesting problem in server authentication. > I.e. How does a browser plugin validate the server it is working for. > There are many reasons for a plugin to want to validate its web server > including contractual relations, but the one that most appeals to me is > that the plugin provides access to confidential data which is used in an > application distributed between the client machine and the server. Since > the data is confidential, the plugin doesn't want to send it to just any > server who can serve up a web page in the correct format, so it needs to > authenticate the server. > > Now the obvious way to validate the server would be through the > certificates exchanged when the SSL session was set up. (I am assuming a > SSL session here because you shouldn't send confidential data over a > non-encrypted link.) However, I haven't found an API where the plugin can > discover the certificate used by the server, so it appears you have to roll > your own. I think that you can get access to the server's certificate. I know you can from the CGI interface. Unfortunately it's the raw ASN.1 encoded certificate, so you would have to ASN.1 decode it. Bleah. If the SSL handshake completes, then you can assume that the client has verified and authenticated the server certificate. The only problem would be that the authentication might not be up to the plugin's standards- i.e. a connection to www.foo.com is somehow intercepted by www.ripoff-plugins.com. The server www.ripoff-plugins.com presents a cert who's name is www.foo.com. The browser correctly presents a pop-up dialog noting the discrepancy, and the luser operating the client clicks on the 'OK' button, allowing the SSL handshake to finish. Oops. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 20 10:27:44 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:27:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition Message-ID: <199701201827.KAA15122@toad.com> At 03:34 AM 1/19/97, pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz wrote: >I was talking to someone recently about the feasibilty of >keyword-scanning phone conversations. He thought it was probably still >beyond the reach of current technology, I thought it wasn't I'd guess it's in-between, and it depends a _lot_ on how error-tolerant you are - do you want to catch them _all_, or just reduce the set of tapes that you'll have humans listen to later, since you're trolling for leads but don't mind missing the occasional one? Speaker-dependent isolated-word recognition is pretty doable. Speaker-independent small-vocabulary isolated-word is also pretty good (though the AT&T calling-card bot does a better job when I read it numbers than when I rapidly tell it "calling card" early in its dialog.) Connected-word is a lot harder. But word-scanning isn't the only thing "They" would troll for - it's probably easier to look for possible matches for specific voices, since you don't have to be too accurate. You want to catch Big Joey's calls from Vinnie, but don't care about his wife's calls. Some of the problems are with modeling speech well enough to do good algorithms; some are just getting enough horsepower to do it in real time. Can "They" afford enough DSP chips to do the job? They certainly can't follow a significant fraction of domestic traffic, and probably not even of US-to-overseas international traffic, but they may be able to pick out calls to/from phones of usual suspects, at least if they're mainly trying to filter for what tapes to listen to. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From mpd at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 10:28:57 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 10:28:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701201628.IAA12866@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701201828.KAA15491@netcom11.netcom.com> Jim Choate writes: > If infinity does not have predecessors (ie is immune to > normal arithmetic operations) then it is not possible for a > sequence to approach it by adding a finite amount to > succesive terms in order to approach it. This means that a > sequence can not meaningfuly be asymptotic with infinity > (meaning I have to be able to draw a asymptote, at least in > theory, in order to demonstrate the limit). > If infinity is not a number, how is it possible to have a > definite number (ie transfinite) which is larger than it? > My contention is that number theory as you present it is > playing fast and loose with the concept of infinity not > being a number or visa versa. The problem here is that the terms "infinity" and "number" are used to refer to many different things in mathematics. We use "infinity" as a term for transfinite Cardinals and Ordinals, but also use it when describing convergence on the reals, to indicate that a sequence increases without bound. We use it in calculus to describe the limits of integration over all real numbers, a set which does not include any infinite numbers at all. Similar we use the term "number" to refer to Cardinals, Ordinals, Reals, Integers, Complex, Quaternians, or whatever, hoping that what we mean by it will be clear from the context. With respect to the Real numbers, infinity is not a number, but simply a way of saying something increases without bound or that we wish to include all the positive or negative reals when performing some mathematical operation. With regard to Ordinals and Cardinals, not only is infinity a number, but there are an uncountable number of different infinities, which cannot be placed in 1-1 correspondence with each other. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From frissell at panix.com Mon Jan 20 11:01:56 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:01:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Prayer For Swiss Banks Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970120135744.017c178c@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- This happened a year ago but I couldn't resist posting it in light of the current political attacks on the privacy of Swiss banks. MANILA, Philippines (Feb 24, 1996 9:45 p.m. EST) - Former Philippine first lady Imelda Marcos presided over a bizarre ceremony on Sunday to mark the 10th anniversary of the People's Power revolution that forced her and her corrupt husband into ignominious exile. Marcos -- notorious shopaholic, convicted criminal and now a legally elected member of the Philippine Congress -- asked God to bless Corazon Aquino and other leaders of the 1986 revolt. But she also asked the Almighty to enlighten Swiss bankers holding some of the estimated $5 billion the Marcoses and their cronies are accused of looting from the national economy. "May the Lord enlighten ... the Swiss banks -- that they might uphold justice and preserve the integrity of their own laws and the laws of confidentiality, trust and basic decency between the banks and their clients," she said in a speech. Two Swiss banks holding some $475 million linked to the Marcoses are currently embroiled in a row over what to do with the money. The Philippine government wants it back but a U.S. court has ordered it distributed to victims of human rights abuses during the late Ferdinand Marcos's 20 years in power. ***** DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMuPAIIVO4r4sgSPhAQFhSQQAiLrFwcvR0CxiZDrG1f6RSysX8ypxe2y4 Az2MejxFj4ACZIw9lCN98pxRwM8QwEQnCo+RKpMEchurk1bx0EEK749+kxpccsw2 qi+VW1lhBLV38YyzAm0vRwK1pwsKuW/E0UjMOvfTfQynRljohiLvLxQDMJ4DQLHi qi+R9K2Gpr0= =wmjK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Mon Jan 20 11:06:21 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:06:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quantum computers/Java of a different sort Message-ID: <32E3C19A.C48@vail.tivoli.com> For all you quantum computer fans, see http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/html/970117c.htm -- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ To: java at tivoli.com Subject: ScienceNOW www.sciencenow.org From: jchou at tivoli.com Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:49:39 -0500 jchou at tivoli.com 01/20/97 12:49 PM An advance in Java computing... http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/html/970117c.htm ScienceNOW www.sciencenow.org
Knight-Ridder
ScienceBase Hewlett-Packard Chemical
Analysis

Home News Tips Archives Masthead Feedback Science Online

Previous Story Next Story

Science
Online

Science's Next
Wave

ScienceNOW logo

Friday, 17 January 1997, 7:00 p.m.

Quantum Computer in a Cup of Joe?

Researchers have come up with a way to turn coffee and other mundane liquids into primitive quantum computers. The findings, reported in today's Science and in an upcoming issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, suggest a new approach toward conquering the Mount Everest of computing: a quantum computer that in a few seconds could perform calculations that would take billions of years on an ordinary supercomputer.


Illustration
Fresh-brewed. A prototype tabletop NMR quantum computer, showing the circuitry and the radio-frequency coil.

JOSHUA SMITH


The key is nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), a technique for manipulating and measuring the spins of atomic nuclei that is already a mainstay of medical imaging and chemical analysis. The up-or-down spin of nuclei offers the two-bit logic system that a computer needs. What makes a quantum computer special, however, is quantum parallelism. In the strange world of quantum mechanics, the spin of a nucleus can be in both states, representing both bits, at the same time. That property should permit a quantum computer to perform calculations on incredibly large numbers of bits at once. And Neil Gershenfeld of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Isaac Chuang of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and a second team, Tim Havel and Amr Fahmy of Harvard Medical School and David Cory of MIT, have found that it's easier to achieve this parallelism by using NMR in an ordinary liquid than in the exotic systems researchers have tried so far.

Cory, Fahmy, and Havel have actually built quantum circuits using a standard NMR spectrometer, while Gershenfeld and Chuang are gearing up experiments and hope to demonstrate quantum circuits and maybe even a simple computation by next summer. What can be done now can be done with easily available and affordable equipment--"off-the-shelf coffee cups, off-the -shelf liquids, off-the-shelf magnets, etc.," says MIT computer scientist Seth Lloyd.

"This NMR scheme is pretty slick stuff, but in the long run, they're going to have to find a particularly special molecule or state that allows them to extend it to large numbers," says Chris Monroe of the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Indeed, the researchers note that fundamental obstacles may prevent the scheme from ever producing a practical computer. But "from the point of view of verifying the basic ideas and doing interesting physics," says Lloyd, a pioneer theorist in quantum computing, "it's fantastic." For more details, Science Online subscribers can link to the News story in today's Science.

© 1997 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science

Previous Story Next Story

Home News Tips Archives Masthead Feedback Science Online
From timd at consensus.com Mon Jan 20 11:13:00 1997 From: timd at consensus.com (Tim Dierks) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:13:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Question on Diffie-Hellman patent Message-ID: <199701201913.LAA15649@toad.com> At 11:24 AM -0500 1/20/97, Amanda Walker wrote: >Please excuse if this is a FAQ. > >I'd been operating under the assumption that the Diffie-Hellman patent >(4200770) will expire on April 29, 1997 (17 years after the date of issue). >Several people have recently told me it doesn't expire until September, >evidently confusing the date of issue with the filing date. However, >does anyone know of another patent (Hellman-Merkle, perhaps?) that would hve >an impact on software that does D-H key exchange? We've got some planned >uses >of DH; while it doesn't seem cost effective to pay to license DH at this >point, that six-month difference is something I need to plan around if >necessary. As a result of the GATT treaty, patent expiration times for some US patents changed. The international standard is 20 years from filing, while old US law was 17 years from issue. On the day which GATT took force for the US (June 8, 1995), all outstanding patents' expiration dates were changed to 20 years from filing or 17 years from issue, whichever is later. This affects some cryptography patents as follows: Here's a summary of some relevant crypto patents: Name Number Filed Issued Expires Diffie-Hellman 4,200,770 Sept. 6, 1977 Apr. 29, 1980 Sept. 6, 1997 Hellman-Merkle 4,218,582 Oct. 6, 1977 Aug. 19, 1980 Oct. 6, 1997 RSA 4,405,829 Dec. 14, 1977 Sept. 20, 1983 Sept. 20, 2000 Data from References: - Tim Tim Dierks - timd at consensus.com - www.consensus.com Software Haruspex - Consensus Development Developer of SSL Plus: SSL 3.0 Integration Suite From mpd at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 11:13:00 1997 From: mpd at netcom.com (Mike Duvos) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:13:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701201913.LAA15647@toad.com> Jim Choate writes: > If infinity does not have predecessors (ie is immune to > normal arithmetic operations) then it is not possible for a > sequence to approach it by adding a finite amount to > succesive terms in order to approach it. This means that a > sequence can not meaningfuly be asymptotic with infinity > (meaning I have to be able to draw a asymptote, at least in > theory, in order to demonstrate the limit). > If infinity is not a number, how is it possible to have a > definite number (ie transfinite) which is larger than it? > My contention is that number theory as you present it is > playing fast and loose with the concept of infinity not > being a number or visa versa. The problem here is that the terms "infinity" and "number" are used to refer to many different things in mathematics. We use "infinity" as a term for transfinite Cardinals and Ordinals, but also use it when describing convergence on the reals, to indicate that a sequence increases without bound. We use it in calculus to describe the limits of integration over all real numbers, a set which does not include any infinite numbers at all. Similar we use the term "number" to refer to Cardinals, Ordinals, Reals, Integers, Complex, Quaternians, or whatever, hoping that what we mean by it will be clear from the context. With respect to the Real numbers, infinity is not a number, but simply a way of saying something increases without bound or that we wish to include all the positive or negative reals when performing some mathematical operation. With regard to Ordinals and Cardinals, not only is infinity a number, but there are an uncountable number of different infinities, which cannot be placed in 1-1 correspondence with each other. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd at netcom.com $ via Finger. $ From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 20 11:14:36 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:14:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: INV_ade Message-ID: <199701201914.LAA15675@toad.com> # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From rcs at cs.arizona.edu Mon Jan 20 11:16:25 1997 From: rcs at cs.arizona.edu (Richard Schroeppel) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:16:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: DHM patent Message-ID: <199701201916.LAA15703@toad.com> re: A.Walker's query about expiration date of DH patent. (I'm not a lawyer: This is just my opinion. Get advice from a professional for making your business decisions.) A couple of years ago, as part of the legislation implementing the GATT treaty, Congress changed the patent lifetime. The old rule was 17 years from grant date; the new rule is 20 years from filing date. There were various transition rules; one was that holders of current patents could select either rule. Presumably they will choose the rule that gives the later expiration date. In the case of the DHM patent #4200770, this gives then a few more months, to Sept. 6 1997. Roger Schlafly has made a reasonable case that the DHM patent is invalid because the invention was "published" more than a year before the patent was filed. (He dug up a copy of a preprint they were circulating with a stamped received-date of ?May 1976?.) There is also a patent by Hellman & Merkle that seems to deal with the (busted) knapsack cryptosystem. It's number 4218582, filed Oct 6, 1977, granted Aug 19, 1980. My cursory reading shows that it includes the math both for knapsack crypto and for doing modular exponentiation. It might be a good idea to look this over to make sure it doesn't affect your plans. Rich Schroeppel rcs at cs.arizona.edu From orwant at media.mit.edu Mon Jan 20 11:18:09 1997 From: orwant at media.mit.edu (Jon Orwant) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:18:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Disseminating public-key crypto source code Message-ID: <199701201918.LAA15713@toad.com> I've written a few Perl routines for public-key cryptography. I'd like to freely disseminate the source code (starting with ElGamal) to as many people as I can, It's my understanding that there are two orthogonal restrictions: 1) ITAResque: I can't give code to non-U.S. citizens. 2) PKPesque: Using public-key crypto is an infringement, although disseminating/possessing the source code is not. While I'm sure these are oversimplifications, it would seem that I can release my source code over the Internet provided I install a simple verification mechanism (cf. MIT's PGP distribution) to ensure that only people claiming to be U.S. citizens have access privileges. Am I correct? If so, why aren't more people doing this? Jon Orwant MIT Media Lab orwant at media.mit.edu From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 20 11:27:45 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:27:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: a comment of Vulis's Message-ID: <199701201925.LAA15760@toad.com> Dr Vulis made a comment that there was the threat of persons in favor of the moderator being able to get away with slander while those victims being unable to respond. I assume that the moderator will refrain from such action, but if something were actually cut, I could get it through anyway. At least until majordomo is secured against such intrusion. The list won't be truly secure until no one can request the subscription list. If I felt that I needed to get my message past the moderator, I would just request the complete listing of cypherpunks subscribers, copy that into the Bcc: field of eudora, and forge an address. Now my message would get through, my computer would probably be tied up for an hour or so distributing my statement, but my message would get through. The security necessary to counteract this would be to either make the subscription list unavailable, or delete the actual addresses from the list. For instance Sean Roach would become Sean Roach. Now people could still see who was on the list, but couldn't use it to negate the established distribution system. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 20 11:27:45 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:27:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [FLAME] [PURE VITROL] Re: IMDMP: SOURCE... Message-ID: <199701201925.LAA15771@toad.com> At 10:05 PM 1/18/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis wrote: >> Non sequitor. > ^ >Do "cypher punks" use lousy spelling as a kind of "poor fag's crypto"? I'm a heterosexual, so I may be off the mark here, but. Reguarding my history books, Mr. Hoover (can't remember his first name), of F.B.I. fame, a reported homosexual, was one of the biggest gaybashers of his era. By your acidic comments, are you trying to tell us something? From frantz at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 11:33:38 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:33:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net> Message-ID: At 9:19 PM -0800 1/19/97, WinSock Remailer wrote: >Bill Frantz writes: > >> I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that >> email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to >> toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small >> fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost. > >Failing something catastrophic like a disk failure or a host down for >more than a week, this should not be the case. Almost every site >running sendmail has the Os ("SuperSafe") option set. That means >sendmail will not respond to a "." at the end of a DATA command with >SMTP code 250 until it has written the incoming message (and queue >info) to disk and called fsync. Thus, you may get 2 copies of a >message, but mail messages should not just disappear regularly at all, >even if the network goes down or a machine crashes. > >Non-sendmail MTA's tend to be even more strict about this, not even >allowing this behavior to be disabled. About 9 months ago, I lost somewhere between 50 and 100 email messages because they were written to a disk with a corrupted file system. Now failures of this kind may be in the category of "catastrophic disk failure", but in my unfortunate experience, they are not all that uncommon. Note that since I lost multiple messages due to one failure, tests of the form, "Once is happenstance, twice coincidence, three or more is conspiracy" might say, "conspiracy" even for just one failure. The chances of this test criteria error increase for frequent posters. At 4:02 AM -0800 1/20/97, Toto asked: > Are there any critereon established, yet, as to what type of content >will be necessary for a letter to get 'lost'? See the above discussion of disk failure. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 11:35:09 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:35:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: <199701201612.IAA12435@toad.com> Message-ID: At 3:41 PM -0800 1/16/97, Adam Back wrote: >Bill Frantz writes: >> At 4:39 AM -0800 1/16/97, Adam Back wrote: >> >- PIN for phone's RSA signature keys >> >> It is not clear you need signatures in the secure phone case. Eric >> Blossom's 3DES uses straight DH for key exchange with verbal verification >> that both ends are using the same key. > >How does Eric's box display the negotiated key to the user? (I don't >recall the pair I saw having displays). I have not seen the production box, I am going from my memory of Eric's preproduction description at a meeting last spring. I hope someone who knows what they are talking about will butt in here if I am wrong. The box has a 3 or 4 digit display which displays "something" about the 3DES key, where "something" is some of the bits, or a hash, or ... With 3 decimal digits, a MIM attacker has a 999 out of 1000 chance of getting caught. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From vznuri at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 11:48:15 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:48:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701201946.LAA14921@netcom4.netcom.com> [microcurrency] >It will also not catch on until there are better standards involving >microcurrency transactions amongst the vendors. It would also help if >there was a single interface (or "helper app") for whatever vendor you >decided to go with. as I see it, I think there are a few key standards that need to be devised: 1. an html tag that indicates how much a link costs, probably in the type syntax 2. modification of http to support a payment mechanism, by sending a token. 3. browser "piggy bank". there are other standards, such as how a person might get cash into their piggy bank etc., but most would be related to the above items. notice that we don't really need a good interoperable standard to begin with. often Netscape and MS invent tags that are not interoperable between them, and later standardization arrives at a consensus / convergence. as I see it, I think the browser manufacturers should just pick their favorite digital cash scheme (cybercash, digicash, whatever) that is easiest to implement, and do so, with the intention of integrating other schemes at a later date. >Currently every vendor of payment schemes has made it proprietary in some >way. (At least the ones I have seen.) This means that if the user visits >three different web pages, each using a payment scheme from a different >vendor, that user has to be signed up with all of those vendors. (Or at >least have their helper apps.) hence, a good opportunity for the browser manufacturer to remove all these additional complications and make it point-and-click simple. I agree, this is not going to be a total nonbrainer. but better the browser manufacturer do it for their software, allowing everyone who uses it to benefit, than every single cash user in cyberspace trying to replicate the same difficult series of steps to get their cash going. >I will not even go into the hastles of trying to set it up from the server >side. (The last payment scheme I installed (cybercash) was not very well >documented. The documentation on the web site contradicted the software >with the tar file. (And both were wrong at some point.)) Until these >payment schemes are easier to deal with for the web page provider, they >will not catch on. (There will also need to be more support for Internet >service providers with multiple vendors all on different payment schemes.) > >Until there is a single standard hammered out, micropayments will still be >few and far between. generally, that's what I'm calling for, some ad hoc standards being put into place immediately by the browser manufacturers, in the same way new tags are always being invented. standardization generally results *after* an initial, minimally constrained innovation phase, imho. From vznuri at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 11:58:37 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 11:58:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft In-Reply-To: <199701182228.OAA00244@crypt.hfinney.com> Message-ID: <199701201955.LAA15540@netcom4.netcom.com> >> notice how much crypto really caught on when Netscape >> incorporated it, and how this action alone did more for >> the proliferation of crypto in cyberspace, almost, than >> all prior efforts combined. I think that microcurrency >> will be unleashed in a very similar way. > >I assume you are referring to secure web connections via SSL in talking >about crypto. In that case there was a very strong pent up demand for >the service. Customers were afraid to send credit card numbers and >other personal information across the web. Sellers were pressuring the >net server companies to do something to quell these concerns so on-line >selling could succeed. Netscape did it, and in the grand tradition of >the net, implementation beat design and SSL defeated SHTTP. neither has "beat" the other at this point. but this does show something I have always believed: companies should just invent ad-hoc, quick-and-dirty standards if full standards are not immediately available. it makes no sense to me to delay the introduction of some new feature because there isn't industry standardization. the case is often that the initial ad-hoc standards will tend to converge into a better standard down the road. I don't see standards as "forever". standards should be viewed as stepping stones to better standards. hence I think netscape and/or MS should invent a "plug and play" (i.e. trivial to use) micropayment standard immediately, regardless of what industry standardization does not or will exist. it wouldn't be pretty at first but standardization to better interfaces could ensue later. the main thing is to get it on the table, and get people using it, to create the demand. services are rarely developed unless there is a demand. hence I suggest that a *rudimentary* form of the service be first devised and implemented asap to increase demand for one with much more finesse. In its early >versions SSL had a lot of problems but it was a good enough solution for >what it needed to be. exactly. >The question is whether there is similar market demand for pay per view >web pages. don't think this is a valid question. the whole point of microcurrency is just decreasing the cost until people hit the page and don't care about the cost. hence I think there is a guaranteed market, because with microcurrency you can always shave off your price to virtually infinitesmal values (say pennies a hit) that will guarantee you will have at least some audience. Do web service operators think they can offer value added >services which will motivate customers to click through the for-pay link? I'm imagining just putting a teeny little transaction charge on top of every single hit that now exists. if it is small enough, consumers won't care very much. >There is also the issue of sellers learning to use the various payment >systems which are out there. Here again if Netscape and Microsoft would >just pick one then everyone could standardize on it, which would >increase acceptance a great deal. well, pick one payment scheme and then competing companies could adopt the same standard (but offer competing systems and features) >Ecash as it is implemented now has the problem that the customer has to >open a special bank account. What you need is a payment system where >you can use your existing VISA card and withdraw cash against it into >your electronic wallet. This is pretty close to the FV model but their >payment system is somewhat clumsy. exactly. someone who reengineered the whole thing from top to bottom and made it absolutely trivial to use-- I suspect the future of the browser wars will belong to the company that does this. again, I note it might be doable in a plug in, but as I said, I think browser manufacturers are eventually going to put it into their own code because of its sheer importance. From lucifer at dhp.com Mon Jan 20 12:13:21 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:13:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: ElGamal Message-ID: <199701202010.PAA26311@dhp.com> Timothy C. Mayonnaise is the living proof that anal sex causes pregnancy. o /\O/ O Timothy C. Mayonnaise 0 \\ | 0-# // | / \ From declan at pathfinder.com Mon Jan 20 12:16:38 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:16:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs Message-ID: [Can anyone who knows more than I do answer this? --Declan] --- Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 14:45:44 -0500 (EST) To: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) From: Solveig Bernstein What have the new crypto regs done to the "technical data" and the "public domain" exemptions from ITAR? The problem is this: as I understand it, the Commerce Dept. regs exempt teaching and print presentations generally, but these exemptions do not apply to "encryption software." Does this mean that the exemptions do not apply to *teaching about* encryption software or *publications about* encryption software? Or *only* that the exemptions do not apply to diskette-contained source code or object code. In other words, the new regs might completely decontrol teaching and publication of something like Professor Bernstein's Snuffle. On the other hand, the new regs might, like ITAR, restrict teaching and publication of Snuffle (as well as publication of source code in diskette format). The purpose of the question is to understand whether a First Amendment challenge to the new regs is a First Amendment challenge to a restriction on *teaching, publication, and program distribution* or just a challenge to a restriction on *program distribution.* Solveig Bernstein, Esq. (202) 789-5274 (202) 842-3490 (fax) Assistant Director of Telecommunications & Technology Studies Cato Institute 1000 Mass. Ave. NW Washington, DC 20001 ------------------------- The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 20 12:45:26 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:45:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: [FLAME] [PURE VITROL] Re: IMDMP: SOURCE... In-Reply-To: <9701201925.AA09698@uu.psi.com> Message-ID: Sean Roach writes: > At 10:05 PM 1/18/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis wrote: > >> Non sequitor. > > ^ > >Do "cypher punks" use lousy spelling as a kind of "poor fag's crypto"? > > I'm a heterosexual, so I may be off the mark here, but. Reguarding my > history books, Mr. Hoover (can't remember his first name), of F.B.I. fame, a > reported homosexual, was one of the biggest gaybashers of his era. By your > acidic comments, are you trying to tell us something? Homosexual activists have accused many prominent people, like Hoover and da Vinci, of sharing their sexual perversions. I have seen no evidence that Hoover was a pervert other than a claim by one woman, a proven liar, that she was present at an orgy where Hoover wore a woman's dress and engaged in sex with men. Several other people who she claimed were present at the orgy called her a liar. She's dead, or she would have probably been supporting Geekmore and EFF today. You may recall that the moderator cocksucker Sandfart invited me to a "cypher punks" meating in San Francisco, and if I had accepted, would have told many lies about my participation in their homosexual orgies. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 20 13:00:15 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:00:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL Message-ID: <199701202100.NAA17730@toad.com> At 04:38 PM 1/19/97 -0600, snow wrote: > x=0; > x1=0; > x++; > x--; > > Would give you all int's, the only problem you have is granularity. Nice, but you have a typo, the result would be the same as x is both incremented and decremented before it can be output. I am assumming that the second block of code has it right. > x=0.00000000001; > y=0.00000000001; > x1=x; > x=x+y; > x1=x1-y; Also, I am assumming that the increment, decrement portion of the code should be in a loop. Otherwise this will result in exactly one value for x, and one for x1. The output of the first block is x=1, x1=0. The output of the second block is x=0.00000000002, y=0.00000000001, x1=0.00000000000. Also, the code does have other errors that don't "ring any bells" as they allow the mind to figure out what your intent is. Not unlike the many complaints in "The Far Side" where everyone complains that it is the female mosquito that bites people while ignoring that no mosquito has ever willingly walked into an appropiately scaled house wearing a hat. From andrew_loewenstern at il.us.swissbank.com Mon Jan 20 13:36:00 1997 From: andrew_loewenstern at il.us.swissbank.com (Andrew Loewenstern) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:36:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Question on Diffie-Hellman patent In-Reply-To: <199701201913.LAA15649@toad.com> Message-ID: <9701202135.AA00489@ch1d157nwk> Tim Dierks writes: > Here's a summary of some relevant crypto patents: > > Name Number Filed Issued Expires > > Diffie-Hellman 4,200,770 Sept. 6, 1977 Apr. 29, 1980 Sept. 6, 1997 > Hellman-Merkle 4,218,582 Oct. 6, 1977 Aug. 19, 1980 Oct. 6, 1997 > RSA 4,405,829 Dec. 14, 1977 Sept. 20, 1983 Sept. 20, 2000 So who's planning on throwing a big party on Sept. 6th? Will Jim Bizos be celebrating? :-) andrew From markm at voicenet.com Mon Jan 20 13:36:06 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:36:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Monitoring the monitors In-Reply-To: <199701201611.IAA12370@toad.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Ross Wright wrote: > On or About 19 Jan 97 at 17:37, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Somebody correct me if I'm wrong. We already get the censored stuff > > on the alleged-to-be "unedited" list, so by looking at the censored > > list only, we can do the subtraction more reliably than Sandfort. > > > > Just the censored list is needed, not the cut-out stuff, as far as I > > know. > > I disagree. Or I don't quite understand what you are saying. I > want to see the moderated list and I want to see what was removed. You can see what was removed by comparing the unedited and moderated lists. Allow a certain lagtime (24 hours, perhaps) for moderated messages to arrive and run a diff on the two folders. This will give you the rejected material. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMuPmMizIPc7jvyFpAQGQqwf/f8TGLE4RC0n7Xr2Ut35MtqE4B5pwDbpp tcGAjKAprzTRA/H5TIUTbV2/ZYvP60kFx/ZFoKvDNqaYb9lyU+XrYRCBAPyaxGND 19ZMHJ6qsqOjCxHHj2wP04Dpvv8BQ1rASibImYwAG4YFA65NRqeNdtjGNCKPWZtm bmMC03aUl/1dhhU1uSMw+Ps9okmW7tfBuuXW6q7tchNQ3kH8blYbZr1eyWSAHH+J uCdc4oV5eVgfvlKLLt0iU6DNoJUFitYtCRcFsIHH64B4VijFLigw0bUH0z1DOqsW n7Mlp3IUaVcHnOuyKLg362455n7UygVPmAIpFewlI5mX7/6VaNgjCg== =GAUL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 13:41:16 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:41:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970120132632.006e91cc@192.100.81.126> At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: > Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 20 13:42:18 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:42:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: I beg you, PLEASE prove that 0.123456789101112131415 is IRRATIONAL Message-ID: <199701202142.NAA19097@toad.com> At 04:38 PM 1/19/97 -0600, snow wrote: > x=0; > x1=0; > x++; > x--; > > Would give you all int's, the only problem you have is granularity. Nice, but you have a typo, the result would be the same as x is both incremented and decremented before it can be output. I am assumming that the second block of code has it right. > x=0.00000000001; > y=0.00000000001; > x1=x; > x=x+y; > x1=x1-y; Also, I am assumming that the increment, decrement portion of the code should be in a loop. Otherwise this will result in exactly one value for x, and one for x1. The output of the first block is x=1, x1=0. The output of the second block is x=0.00000000002, y=0.00000000001, x1=0.00000000000. Also, the code does have other errors that don't "ring any bells" as they allow the mind to figure out what your intent is. Not unlike the many complaints in "The Far Side" where everyone complains that it is the female mosquito that bites people while ignoring that no mosquito has ever willingly walked into an appropiately scaled house wearing a hat. From frantz at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 13:42:20 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:42:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) Message-ID: <199701202142.NAA19098@toad.com> At 3:41 PM -0800 1/16/97, Adam Back wrote: >Bill Frantz writes: >> At 4:39 AM -0800 1/16/97, Adam Back wrote: >> >- PIN for phone's RSA signature keys >> >> It is not clear you need signatures in the secure phone case. Eric >> Blossom's 3DES uses straight DH for key exchange with verbal verification >> that both ends are using the same key. > >How does Eric's box display the negotiated key to the user? (I don't >recall the pair I saw having displays). I have not seen the production box, I am going from my memory of Eric's preproduction description at a meeting last spring. I hope someone who knows what they are talking about will butt in here if I am wrong. The box has a 3 or 4 digit display which displays "something" about the 3DES key, where "something" is some of the bits, or a hash, or ... With 3 decimal digits, a MIM attacker has a 999 out of 1000 chance of getting caught. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From frantz at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 13:42:52 1997 From: frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:42:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc Message-ID: <199701202142.NAA19130@toad.com> At 9:19 PM -0800 1/19/97, WinSock Remailer wrote: >Bill Frantz writes: > >> I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that >> email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to >> toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small >> fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost. > >Failing something catastrophic like a disk failure or a host down for >more than a week, this should not be the case. Almost every site >running sendmail has the Os ("SuperSafe") option set. That means >sendmail will not respond to a "." at the end of a DATA command with >SMTP code 250 until it has written the incoming message (and queue >info) to disk and called fsync. Thus, you may get 2 copies of a >message, but mail messages should not just disappear regularly at all, >even if the network goes down or a machine crashes. > >Non-sendmail MTA's tend to be even more strict about this, not even >allowing this behavior to be disabled. About 9 months ago, I lost somewhere between 50 and 100 email messages because they were written to a disk with a corrupted file system. Now failures of this kind may be in the category of "catastrophic disk failure", but in my unfortunate experience, they are not all that uncommon. Note that since I lost multiple messages due to one failure, tests of the form, "Once is happenstance, twice coincidence, three or more is conspiracy" might say, "conspiracy" even for just one failure. The chances of this test criteria error increase for frequent posters. At 4:02 AM -0800 1/20/97, Toto asked: > Are there any critereon established, yet, as to what type of content >will be necessary for a letter to get 'lost'? See the above discussion of disk failure. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Client in California, POP3 | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | in Pittsburgh, Packets in | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz at netcom.com | Pakistan. - me | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA From vznuri at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 13:42:54 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:42:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft Message-ID: <199701202142.NAA19139@toad.com> [microcurrency] >It will also not catch on until there are better standards involving >microcurrency transactions amongst the vendors. It would also help if >there was a single interface (or "helper app") for whatever vendor you >decided to go with. as I see it, I think there are a few key standards that need to be devised: 1. an html tag that indicates how much a link costs, probably in the type syntax 2. modification of http to support a payment mechanism, by sending a token. 3. browser "piggy bank". there are other standards, such as how a person might get cash into their piggy bank etc., but most would be related to the above items. notice that we don't really need a good interoperable standard to begin with. often Netscape and MS invent tags that are not interoperable between them, and later standardization arrives at a consensus / convergence. as I see it, I think the browser manufacturers should just pick their favorite digital cash scheme (cybercash, digicash, whatever) that is easiest to implement, and do so, with the intention of integrating other schemes at a later date. >Currently every vendor of payment schemes has made it proprietary in some >way. (At least the ones I have seen.) This means that if the user visits >three different web pages, each using a payment scheme from a different >vendor, that user has to be signed up with all of those vendors. (Or at >least have their helper apps.) hence, a good opportunity for the browser manufacturer to remove all these additional complications and make it point-and-click simple. I agree, this is not going to be a total nonbrainer. but better the browser manufacturer do it for their software, allowing everyone who uses it to benefit, than every single cash user in cyberspace trying to replicate the same difficult series of steps to get their cash going. >I will not even go into the hastles of trying to set it up from the server >side. (The last payment scheme I installed (cybercash) was not very well >documented. The documentation on the web site contradicted the software >with the tar file. (And both were wrong at some point.)) Until these >payment schemes are easier to deal with for the web page provider, they >will not catch on. (There will also need to be more support for Internet >service providers with multiple vendors all on different payment schemes.) > >Until there is a single standard hammered out, micropayments will still be >few and far between. generally, that's what I'm calling for, some ad hoc standards being put into place immediately by the browser manufacturers, in the same way new tags are always being invented. standardization generally results *after* an initial, minimally constrained innovation phase, imho. From vznuri at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 13:43:08 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:43:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft Message-ID: <199701202143.NAA19163@toad.com> >> notice how much crypto really caught on when Netscape >> incorporated it, and how this action alone did more for >> the proliferation of crypto in cyberspace, almost, than >> all prior efforts combined. I think that microcurrency >> will be unleashed in a very similar way. > >I assume you are referring to secure web connections via SSL in talking >about crypto. In that case there was a very strong pent up demand for >the service. Customers were afraid to send credit card numbers and >other personal information across the web. Sellers were pressuring the >net server companies to do something to quell these concerns so on-line >selling could succeed. Netscape did it, and in the grand tradition of >the net, implementation beat design and SSL defeated SHTTP. neither has "beat" the other at this point. but this does show something I have always believed: companies should just invent ad-hoc, quick-and-dirty standards if full standards are not immediately available. it makes no sense to me to delay the introduction of some new feature because there isn't industry standardization. the case is often that the initial ad-hoc standards will tend to converge into a better standard down the road. I don't see standards as "forever". standards should be viewed as stepping stones to better standards. hence I think netscape and/or MS should invent a "plug and play" (i.e. trivial to use) micropayment standard immediately, regardless of what industry standardization does not or will exist. it wouldn't be pretty at first but standardization to better interfaces could ensue later. the main thing is to get it on the table, and get people using it, to create the demand. services are rarely developed unless there is a demand. hence I suggest that a *rudimentary* form of the service be first devised and implemented asap to increase demand for one with much more finesse. In its early >versions SSL had a lot of problems but it was a good enough solution for >what it needed to be. exactly. >The question is whether there is similar market demand for pay per view >web pages. don't think this is a valid question. the whole point of microcurrency is just decreasing the cost until people hit the page and don't care about the cost. hence I think there is a guaranteed market, because with microcurrency you can always shave off your price to virtually infinitesmal values (say pennies a hit) that will guarantee you will have at least some audience. Do web service operators think they can offer value added >services which will motivate customers to click through the for-pay link? I'm imagining just putting a teeny little transaction charge on top of every single hit that now exists. if it is small enough, consumers won't care very much. >There is also the issue of sellers learning to use the various payment >systems which are out there. Here again if Netscape and Microsoft would >just pick one then everyone could standardize on it, which would >increase acceptance a great deal. well, pick one payment scheme and then competing companies could adopt the same standard (but offer competing systems and features) >Ecash as it is implemented now has the problem that the customer has to >open a special bank account. What you need is a payment system where >you can use your existing VISA card and withdraw cash against it into >your electronic wallet. This is pretty close to the FV model but their >payment system is somewhat clumsy. exactly. someone who reengineered the whole thing from top to bottom and made it absolutely trivial to use-- I suspect the future of the browser wars will belong to the company that does this. again, I note it might be doable in a plug in, but as I said, I think browser manufacturers are eventually going to put it into their own code because of its sheer importance. From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Mon Jan 20 13:43:12 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:43:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quantum computers/Java of a different sort Message-ID: <199701202143.NAA19177@toad.com> For all you quantum computer fans, see http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/html/970117c.htm -- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ --------------32AF54C4607C Content-Type: MESSAGE/RFC822 Content-ID: Return-Path: Received: from tivoli.com by kenya.tivoli.com (8.8.4/jfy) id MAA02404; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:50:23 -0600 (CST) Received: from corp.tivoli.com (corp.tivoli.com [146.84.1.6]) by tivoli.com (8.8.0/8.8.0-with-local-mods-ESMTP) with ESMTP id MAA08806; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:50:23 -0600 (CST) Received: from tivoli.com (tivoli.tivoli.com [146.84.1.5]) by corp.tivoli.com (8.6.10/8.6.13) with ESMTP id MAA10846; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:49:18 -0600 Received: from notes-brahms2.tivoli.com (brahms2.tivoli.com [146.84.3.4]) by tivoli.com (8.8.0/8.8.0-with-local-mods-ESMTP) with SMTP id MAA08787; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:50:15 -0600 (CST) Received: by notes-brahms2.tivoli.com(Lotus SMTP MTA v1.05 (274.9 11-27-1996)) id 86256425.00673DAD ; Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:47:39 -0500 From: jchou at tivoli.com X-Lotus-FromDomain: TIVOLI SYSTEMS To: java at tivoli.com Message-ID: <86256425.00673B22.00 at notes-brahms2.tivoli.com> Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 12:49:39 -0500 Subject: ScienceNOW www.sciencenow.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII jchou at tivoli.com 01/20/97 12:49 PM An advance in Java computing... http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/html/970117c.htm ScienceNOW www.sciencenow.org
Knight-Ridder
ScienceBase Hewlett-Packard Chemical
Analysis

Home News Tips Archives Masthead Feedback Science Online

Previous Story Next Story

Science
Online

Science's Next
Wave

ScienceNOW logo

Friday, 17 January 1997, 7:00 p.m.

Quantum Computer in a Cup of Joe?

Researchers have come up with a way to turn coffee and other mundane liquids into primitive quantum computers. The findings, reported in today's Science and in an upcoming issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, suggest a new approach toward conquering the Mount Everest of computing: a quantum computer that in a few seconds could perform calculations that would take billions of years on an ordinary supercomputer.


Illustration
Fresh-brewed. A prototype tabletop NMR quantum computer, showing the circuitry and the radio-frequency coil.

JOSHUA SMITH


The key is nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR), a technique for manipulating and measuring the spins of atomic nuclei that is already a mainstay of medical imaging and chemical analysis. The up-or-down spin of nuclei offers the two-bit logic system that a computer needs. What makes a quantum computer special, however, is quantum parallelism. In the strange world of quantum mechanics, the spin of a nucleus can be in both states, representing both bits, at the same time. That property should permit a quantum computer to perform calculations on incredibly large numbers of bits at once. And Neil Gershenfeld of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Isaac Chuang of the University of California, Santa Barbara, and a second team, Tim Havel and Amr Fahmy of Harvard Medical School and David Cory of MIT, have found that it's easier to achieve this parallelism by using NMR in an ordinary liquid than in the exotic systems researchers have tried so far.

Cory, Fahmy, and Havel have actually built quantum circuits using a standard NMR spectrometer, while Gershenfeld and Chuang are gearing up experiments and hope to demonstrate quantum circuits and maybe even a simple computation by next summer. What can be done now can be done with easily available and affordable equipment--"off-the-shelf coffee cups, off-the -shelf liquids, off-the-shelf magnets, etc.," says MIT computer scientist Seth Lloyd.

"This NMR scheme is pretty slick stuff, but in the long run, they're going to have to find a particularly special molecule or state that allows them to extend it to large numbers," says Chris Monroe of the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

Indeed, the researchers note that fundamental obstacles may prevent the scheme from ever producing a practical computer. But "from the point of view of verifying the basic ideas and doing interesting physics," says Lloyd, a pioneer theorist in quantum computing, "it's fantastic." For more details, Science Online subscribers can link to the News story in today's Science.

© 1997 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science

Previous Story Next Story

Home News Tips Archives Masthead Feedback Science Online
--------------32AF54C4607C-- From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 20 13:44:13 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:44:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: a comment of Vulis's Message-ID: <199701202144.NAA19211@toad.com> Dr Vulis made a comment that there was the threat of persons in favor of the moderator being able to get away with slander while those victims being unable to respond. I assume that the moderator will refrain from such action, but if something were actually cut, I could get it through anyway. At least until majordomo is secured against such intrusion. The list won't be truly secure until no one can request the subscription list. If I felt that I needed to get my message past the moderator, I would just request the complete listing of cypherpunks subscribers, copy that into the Bcc: field of eudora, and forge an address. Now my message would get through, my computer would probably be tied up for an hour or so distributing my statement, but my message would get through. The security necessary to counteract this would be to either make the subscription list unavailable, or delete the actual addresses from the list. For instance Sean Roach would become Sean Roach. Now people could still see who was on the list, but couldn't use it to negate the established distribution system. From frissell at panix.com Mon Jan 20 13:45:06 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:45:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Prayer For Swiss Banks Message-ID: <199701202145.NAA19229@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- This happened a year ago but I couldn't resist posting it in light of the current political attacks on the privacy of Swiss banks. MANILA, Philippines (Feb 24, 1996 9:45 p.m. EST) - Former Philippine first lady Imelda Marcos presided over a bizarre ceremony on Sunday to mark the 10th anniversary of the People's Power revolution that forced her and her corrupt husband into ignominious exile. Marcos -- notorious shopaholic, convicted criminal and now a legally elected member of the Philippine Congress -- asked God to bless Corazon Aquino and other leaders of the 1986 revolt. But she also asked the Almighty to enlighten Swiss bankers holding some of the estimated $5 billion the Marcoses and their cronies are accused of looting from the national economy. "May the Lord enlighten ... the Swiss banks -- that they might uphold justice and preserve the integrity of their own laws and the laws of confidentiality, trust and basic decency between the banks and their clients," she said in a speech. Two Swiss banks holding some $475 million linked to the Marcoses are currently embroiled in a row over what to do with the money. The Philippine government wants it back but a U.S. court has ordered it distributed to victims of human rights abuses during the late Ferdinand Marcos's 20 years in power. ***** DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMuPAIIVO4r4sgSPhAQFhSQQAiLrFwcvR0CxiZDrG1f6RSysX8ypxe2y4 Az2MejxFj4ACZIw9lCN98pxRwM8QwEQnCo+RKpMEchurk1bx0EEK749+kxpccsw2 qi+VW1lhBLV38YyzAm0vRwK1pwsKuW/E0UjMOvfTfQynRljohiLvLxQDMJ4DQLHi qi+R9K2Gpr0= =wmjK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From declan at pathfinder.com Mon Jan 20 13:46:05 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:46:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs Message-ID: <199701202146.NAA19272@toad.com> [Can anyone who knows more than I do answer this? --Declan] --- Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 14:45:44 -0500 (EST) To: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) From: Solveig Bernstein What have the new crypto regs done to the "technical data" and the "public domain" exemptions from ITAR? The problem is this: as I understand it, the Commerce Dept. regs exempt teaching and print presentations generally, but these exemptions do not apply to "encryption software." Does this mean that the exemptions do not apply to *teaching about* encryption software or *publications about* encryption software? Or *only* that the exemptions do not apply to diskette-contained source code or object code. In other words, the new regs might completely decontrol teaching and publication of something like Professor Bernstein's Snuffle. On the other hand, the new regs might, like ITAR, restrict teaching and publication of Snuffle (as well as publication of source code in diskette format). The purpose of the question is to understand whether a First Amendment challenge to the new regs is a First Amendment challenge to a restriction on *teaching, publication, and program distribution* or just a challenge to a restriction on *program distribution.* Solveig Bernstein, Esq. (202) 789-5274 (202) 842-3490 (fax) Assistant Director of Telecommunications & Technology Studies Cato Institute 1000 Mass. Ave. NW Washington, DC 20001 ------------------------- The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ From andrew_loewenstern at il.us.swissbank.com Mon Jan 20 13:56:01 1997 From: andrew_loewenstern at il.us.swissbank.com (Andrew Loewenstern) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:56:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Question on Diffie-Hellman patent Message-ID: <199701202156.NAA19594@toad.com> Tim Dierks writes: > Here's a summary of some relevant crypto patents: > > Name Number Filed Issued Expires > > Diffie-Hellman 4,200,770 Sept. 6, 1977 Apr. 29, 1980 Sept. 6, 1997 > Hellman-Merkle 4,218,582 Oct. 6, 1977 Aug. 19, 1980 Oct. 6, 1997 > RSA 4,405,829 Dec. 14, 1977 Sept. 20, 1983 Sept. 20, 2000 So who's planning on throwing a big party on Sept. 6th? Will Jim Bizos be celebrating? :-) andrew From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 13:56:08 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:56:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701202156.NAA19603@toad.com> At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: > Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From sandfort at crl.com Mon Jan 20 13:56:56 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:56:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Question on Diffie-Hellman patent In-Reply-To: <9701202135.AA00489@ch1d157nwk> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Andrew Loewenstern wrote: > Tim Dierks writes: > > Here's a summary of some relevant crypto patents: > > > > Name Number Filed Issued Expires > > > > Diffie-Hellman 4,200,770 Sept. 6, 1977 Apr. 29, 1980 Sept. 6, 1997 > > Hellman-Merkle 4,218,582 Oct. 6, 1977 Aug. 19, 1980 Oct. 6, 1997 > > RSA 4,405,829 Dec. 14, 1977 Sept. 20, 1983 Sept. 20, 2000 > > So who's planning on throwing a big party on Sept. 6th? Will Jim Bizos be > celebrating? :-) I'll call dibs on that. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jan 20 13:58:50 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 13:58:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Slow Cypherpunk Day In-Reply-To: <199701201704.JAA04094@netcom21.netcom.com> Message-ID: At 12:04 pm -0500 1/20/97, Mike Duvos wrote: >Is cypherpunks-outgoing-ksiuw at toad.com where articles should be sent >to bypass the censors? Only until they figure out to set it to receive mail from Sandy only. (Don't forget to use the "Received" headers to avoid spoofing, Mr. G.) Cheers, Bob ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From sandfort at crl8.crl.com Mon Jan 20 14:25:49 1997 From: sandfort at crl8.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 14:25:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Question on Diffie-Hellman patent Message-ID: <199701202225.OAA20788@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Andrew Loewenstern wrote: > Tim Dierks writes: > > Here's a summary of some relevant crypto patents: > > > > Name Number Filed Issued Expires > > > > Diffie-Hellman 4,200,770 Sept. 6, 1977 Apr. 29, 1980 Sept. 6, 1997 > > Hellman-Merkle 4,218,582 Oct. 6, 1977 Aug. 19, 1980 Oct. 6, 1997 > > RSA 4,405,829 Dec. 14, 1977 Sept. 20, 1983 Sept. 20, 2000 > > So who's planning on throwing a big party on Sept. 6th? Will Jim Bizos be > celebrating? :-) I'll call dibs on that. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 20 14:34:55 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 14:34:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Slow Cypherpunk Day In-Reply-To: <199701201704.JAA04094@netcom21.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199701202231.QAA01840@manifold.algebra.com> Mike Duvos wrote: > > Is cypherpunks-outgoing-ksiuw at toad.com where articles should be sent > to bypass the censors? > > Testing 1 2 3... > > Cocksucker Armenian Mayonaise Gilmore Faggot Crypto > > Testing 1 2 3... > > We now return you to your regular programming... > It appears that they suffer fro the same problem as Prof. Alex Kaplan once suffered from, when he thought that sending a message to inforuss-outgoing was enough to protect himself from forgeries. And mind you, Kaplan was a professor. - Igor. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 14:42:46 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 14:42:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Server Authentication Message-ID: <199701202249.QAA03591@einstein> Forwarded message: Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:26:05 -0800 (PST) > From: Eric Murray > Subject: Re: Server Authentication > > I think that you can get access to the server's certificate. > I know you can from the CGI interface. Unfortunately it's the > raw ASN.1 encoded certificate, so you would have to ASN.1 decode it. > Bleah. > > If the SSL handshake completes, then you can assume that the client > has verified and authenticated the server certificate. The only problem > would be that the authentication might not be up to the plugin's standards- > i.e. a connection to www.foo.com is somehow intercepted by > www.ripoff-plugins.com. The server www.ripoff-plugins.com presents a cert > who's name is www.foo.com. The browser correctly presents a pop-up dialog > noting the discrepancy, and the luser operating the client clicks > on the 'OK' button, allowing the SSL handshake to finish. Oops. Isn't LDAP v3 supposed to answer some of these questions related to server authentication as well anonymity of the users site (if desired)? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From azur at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 14:47:43 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 14:47:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: >Steve Shear writes: >> [very useful explanation of GSM TDMA, and the new HSCSD] > >64 kbit/s tied to ISDN is very nice technology. > >> ENCRYPTED GSM LINKS >> If the GSM phone includes a data port, as some already do, just connect >> your laptop, dial your ISP and 'push' the encrypted traffic over that link >> (e.g., using TCP/IP and PGPfone). > >This would obviously be possible, but to my mind reduces the appeal of >the system. Not every one has a laptop. [snip] Retrofitting the stonger encryption (e.g., IDEA) to some existing GSM phones may be practical (as I've discussed in previous postings), but unless the service providers support the stonger crypto (seems very unlikely at the moment)parties at the other end of the line will need an Eric Blossom-like device or a laptop running PGPfone. I can see no way around this. > >Also, the cell phone tarriffs may be higher if you need higher >bandwidth to get the software only voice codec implementations in >PGPfone to produce equivalent full-duplex voice quality to that >expected from a digital mobile phone. I may be wrong, but the faster laptops are already able to support the GSM codes and rates in PGPfone (or could). However, most of the service providers may only be offering 9.6kb/s GSM data links at this time, and this would surely impact voice quality. If or when 28.8kb/s data is common via GSM voice links via PGPfone should be better than the default GSM coded voice. --Steve PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear (N7ZEZ) | Internet: azur at netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet, electronic currency and wireless development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler From abostick at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 15:17:33 1997 From: abostick at netcom.com (Alan Bostick) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:17:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701200614.WAA01733@toad.com> Message-ID: What started this thread off was Lucky Green's observation of the beerkegs getting through the security checkpoints at the Oakland Airport. Just yesterday I flew from Seattle's Sea-Tac Airport to Oakland, on Southwest Airlines. My partner and I were (we thought) checking in just in time to be in the second boarding group. (Explanation of Southwest's lo-tech allocation of seat choice elided). An unacompanied woman was the next person ahead of us in the line. She presented the gate agent with *four* tickets and *four* IDs. "Where are these other people?" the agent asked. "They're parking the car," said the traveler. The agent gave her all four boarding passes; and my companion and I were bumped to the third boarding group. The woman in front of us was white and middle-class-looking, traveling with what appeared to be her family. One wonders what would have happened were she a swarthy man wearing robes and a burnoose. Or if she were just wearing shabby clothes. -- Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick From kent at songbird.com Mon Jan 20 15:19:36 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:19:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dedikend Cut's and such (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701201626.IAA12828@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701210021.QAA15476@songbird.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > > > Forwarded message: > > > > Did a little research, Dedekind Cut's and such use Integers to define a > > > SPECIFIC Real to a arbitrary BUT FIXED resolution. They do not define the > > > set of Reals. > > > > They do. The set of all numbers representable by a DC is precisely > > the set of reals. > > Then you are saying that using Dedekind Cut's it is possible to define the > ENTIRE set of Reals? I am assuming that entire includes all those Reals > which aren't representable by any algorithm and of which we can't even speak > (even though we are). > > Another pretty nifty trick. Yep. "Define" is not the same as "generate". Algorithms "generate". -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From declan at pathfinder.com Mon Jan 20 15:24:30 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:24:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Slow Cypherpunk Day In-Reply-To: <199701201704.JAA04094@netcom21.netcom.com> Message-ID: Interesting. I predict it won't be long before Sandy starts using Approved: headers... -Declan Robert Hettinga wrote: >At 12:04 pm -0500 1/20/97, Mike Duvos wrote: >>Is cypherpunks-outgoing-ksiuw at toad.com where articles should be sent >>to bypass the censors? > >Only until they figure out to set it to receive mail from Sandy only. >(Don't forget to use the "Received" headers to avoid spoofing, Mr. G.) ------------------------- The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 20 15:26:10 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:26:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Server Authentication Message-ID: <199701202326.PAA23000@toad.com> Forwarded message: Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:26:05 -0800 (PST) > From: Eric Murray > Subject: Re: Server Authentication > > I think that you can get access to the server's certificate. > I know you can from the CGI interface. Unfortunately it's the > raw ASN.1 encoded certificate, so you would have to ASN.1 decode it. > Bleah. > > If the SSL handshake completes, then you can assume that the client > has verified and authenticated the server certificate. The only problem > would be that the authentication might not be up to the plugin's standards- > i.e. a connection to www.foo.com is somehow intercepted by > www.ripoff-plugins.com. The server www.ripoff-plugins.com presents a cert > who's name is www.foo.com. The browser correctly presents a pop-up dialog > noting the discrepancy, and the luser operating the client clicks > on the 'OK' button, allowing the SSL handshake to finish. Oops. Isn't LDAP v3 supposed to answer some of these questions related to server authentication as well anonymity of the users site (if desired)? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From azur at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 15:26:57 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 15:26:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701202326.PAB23017@toad.com> >Steve Shear writes: >> [very useful explanation of GSM TDMA, and the new HSCSD] > >64 kbit/s tied to ISDN is very nice technology. > >> ENCRYPTED GSM LINKS >> If the GSM phone includes a data port, as some already do, just connect >> your laptop, dial your ISP and 'push' the encrypted traffic over that link >> (e.g., using TCP/IP and PGPfone). > >This would obviously be possible, but to my mind reduces the appeal of >the system. Not every one has a laptop. [snip] Retrofitting the stonger encryption (e.g., IDEA) to some existing GSM phones may be practical (as I've discussed in previous postings), but unless the service providers support the stonger crypto (seems very unlikely at the moment)parties at the other end of the line will need an Eric Blossom-like device or a laptop running PGPfone. I can see no way around this. > >Also, the cell phone tarriffs may be higher if you need higher >bandwidth to get the software only voice codec implementations in >PGPfone to produce equivalent full-duplex voice quality to that >expected from a digital mobile phone. I may be wrong, but the faster laptops are already able to support the GSM codes and rates in PGPfone (or could). However, most of the service providers may only be offering 9.6kb/s GSM data links at this time, and this would surely impact voice quality. If or when 28.8kb/s data is common via GSM voice links via PGPfone should be better than the default GSM coded voice. --Steve PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear (N7ZEZ) | Internet: azur at netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet, electronic currency and wireless development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler From asgaard at cor.sos.sll.se Mon Jan 20 16:06:49 1997 From: asgaard at cor.sos.sll.se (Asgaard) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:06:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology In-Reply-To: <199701201613.IAA12460@toad.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Adam Back wrote: > into the data port. You can't fit the laptop and GSM phone > combination into your shirt pocket. What are you going to use for a With a reasonably sized shirt pocket you can fit a Nokia 9000 Communicator into it: a combination of GSM phone and 386 computer, with 6 MB storage (OS and default applications use 4 of those) and 2 MB RAM. It runs fax, SMS (Short Messages Services), a Terminal, SMTP, IMAP4, MIME1, WWW and telnet. The operative system is GEOS (tm) 3.0. I guess it's not very programmable though (and there is no PGPhone implementation for GEOS) and data speed is only 9600 bps. And there is probably no connection between the mic/speaker and the computer. But it's only 173 x 64 x 38 mm, and perhaps the next generation of such devices might be interesting for reengineering into secure end-to-end crypto phenes? Asgaard From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 16:09:46 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:09:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc In-Reply-To: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net> Message-ID: <32E41C4C.7CDE@sk.sympatico.ca> Bill Frantz wrote: > Note that since I lost multiple messages due to one failure, tests of the > form, "Once is happenstance, twice coincidence, three or more is > conspiracy" might say, "conspiracy" even for just one failure. The chances > of this test criteria error increase for frequent posters. It sounds like you're laying the groundwork for debunking CypherPunk conspiracy myths before they even appear. Not that I'm the paranoid type (but I 'would' be interested in knowing exacly where you 'claim' you were when J.F.K. was shot). Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 16:09:59 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:09:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970120132632.006e91cc@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <32E41718.72A4@sk.sympatico.ca> Lucky Green wrote: > > At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? > > I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. SaskTel also offers this type of access, at around the same price. As long as they had a monopoly on the citizens of the province, they gouged people in the boondocks $ 6.00/hr for basic access to the InterNet. Now that they have competition, and need to have competitive rates to stay in business, they are acting like they are the consumer's best friend, instead of rip-off shitheads. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 16:10:08 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:10:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNS_top In-Reply-To: <1.5.4.32.19970120152824.0068df5c@pop.pipeline.com> Message-ID: <32E41F0C.342C@sk.sympatico.ca> John Young wrote: > Governments in China, Burma and > Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with > minimal success. Do you have any pointers to information in regard to this, or are you just being a goddamn tease? Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 16:11:41 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:11:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E41D5E.4C62@sk.sympatico.ca> Blanc Weber wrote: > And as everyone on this list acutely knows, neither math, science, nor > politics has anything to do with crypto. I agree. Let's stick to discussions of crack-crypto Ebonics, and child-crypto PigLatin. Toto From blake at bcdev.com Mon Jan 20 16:22:38 1997 From: blake at bcdev.com (Blake Coverett) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:22:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <01BC0707.3ED5B650@bcdev.com> Lucky wrote: > I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and > is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. NorTel isn't exactly Canada's phone company. NorTel manufactures telecom equipment. It is however 51% owned by BCE, which owns or has controlling interest in Bell Canada and several of the regional carriers as well a huge mess of other telco stuff. ISDN is available fairly widely in my area of the country, but I'm not aware of an commercially available ADSL UUNET Canada has been conducting ADSL trials in a couple of cities, but that's all I've heard of thus far. regards, -Blake (who would love to be proved wrong as the price sounds great) From abostick at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 16:40:35 1997 From: abostick at netcom.com (Alan Bostick) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:40:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701210040.QAA24710@toad.com> What started this thread off was Lucky Green's observation of the beerkegs getting through the security checkpoints at the Oakland Airport. Just yesterday I flew from Seattle's Sea-Tac Airport to Oakland, on Southwest Airlines. My partner and I were (we thought) checking in just in time to be in the second boarding group. (Explanation of Southwest's lo-tech allocation of seat choice elided). An unacompanied woman was the next person ahead of us in the line. She presented the gate agent with *four* tickets and *four* IDs. "Where are these other people?" the agent asked. "They're parking the car," said the traveler. The agent gave her all four boarding passes; and my companion and I were bumped to the third boarding group. The woman in front of us was white and middle-class-looking, traveling with what appeared to be her family. One wonders what would have happened were she a swarthy man wearing robes and a burnoose. Or if she were just wearing shabby clothes. -- Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick From kent at songbird.com Mon Jan 20 16:40:39 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:40:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dedikend Cut's and such (fwd) Message-ID: <199701210040.QAA24718@toad.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > > > Forwarded message: > > > > Did a little research, Dedekind Cut's and such use Integers to define a > > > SPECIFIC Real to a arbitrary BUT FIXED resolution. They do not define the > > > set of Reals. > > > > They do. The set of all numbers representable by a DC is precisely > > the set of reals. > > Then you are saying that using Dedekind Cut's it is possible to define the > ENTIRE set of Reals? I am assuming that entire includes all those Reals > which aren't representable by any algorithm and of which we can't even speak > (even though we are). > > Another pretty nifty trick. Yep. "Define" is not the same as "generate". Algorithms "generate". -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 16:55:35 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:55:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math Message-ID: <199701210055.QAA24887@toad.com> Blanc Weber wrote: > And as everyone on this list acutely knows, neither math, science, nor > politics has anything to do with crypto. I agree. Let's stick to discussions of crack-crypto Ebonics, and child-crypto PigLatin. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 16:55:48 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:55:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy and the Doc Message-ID: <199701210055.QAA24904@toad.com> Bill Frantz wrote: > Note that since I lost multiple messages due to one failure, tests of the > form, "Once is happenstance, twice coincidence, three or more is > conspiracy" might say, "conspiracy" even for just one failure. The chances > of this test criteria error increase for frequent posters. It sounds like you're laying the groundwork for debunking CypherPunk conspiracy myths before they even appear. Not that I'm the paranoid type (but I 'would' be interested in knowing exacly where you 'claim' you were when J.F.K. was shot). Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 16:56:00 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:56:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701210056.QAA24923@toad.com> Lucky Green wrote: > > At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? > > I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. SaskTel also offers this type of access, at around the same price. As long as they had a monopoly on the citizens of the province, they gouged people in the boondocks $ 6.00/hr for basic access to the InterNet. Now that they have competition, and need to have competitive rates to stay in business, they are acting like they are the consumer's best friend, instead of rip-off shitheads. Toto From blake at bcdev.com Mon Jan 20 16:56:02 1997 From: blake at bcdev.com (Blake Coverett) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:56:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701210056.QAA24924@toad.com> Lucky wrote: > I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and > is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. NorTel isn't exactly Canada's phone company. NorTel manufactures telecom equipment. It is however 51% owned by BCE, which owns or has controlling interest in Bell Canada and several of the regional carriers as well a huge mess of other telco stuff. ISDN is available fairly widely in my area of the country, but I'm not aware of an commercially available ADSL UUNET Canada has been conducting ADSL trials in a couple of cities, but that's all I've heard of thus far. regards, -Blake (who would love to be proved wrong as the price sounds great) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 16:57:24 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:57:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNS_top Message-ID: <199701210057.QAA24931@toad.com> John Young wrote: > Governments in China, Burma and > Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with > minimal success. Do you have any pointers to information in regard to this, or are you just being a goddamn tease? Toto From asgaard at Cor.sos.sll.se Mon Jan 20 16:57:51 1997 From: asgaard at Cor.sos.sll.se (Asgaard) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 16:57:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701210057.QAA24939@toad.com> On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Adam Back wrote: > into the data port. You can't fit the laptop and GSM phone > combination into your shirt pocket. What are you going to use for a With a reasonably sized shirt pocket you can fit a Nokia 9000 Communicator into it: a combination of GSM phone and 386 computer, with 6 MB storage (OS and default applications use 4 of those) and 2 MB RAM. It runs fax, SMS (Short Messages Services), a Terminal, SMTP, IMAP4, MIME1, WWW and telnet. The operative system is GEOS (tm) 3.0. I guess it's not very programmable though (and there is no PGPhone implementation for GEOS) and data speed is only 9600 bps. And there is probably no connection between the mic/speaker and the computer. But it's only 173 x 64 x 38 mm, and perhaps the next generation of such devices might be interesting for reengineering into secure end-to-end crypto phenes? Asgaard From gotagun at liii.com Mon Jan 20 17:18:30 1997 From: gotagun at liii.com (Jane Jefferson) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 17:18:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701210118.UAA28283@rowan.liii.com> Also Sprach Adam Back: > > It is my belief > that his posts can only be understood in a "meta" sense -- he is > engaged in a highly complex cryptographic experiment. People who read > and respond to his individual posts are the unwitting subjects in his > experiments. His posts and the responses to them are actually the > data-set for a thorough cryptanalysis of mailing list threats. His > current topic under investigation is Denial of Service (DoS) attacks > on mailing lists. I agree that this is what is being done, but the experiment dorsn't have as much to do with cryptanalysis as much as it has to do with sociology. The limits here are not mathematical and static, they are social and based on the limits of tolerance of both the group and the individual. > I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when > the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. That appears to be the main brunt of his efforts, to "push the envelope" of free speech in order to force it's definition. Perhaps to exhibit the necessity for a controlling authority, and thus justify the existence of the various agencies which are trying to control the flow of information in this country and elsewhere. > I hope Dimitri's selfless efforts in furthering understanding of DoS > attacks on mailing lists is properly acknowledged when he publishes > his findings on completion of his experiments. I also hope that > Dimitri will document his recommendations for mailing list > configuration and management in light of his experiments. I would not say that what he is doing is a bit selfless, the Clipper Chip crowd are probably lining his pockets in a big way. That's acknowledgement enough for me. :-/ "In peacetime, a warlike man sets upon himself." -- Nietzsche -- Marcus: "They'll try to kill you." | Xena: "Oh, I still have a few tricks | "Here we GO!!!" left up my sleeve...I don't | -- Jane's Addiction have any sleeves!" -- Xena bloopers | From gotagun at liii.com Mon Jan 20 17:40:37 1997 From: gotagun at liii.com (Jane Jefferson) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 17:40:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701210140.RAA25601@toad.com> Also Sprach Adam Back: > > It is my belief > that his posts can only be understood in a "meta" sense -- he is > engaged in a highly complex cryptographic experiment. People who read > and respond to his individual posts are the unwitting subjects in his > experiments. His posts and the responses to them are actually the > data-set for a thorough cryptanalysis of mailing list threats. His > current topic under investigation is Denial of Service (DoS) attacks > on mailing lists. I agree that this is what is being done, but the experiment dorsn't have as much to do with cryptanalysis as much as it has to do with sociology. The limits here are not mathematical and static, they are social and based on the limits of tolerance of both the group and the individual. > I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when > the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. That appears to be the main brunt of his efforts, to "push the envelope" of free speech in order to force it's definition. Perhaps to exhibit the necessity for a controlling authority, and thus justify the existence of the various agencies which are trying to control the flow of information in this country and elsewhere. > I hope Dimitri's selfless efforts in furthering understanding of DoS > attacks on mailing lists is properly acknowledged when he publishes > his findings on completion of his experiments. I also hope that > Dimitri will document his recommendations for mailing list > configuration and management in light of his experiments. I would not say that what he is doing is a bit selfless, the Clipper Chip crowd are probably lining his pockets in a big way. That's acknowledgement enough for me. :-/ "In peacetime, a warlike man sets upon himself." -- Nietzsche -- Marcus: "They'll try to kill you." | Xena: "Oh, I still have a few tricks | "Here we GO!!!" left up my sleeve...I don't | -- Jane's Addiction have any sleeves!" -- Xena bloopers | From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 20 17:52:39 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 17:52:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) Message-ID: <199701210152.RAA25759@toad.com> At 11:41 PM 1/16/97 GMT, Adam Back wrote: > >Bill Frantz writes: >> As long as the man in the middle can't imitate a familiar voice, >> this procedure is reasonably secure. > >This is the approach taken by PGPfone also. If the value of the >conversations was high (>$100,000?) passable voice imitation wouldn't >be that hard I suspect. I have long considered how easy it would be to use a sound card to modify the human voice to match within certain tolerances the voice of another. There are currently on the market, phones specifically designed to modify the voice of the user so that kids can answer as adults, women can answer as thier own protective boyfriends, bosses can answer anonymous calls as the secretary, etc... There are currently on the market keyboards that allow you to sample some real world sound and use it as a voice in your music, (the model I saw, a toy produced by Radio Shack, simply sped up or slowed down the sound to achieve this.) I have thought, if a machine were to take the incoming voice, analize (apologies for spelling) it to get a spectrum signature, a pattern that can be added or subtracted from another, and could then add the difference between that and the victims signature to the users voice, then real-time, on-the-fly con jobs would be easy. The only thing that the user would be responsible for would be the accent, and the day-to-day vocabulary of the victim. I told a friend about this and he confirmed that such was available if you knew where to look. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 20 18:10:21 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:10:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701210210.SAA26157@toad.com> At 12:07 PM 1/20/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: >Depending on the country and bank you can probably perform almost >any transfer you like by fax. I moved my pension from one bank >to another simply by sending a fax. I have done similar transactions >with Swiss, German and UK banks. > >For some reason the fax is considered to be a practically >infallible authentication device. Quite why is beyond me since >it should be obvious to anyone that all one needs to fake a >fax is a photocopier, document signed by account holder, paste >and scissors. You get everything needed on a signed cheque. > A check is no good, most checks are now printed on paper with special lines that are supposed to become obvious after copying. A signed letter or even a mailing envelope would probably be better. Also, scotch tape makes those pexky shadows disapear like magic. My dad uses it to make multiple versions of make-up math tests that trivially look like the origional in order to goad persons who were sick on test day so that they could get the answers from someone else into printing down those answers and getting less than random probability. (multiple choice) From adam at homeport.org Mon Jan 20 18:27:26 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:27:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701210040.QAA24710@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701210223.VAA20804@homeport.org> Recall that all security is economics. The airlines want the appearance of security without having to pay for it. The '3 questions' ("Pack your luggage? let it out of your sight? Taking any gifts?") originated with El Al, where they are the introduction to a very expensive (and privacy invading) set of screening questions. The El Al people are trained to watch you as they ask the questions, and respond to signs of lying or rehersal. The Americans read the questions off the screen, and pay no attention to your answers. The market, however, is irrational*, and airlines prefer to have government imposed regulations over having to actually figure out what works, and do it. *The market is irrational because statistics on what airlines are safer than others is closely held knowledge of the FAA. Adam Alan Bostick wrote: | She presented the gate agent with *four* tickets and *four* IDs. "Where | are these other people?" the agent asked. "They're parking the car," | said the traveler. The agent gave her all four boarding passes; and my | companion and I were bumped to the third boarding group. | | The woman in front of us was white and middle-class-looking, traveling | with what appeared to be her family. One wonders what would have | happened were she a swarthy man wearing robes and a burnoose. Or if she | were just wearing shabby clothes. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 18:33:01 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:33:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701210118.UAA28283@rowan.liii.com> Message-ID: <32E4477E.3F8B@sk.sympatico.ca> Jane Jefferson wrote: > Also Sprach Adam Back: > > I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when > > the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. > > That appears to be the main brunt of his efforts, to "push the envelope" > of free speech in order to force it's definition. Perhaps to exhibit > the necessity for a controlling authority, and thus justify the existence > of the various agencies which are trying to control the flow of > information in this country and elsewhere. If what you say is true, then Dr. DV K's efforts are quite possibly the most important issue being addressed in this conference, because behind free speech, lies the most important issue of all--when does it start, and when does it stop. Cryptography, above all, enables the ability of a group or an individual to keep their communications secret, safe from prying eyes. The military-industrial complex proclaims this necessary for the purposes of state-security, and denies that it is used in order to keep their 'sins' from being exposed. (If you believe this, then please contact me by private email regarding an ocean-front property I have available in Tucson, AZ. If you act quickly, I will throw in a set of the Amazing Ginzu Knives as an added bonus.) The crypto-cognizant citizen proclaims cryptographical ability as a means of empowering their rights of free speech. The more intelligent of them recognize as misinformation the government's feeble claims that they cannot successfully investigate someone moving tons of illegal drugs into the country unless they have the capacity to eavesdrop on the private correspondences of 'all' of their citizens. (Which is the equivalent, in my mind, of claiming that AIDS cannot be held in check without knowing the details of all of the citizens sex-lives.) In short, I believe that if the issue of free speech is not one of the central issues on the CypherPunks list, then the list is merely one more heartless, unfeeling extension of the Great Machine which is grinding inexorably forward toward the day when we will all have its numbers tattoo'd on our forearms. As far as I am concerned, any CypherPunk who believes that the socio/politico issues surrounding cryptography are not important enough to be an integral part of this list is falling into the same type of trap as those who think that they can become good cryptographers without becoming good cryptanalysts. Those who seek to become merely cryptographers seem to think that 'numbers rule'--those who seek to be able to analyze the end-result of those 'numbers' realize that the minds, hearts and souls 'behind' those numbers tell the story of how people think and feel, and the motivations behind their cryptographical intent. (And also reveals where their vulnerabilities lie.) Thinking that cryptography is about 'numbers' is akin to thinking that equality is about 'skin-color'. > "In peacetime, a warlike man sets upon himself." -- Nietzsche "In times of war, a peacelike man sets upon others." Bubba Rom Dos Toto From drose at azstarnet.com Mon Jan 20 18:57:25 1997 From: drose at azstarnet.com (drose at azstarnet.com) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:57:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701210257.TAA17513@web.azstarnet.com> Alan Bostick wrote: [...] >She presented the gate agent with *four* tickets and *four* IDs. "Where >are these other people?" the agent asked. "They're parking the car," >said the traveler. The agent gave her all four boarding passes; and my >companion and I were bumped to the third boarding group. > >The woman in front of us was white and middle-class-looking, traveling >with what appeared to be her family. One wonders what would have >happened were she a swarthy man wearing robes and a burnoose. Or if she >were just wearing shabby clothes. My guess is that you and your companion would have been further discommoded, with the possible concomitant saving of your lives. From jimbell at pacifier.com Mon Jan 20 18:57:42 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:57:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Interesting item from Nwlibertarians@teleport.com Message-ID: <199701210257.SAA08626@mail.pacifier.com> >Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 17:44:32 -0800 (PST) >From: James Ogle >Subject: NWLibs> LP: Browne's Vote Annulled, Chudov Still PM >To: Jack Dean >cc: usa-par at netcom.com, ichudov at algebra.com, rjschundler at aol.com, > nwlibertarians at teleport.com, brockman at netcom.com >Sender: owner-nwlibertarians at teleport.com >Reply-To: nwlibertarians at teleport.com > > >To: Jack Dean >Cc: Usa-par at netcom.com Listserver Members and Other Libertarians > >It turns out that according to Jack Dean, a campaign worker with the Harry >Browne in '96 campaign, the eballot vote for Igor Chudov (Libertarian - >OK) cast from HarryBrowne at HarryBrowne'96.com address, which was forwarded >to Mr. Jack Dean by me, was a fake - so the two votes are shaved off the >Chudov total. Can anyone speak with better authority on Browne then >Mr. Jack Dean, and say the Browne did cast the vote? On a positive >note however, Tim Ladd (Pot - CA) has agreed to list Mr. Chudov as his >first choice, so Mr. Chudov stays as PM for the time being with five votes. > >The new vote totals are shown below. > >BTW, a special welcome to the usa-par at netcom.com list to Evan Colletti >(Pot - NV), who joins the list from Reno NV, as a founder of the NV-PAR >and the Nevada Pot Party. > > --James Ogle > >On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Jack Dean wrote: > >> >> You wrote: >> >> >Jack, i just received this email from Mr. Harry Browne. Will you >> >please confirm with him that he did indeed cast the vote? >> >> No, he didn't. It appears to be a faked e-mail message. I'll be >> investigating how it was done. >> >> Sorry. >> >> Jack >> >> >> ************************************************************************** >> J. Harris Dean | voice & fax> 714/870-5585 >> 2217 Vista del Sol | pager with voice mail> 714/935-3638 >> Fullerton, CA 92831 | e-mail> JackDean at webworldinc.com >> ************************************************************************** >> "LIBERTY is something you cannot have, unless you are >> willing to give it to others." - William Allen White > >---------------------------------------------------Votes for PM of USA PAR > > > ====**** ************************** ****==== > ====*** * THE 3RD USA PARLIAMENT * ***==== > ====== ************************** ====== > > Igor Chudov Taoiseach > >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >For Immediate Release January 20, 1997 > > RESULTS OF VOTING FOR TAOISEACH > > Vote For # Of Vote For >MP Vote For PM Secretary Seats Rules >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Monty Truitt 1 Monty Truitt 1 James Ogle > 2 James Ogle 2 Monty Truitt > 3 Donald Duck 3 Micky Mouse 1 no >Daniel Brockman 1 Valerie Madriaga 1 James Ogle > 2 Igor Chudov > 3 Mike Bogatirev > 4 Zachary Quest 2 yes >Mike Robinson 1 Daniel Brockman 1 James Ogle > 2 Steve Michael 2 Mike Robinson > 3 Mike Robinson 1 yes >Nathan Brown 1 John Mayer 1 James Ogle > 2 Michael Banon 1 yes >Patrick Seats 1 Patrick Seats 1 James Ogle > 2 Daniel Brockman 2 Gary Swing 1 yes >Kerby Hensley 1 Locke Heemstra 1 James Ogle 1 >Jack Clayton 1 Steve Michael 1 James Ogle > 2 Jack Clayton 1 yes >Igor Chudov 1 Daniel Brockman 1 James Ogle > 2 Igor Chudov 1 yes* >James Ogle 1 Daniel Brockman 1 James Ogle > 2 Igor Chudov > 3 Nathan Brown > 4 Zachary Quest 2 yes >Bruce Daniels 1 Daniel Brockman 1 Gary Swing 8 yes >Gorden Hartman 1 Daniel Brockman 2 James Ogle 3 yes >John Mayer 1 Steve Michael 1 James Ogle 1 yes >Mike Bogatirev 1 Daniel Brockman 1 James Ogle 2 abstain >Gene Marsee' 1 Valerie Madriaga 1 James Ogle 1 abstain >Locke Heemstra 1 Lock Heemstra 1 James Ogle > 2 Daniel Brockman 1 yes >Shirley Bradshaw 1 Bruce Daniels 1 James Ogle > 2 Valerie Madriaga 1 >Lloyd Llewellyn 1 Igor Chudov 1 >Eli Rozicki 1 Nathon Brown 1 >Laura Booth 1 Nathan Brown 1 James Ogle 1 yes >Ann Atkerson 1 Newt Gingrich 1 James Ogle 1 >Steve Duby 1 Steve Duby 1 James Ogle > 2 Nathan Brown > 3 John Mayer > 4 Laura Booth 1 >Greg Farley 1 Nathan Brown 1 James Ogle 1 >Tim Ladd 1 Igor Chudov 1 James Ogle > 2 Nathan Brown >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Total 35 > > >*Voted yes on rules and other rules, and wrote in "Create USA PAR Web Page". > >Results As Of 1/20/97 > >Daniel Brockman (17 votes) Declines To Stand >Igor Chudov Elected Prime Minister - 5 votes >James Ogle Elected Secretary - 25 votes >Rules Approved - 23 votes > >--James Ogle, secretary > USA Parliament > > > Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Mon Jan 20 18:58:15 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 18:58:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970120132632.006e91cc@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Lucky Green wrote: > At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? > > I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. > > > > -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred > Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of > your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. > http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm > From kent at songbird.com Mon Jan 20 19:13:07 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:13:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701201628.IAA12866@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701210415.UAA17450@songbird.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > > > > Infinity does not have a predecessor, so it makes no sense to > > count back from it a finite number of steps. > > If infinity does not have predecessors (ie is immune to normal arithmetic > operations) then it is not possible for a sequence to approach it by adding > a finite amount to succesive terms in order to approach it. This means that > a sequence can not meaningfuly be asymptotic with infinity (meaning I have to > be able to draw a asymptote, at least in theory, in order to demonstrate the > limit). Jim, the problem here, as elsewhere in your posts, is that you confuse the prosaic meaning of terms with the mathematical meaning. "Approaching" infinity is sort of inane, mathematically speaking, but if it did have a meaning, it wouldn't mean "getting closer to". > > If one constructs the Ordinals, which are isomorphism classes of > > well-ordered sets, and the Cardinals, which are equivalence > > classes of equipotent sets, one will automatically end up with > > all sorts of transfinite numbers. > > If infinity is not a number, how is it possible to have a definite number > (ie transfinite) which is larger than it? > > My contention is that number theory as you present it is playing fast and > loose with the concept of infinity not being a number or visa versa. Your contention is precisely what you are doing. The term "infinity" means several things mathematically speaking, but the various meanings are precise. Your comments demonstrate that you don't really know what those precise meanings are, and thus it is difficult for people who are used to them to communicate with you. So perhaps you could define *exactly* what you mean by "infinity"? -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Jan 20 19:30:36 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:30:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Menwith Hill / NSA Message-ID: <85381742124765@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> I've just heard from Duncan Campbell (who made the documentary), he'll send me a copy of the script which can be put on the web. I'll let people know when it's available. Copies of the tape can be ordered from his company: IPTV Ltd 1 Meadowbank Edinburgh EH8 8JE Scotland, UK E-mail : duncan at gn.apc.org Tel : +44 131 659 6566 Cost is \pounds 14.50 stg + any postage costs for outside UK - \pounds 5 will cover it. They have no NTSC versions in stock but can make them from the master. Provided they get orders for at least 10, the cost will be the same. They accept payment in US$ cheques as well as \pounds stg cheques; no credit cards, sorry. He is, in theory, on holiday for another month or so and only has intermittent net connectivity, so please don't flood him with email just yet. Peter. From declan at pathfinder.com Mon Jan 20 19:40:10 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:40:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNS_top In-Reply-To: <199701210057.QAA24931@toad.com> Message-ID: You'll get the full article soon enough, I expect. The Reuters story isn't quite right, though. Burma has no Net-connection. I stood outside the building that will house it last month (they wouldn't let me in) after hiking five miles through fields to get around police barricades. It should go live this year. For China and Singapore Net-censorship, check out my web site at http://www.eff.org/~declan/global/ -Declan On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > John Young wrote: > > Governments in China, Burma and > > Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with > > minimal success. > > Do you have any pointers to information in regard to this, or are you > just being a goddamn tease? > > Toto > > > > From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 20 19:56:09 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 19:56:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) Message-ID: <199701210356.TAA27801@toad.com> At 11:41 PM 1/16/97 GMT, Adam Back wrote: > >Bill Frantz writes: >> As long as the man in the middle can't imitate a familiar voice, >> this procedure is reasonably secure. > >This is the approach taken by PGPfone also. If the value of the >conversations was high (>$100,000?) passable voice imitation wouldn't >be that hard I suspect. I have long considered how easy it would be to use a sound card to modify the human voice to match within certain tolerances the voice of another. There are currently on the market, phones specifically designed to modify the voice of the user so that kids can answer as adults, women can answer as thier own protective boyfriends, bosses can answer anonymous calls as the secretary, etc... There are currently on the market keyboards that allow you to sample some real world sound and use it as a voice in your music, (the model I saw, a toy produced by Radio Shack, simply sped up or slowed down the sound to achieve this.) I have thought, if a machine were to take the incoming voice, analize (apologies for spelling) it to get a spectrum signature, a pattern that can be added or subtracted from another, and could then add the difference between that and the victims signature to the users voice, then real-time, on-the-fly con jobs would be easy. The only thing that the user would be responsible for would be the accent, and the day-to-day vocabulary of the victim. I told a friend about this and he confirmed that such was available if you knew where to look. From drose at AZStarNet.com Mon Jan 20 20:10:52 1997 From: drose at AZStarNet.com (drose at AZStarNet.com) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:10:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701210410.UAA28001@toad.com> Alan Bostick wrote: [...] >She presented the gate agent with *four* tickets and *four* IDs. "Where >are these other people?" the agent asked. "They're parking the car," >said the traveler. The agent gave her all four boarding passes; and my >companion and I were bumped to the third boarding group. > >The woman in front of us was white and middle-class-looking, traveling >with what appeared to be her family. One wonders what would have >happened were she a swarthy man wearing robes and a burnoose. Or if she >were just wearing shabby clothes. My guess is that you and your companion would have been further discommoded, with the possible concomitant saving of your lives. From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Mon Jan 20 20:10:52 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:10:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701210410.UAA28002@toad.com> ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Lucky Green wrote: > At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? > > I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. > > > > -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred > Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of > your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. > http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm > From owner-cypherpunks Mon Jan 20 20:10:53 1997 From: owner-cypherpunks (owner-cypherpunks) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:10:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701210410.UAA28004@toad.com> From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 20:10:53 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:10:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701210410.UAA28003@toad.com> Jane Jefferson wrote: > Also Sprach Adam Back: > > I await with interest the last phases of Dimitri's experiment, when > > the cypherpunks list becomes a moderated forum. > > That appears to be the main brunt of his efforts, to "push the envelope" > of free speech in order to force it's definition. Perhaps to exhibit > the necessity for a controlling authority, and thus justify the existence > of the various agencies which are trying to control the flow of > information in this country and elsewhere. If what you say is true, then Dr. DV K's efforts are quite possibly the most important issue being addressed in this conference, because behind free speech, lies the most important issue of all--when does it start, and when does it stop. Cryptography, above all, enables the ability of a group or an individual to keep their communications secret, safe from prying eyes. The military-industrial complex proclaims this necessary for the purposes of state-security, and denies that it is used in order to keep their 'sins' from being exposed. (If you believe this, then please contact me by private email regarding an ocean-front property I have available in Tucson, AZ. If you act quickly, I will throw in a set of the Amazing Ginzu Knives as an added bonus.) The crypto-cognizant citizen proclaims cryptographical ability as a means of empowering their rights of free speech. The more intelligent of them recognize as misinformation the government's feeble claims that they cannot successfully investigate someone moving tons of illegal drugs into the country unless they have the capacity to eavesdrop on the private correspondences of 'all' of their citizens. (Which is the equivalent, in my mind, of claiming that AIDS cannot be held in check without knowing the details of all of the citizens sex-lives.) In short, I believe that if the issue of free speech is not one of the central issues on the CypherPunks list, then the list is merely one more heartless, unfeeling extension of the Great Machine which is grinding inexorably forward toward the day when we will all have its numbers tattoo'd on our forearms. As far as I am concerned, any CypherPunk who believes that the socio/politico issues surrounding cryptography are not important enough to be an integral part of this list is falling into the same type of trap as those who think that they can become good cryptographers without becoming good cryptanalysts. Those who seek to become merely cryptographers seem to think that 'numbers rule'--those who seek to be able to analyze the end-result of those 'numbers' realize that the minds, hearts and souls 'behind' those numbers tell the story of how people think and feel, and the motivations behind their cryptographical intent. (And also reveals where their vulnerabilities lie.) Thinking that cryptography is about 'numbers' is akin to thinking that equality is about 'skin-color'. > "In peacetime, a warlike man sets upon himself." -- Nietzsche "In times of war, a peacelike man sets upon others." Bubba Rom Dos Toto From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 20 20:12:35 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:12:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701210412.UAA28009@toad.com> At 12:07 PM 1/20/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: >Depending on the country and bank you can probably perform almost >any transfer you like by fax. I moved my pension from one bank >to another simply by sending a fax. I have done similar transactions >with Swiss, German and UK banks. > >For some reason the fax is considered to be a practically >infallible authentication device. Quite why is beyond me since >it should be obvious to anyone that all one needs to fake a >fax is a photocopier, document signed by account holder, paste >and scissors. You get everything needed on a signed cheque. > A check is no good, most checks are now printed on paper with special lines that are supposed to become obvious after copying. A signed letter or even a mailing envelope would probably be better. Also, scotch tape makes those pexky shadows disapear like magic. My dad uses it to make multiple versions of make-up math tests that trivially look like the origional in order to goad persons who were sick on test day so that they could get the answers from someone else into printing down those answers and getting less than random probability. (multiple choice) From kent at songbird.com Mon Jan 20 20:14:18 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:14:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Math Noise] (fwd) Message-ID: <199701210414.UAA28021@toad.com> Jim Choate allegedly said: > > > > Infinity does not have a predecessor, so it makes no sense to > > count back from it a finite number of steps. > > If infinity does not have predecessors (ie is immune to normal arithmetic > operations) then it is not possible for a sequence to approach it by adding > a finite amount to succesive terms in order to approach it. This means that > a sequence can not meaningfuly be asymptotic with infinity (meaning I have to > be able to draw a asymptote, at least in theory, in order to demonstrate the > limit). Jim, the problem here, as elsewhere in your posts, is that you confuse the prosaic meaning of terms with the mathematical meaning. "Approaching" infinity is sort of inane, mathematically speaking, but if it did have a meaning, it wouldn't mean "getting closer to". > > If one constructs the Ordinals, which are isomorphism classes of > > well-ordered sets, and the Cardinals, which are equivalence > > classes of equipotent sets, one will automatically end up with > > all sorts of transfinite numbers. > > If infinity is not a number, how is it possible to have a definite number > (ie transfinite) which is larger than it? > > My contention is that number theory as you present it is playing fast and > loose with the concept of infinity not being a number or visa versa. Your contention is precisely what you are doing. The term "infinity" means several things mathematically speaking, but the various meanings are precise. Your comments demonstrate that you don't really know what those precise meanings are, and thus it is difficult for people who are used to them to communicate with you. So perhaps you could define *exactly* what you mean by "infinity"? -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From adam at homeport.org Mon Jan 20 20:16:04 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:16:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701210416.UAA28041@toad.com> Recall that all security is economics. The airlines want the appearance of security without having to pay for it. The '3 questions' ("Pack your luggage? let it out of your sight? Taking any gifts?") originated with El Al, where they are the introduction to a very expensive (and privacy invading) set of screening questions. The El Al people are trained to watch you as they ask the questions, and respond to signs of lying or rehersal. The Americans read the questions off the screen, and pay no attention to your answers. The market, however, is irrational*, and airlines prefer to have government imposed regulations over having to actually figure out what works, and do it. *The market is irrational because statistics on what airlines are safer than others is closely held knowledge of the FAA. Adam Alan Bostick wrote: | She presented the gate agent with *four* tickets and *four* IDs. "Where | are these other people?" the agent asked. "They're parking the car," | said the traveler. The agent gave her all four boarding passes; and my | companion and I were bumped to the third boarding group. | | The woman in front of us was white and middle-class-looking, traveling | with what appeared to be her family. One wonders what would have | happened were she a swarthy man wearing robes and a burnoose. Or if she | were just wearing shabby clothes. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From sandfort at crl.com Mon Jan 20 20:17:50 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:17:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <32E4477E.3F8B@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-punks, On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > In short, I believe that if the issue of free speech is not one of > the central issues on the CypherPunks list, then the list is merely > one more heartless, unfeeling extension of the Great Machine which > is grinding inexorably forward toward the day when we will all have > its numbers tattoo'd on our forearms. While free speech is an undeniably important topic, It is just one of many that could be discussed on this list. A concern for protecting privacy was the raison d'etre for the creation of the Cypherpunks list. And technological self-help was always the modus operandi of choice. Obviously, speech and privacy issues are related, but they are not synonymous. Again, I am not saying Cypherpunks do not care about free speech issues. There focus, though, is on achieving privacy through technological means. Works for me. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From declan at pathfinder.com Mon Jan 20 20:25:35 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:25:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNS_top Message-ID: <199701210425.UAA28206@toad.com> You'll get the full article soon enough, I expect. The Reuters story isn't quite right, though. Burma has no Net-connection. I stood outside the building that will house it last month (they wouldn't let me in) after hiking five miles through fields to get around police barricades. It should go live this year. For China and Singapore Net-censorship, check out my web site at http://www.eff.org/~declan/global/ -Declan On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > John Young wrote: > > Governments in China, Burma and > > Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with > > minimal success. > > Do you have any pointers to information in regard to this, or are you > just being a goddamn tease? > > Toto > > > > From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Mon Jan 20 20:25:35 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:25:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Menwith Hill / NSA Message-ID: <199701210425.UAA28205@toad.com> I've just heard from Duncan Campbell (who made the documentary), he'll send me a copy of the script which can be put on the web. I'll let people know when it's available. Copies of the tape can be ordered from his company: IPTV Ltd 1 Meadowbank Edinburgh EH8 8JE Scotland, UK E-mail : duncan at gn.apc.org Tel : +44 131 659 6566 Cost is \pounds 14.50 stg + any postage costs for outside UK - \pounds 5 will cover it. They have no NTSC versions in stock but can make them from the master. Provided they get orders for at least 10, the cost will be the same. They accept payment in US$ cheques as well as \pounds stg cheques; no credit cards, sorry. He is, in theory, on holiday for another month or so and only has intermittent net connectivity, so please don't flood him with email just yet. Peter. From jimbell at pacifier.com Mon Jan 20 20:25:51 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:25:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Interesting item from Nwlibertarians@teleport.com Message-ID: <199701210425.UAA28217@toad.com> >Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 17:44:32 -0800 (PST) >From: James Ogle >Subject: NWLibs> LP: Browne's Vote Annulled, Chudov Still PM >To: Jack Dean >cc: usa-par at netcom.com, ichudov at algebra.com, rjschundler at aol.com, > nwlibertarians at teleport.com, brockman at netcom.com >Sender: owner-nwlibertarians at teleport.com >Reply-To: nwlibertarians at teleport.com > > >To: Jack Dean >Cc: Usa-par at netcom.com Listserver Members and Other Libertarians > >It turns out that according to Jack Dean, a campaign worker with the Harry >Browne in '96 campaign, the eballot vote for Igor Chudov (Libertarian - >OK) cast from HarryBrowne at HarryBrowne'96.com address, which was forwarded >to Mr. Jack Dean by me, was a fake - so the two votes are shaved off the >Chudov total. Can anyone speak with better authority on Browne then >Mr. Jack Dean, and say the Browne did cast the vote? On a positive >note however, Tim Ladd (Pot - CA) has agreed to list Mr. Chudov as his >first choice, so Mr. Chudov stays as PM for the time being with five votes. > >The new vote totals are shown below. > >BTW, a special welcome to the usa-par at netcom.com list to Evan Colletti >(Pot - NV), who joins the list from Reno NV, as a founder of the NV-PAR >and the Nevada Pot Party. > > --James Ogle > >On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Jack Dean wrote: > >> >> You wrote: >> >> >Jack, i just received this email from Mr. Harry Browne. Will you >> >please confirm with him that he did indeed cast the vote? >> >> No, he didn't. It appears to be a faked e-mail message. I'll be >> investigating how it was done. >> >> Sorry. >> >> Jack >> >> >> ************************************************************************** >> J. Harris Dean | voice & fax> 714/870-5585 >> 2217 Vista del Sol | pager with voice mail> 714/935-3638 >> Fullerton, CA 92831 | e-mail> JackDean at webworldinc.com >> ************************************************************************** >> "LIBERTY is something you cannot have, unless you are >> willing to give it to others." - William Allen White > >---------------------------------------------------Votes for PM of USA PAR > > > ====**** ************************** ****==== > ====*** * THE 3RD USA PARLIAMENT * ***==== > ====== ************************** ====== > > Igor Chudov Taoiseach > >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- >For Immediate Release January 20, 1997 > > RESULTS OF VOTING FOR TAOISEACH > > Vote For # Of Vote For >MP Vote For PM Secretary Seats Rules >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Monty Truitt 1 Monty Truitt 1 James Ogle > 2 James Ogle 2 Monty Truitt > 3 Donald Duck 3 Micky Mouse 1 no >Daniel Brockman 1 Valerie Madriaga 1 James Ogle > 2 Igor Chudov > 3 Mike Bogatirev > 4 Zachary Quest 2 yes >Mike Robinson 1 Daniel Brockman 1 James Ogle > 2 Steve Michael 2 Mike Robinson > 3 Mike Robinson 1 yes >Nathan Brown 1 John Mayer 1 James Ogle > 2 Michael Banon 1 yes >Patrick Seats 1 Patrick Seats 1 James Ogle > 2 Daniel Brockman 2 Gary Swing 1 yes >Kerby Hensley 1 Locke Heemstra 1 James Ogle 1 >Jack Clayton 1 Steve Michael 1 James Ogle > 2 Jack Clayton 1 yes >Igor Chudov 1 Daniel Brockman 1 James Ogle > 2 Igor Chudov 1 yes* >James Ogle 1 Daniel Brockman 1 James Ogle > 2 Igor Chudov > 3 Nathan Brown > 4 Zachary Quest 2 yes >Bruce Daniels 1 Daniel Brockman 1 Gary Swing 8 yes >Gorden Hartman 1 Daniel Brockman 2 James Ogle 3 yes >John Mayer 1 Steve Michael 1 James Ogle 1 yes >Mike Bogatirev 1 Daniel Brockman 1 James Ogle 2 abstain >Gene Marsee' 1 Valerie Madriaga 1 James Ogle 1 abstain >Locke Heemstra 1 Lock Heemstra 1 James Ogle > 2 Daniel Brockman 1 yes >Shirley Bradshaw 1 Bruce Daniels 1 James Ogle > 2 Valerie Madriaga 1 >Lloyd Llewellyn 1 Igor Chudov 1 >Eli Rozicki 1 Nathon Brown 1 >Laura Booth 1 Nathan Brown 1 James Ogle 1 yes >Ann Atkerson 1 Newt Gingrich 1 James Ogle 1 >Steve Duby 1 Steve Duby 1 James Ogle > 2 Nathan Brown > 3 John Mayer > 4 Laura Booth 1 >Greg Farley 1 Nathan Brown 1 James Ogle 1 >Tim Ladd 1 Igor Chudov 1 James Ogle > 2 Nathan Brown >------------------------------------------------------------------------ >Total 35 > > >*Voted yes on rules and other rules, and wrote in "Create USA PAR Web Page". > >Results As Of 1/20/97 > >Daniel Brockman (17 votes) Declines To Stand >Igor Chudov Elected Prime Minister - 5 votes >James Ogle Elected Secretary - 25 votes >Rules Approved - 23 votes > >--James Ogle, secretary > USA Parliament > > > Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From LEHMANNJ at saatchi.com.au Mon Jan 20 20:55:37 1997 From: LEHMANNJ at saatchi.com.au (John Lehmann (SSASyd)) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:55:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Disseminating public-key crypto source code Message-ID: <32E45B6B@smtp.saatchi.com.au> > >I've written a few Perl routines for public-key cryptography. I'd >like to freely disseminate the source code (starting with ElGamal) to >as many people as I can, > >It's my understanding that there are two orthogonal restrictions: > > 1) ITAResque: I can't give code to non-U.S. citizens. > 2) PKPesque: Using public-key crypto is an infringement, > although disseminating/possessing the source > code is not. > >While I'm sure these are oversimplifications, it would seem that I can >release my source code over the Internet provided I install a simple >verification mechanism (cf. MIT's PGP distribution) to ensure that >only people claiming to be U.S. citizens have access privileges. > >Am I correct? If so, why aren't more people doing this? > People do do this, but if you are using RSA or other methods patented in the US, you might want to look at them. Is the concept of PK cryptography patented? And of course you are familiar with Bernstein v DoS... [http://www.eff.org/pub/Legal/Cases/Bernstein_v_DoS/HTML/bernstein_961218 _pressrel.html] >The plaintiff in the case, Daniel J. Bernstein, Research Assistant Professor at >the University of Illinois at Chicago, developed an "encryption >algorithm" (a recipe or set of instructions) that he wanted to publish in printed >journals as well as on the Internet. Bernstein sued the >government, claiming that the government's requirements that he register as an >arms dealer and seek government permission before publication >was a violation of his First Amendment right of free speech. This is required by >the Arms Export Control Act and its implementing regulations, >the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. > >In the first phase of this litigation, the government argued that since Bernstein's >ideas were expressed, in part, in computer language (source >code), they were not protected by the First Amendment. On April 15, 1996, >Judge Patel rejected that argument and held for the first time that >computer source code is protected speech for purposes of the First >Amendment. ...here Perl has the advantage of being a scripting language, and so by default comes as source, though if you had written the routines in a scripting langauge like Python, you might find it easier to convince a judge that it was in fact human readable... -- John "BTW IANAL" Lehmann From liz at nym.alias.net Mon Jan 20 20:58:19 1997 From: liz at nym.alias.net (Liz Taylor) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 20:58:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: <199701202142.NAA19098@toad.com> Message-ID: <19970121045809.17075.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) wrote: > The box has a 3 or 4 digit display which displays "something" about the > 3DES key, where "something" is some of the bits, or a hash, or ... With 3 > decimal digits, a MIM attacker has a 999 out of 1000 chance of getting > caught. Not true. It will take a MIM machine less than a tenth of a second to come up with a 3DES key that will have the same three digit hash. Remember the attack found about Clipper's LEAF hash, which was only 16 bits long? From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 20 21:11:07 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:11:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fascist cocksuckers: 0, Freedom of speech: 1 In-Reply-To: <199701210057.QAA24931@toad.com> Message-ID: Toto writes: > John Young wrote: > > Governments in China, Burma and > > Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with > > minimal success. > > Do you have any pointers to information in regard to this, or are you > just being a goddamn tease? For example, the fascist cocksuckers Sandfart and Geekmore have been totally impotent in their failed attempts to suppress free speech. Gilmore's as inept as the governments of China, Burma and Singapore combined. FUCK CENSORSHIP. FUCK EFF (EFFEMINATE FASCISTS FOUNDATION). --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 21:12:29 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:12:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970120210810.006dd5cc@192.100.81.126> At 11:46 AM 1/20/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >[microcurrency] >>It will also not catch on until there are better standards involving >>microcurrency transactions amongst the vendors. It would also help if >>there was a single interface (or "helper app") for whatever vendor you >>decided to go with. I am not sure that is feasible. Single interface, perhaps. Sun's Java Wallet is step in this direction. Single helper app, not a chance. The systems are too different, and do not share a sufficient number of properties, to use the same helper app. >as I see it, I think there are a few key standards that need >to be devised: > >1. an html tag that indicates how much a link costs, probably in >the type syntax This could be done, but is, IMHO, too inflexible. >2. modification of http to support a payment mechanism, by sending >a token. Take a look at PEP and UPP. This may not be what you are looking for, but it is a start. Available at any IETF draft repository. [...] >>Currently every vendor of payment schemes has made it proprietary in some >>way. (At least the ones I have seen.) This means that if the user visits >>three different web pages, each using a payment scheme from a different >>vendor, that user has to be signed up with all of those vendors. (Or at >>least have their helper apps.) The systems are *not* interchangeable due to fundamental differences in the design. This is not a software/UI issue. I do not expect the signup requirements to last much longer. To give just one example, take a look at the current discussions on dev-lucre, a list for the Unofficial Cypherpunks Implementation of Ecash. [Sorry, I don't have the archive URL.] http://www.isaac.cs.berkeley.edu/ntlucre/ has the latest version. The list is currently discussing an ActiveX Ecash control. With -lucre, you no longer need to sign up with an issuer. Assuming an ActiveX control, the client software installs itself. As to the merchant software, Stronghold already ships with Ecash support built in. Netscape has announce that Navigator will ship with CyberCash. There is definitely movement at the browser/server end. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From liz at nym.alias.net Mon Jan 20 21:25:33 1997 From: liz at nym.alias.net (Liz Taylor) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:25:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) Message-ID: <199701210525.VAA29113@toad.com> frantz at netcom.com (Bill Frantz) wrote: > The box has a 3 or 4 digit display which displays "something" about the > 3DES key, where "something" is some of the bits, or a hash, or ... With 3 > decimal digits, a MIM attacker has a 999 out of 1000 chance of getting > caught. Not true. It will take a MIM machine less than a tenth of a second to come up with a 3DES key that will have the same three digit hash. Remember the attack found about Clipper's LEAF hash, which was only 16 bits long? From LEHMANNJ at saatchi.com.au Mon Jan 20 21:25:53 1997 From: LEHMANNJ at saatchi.com.au (John Lehmann (SSASyd)) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:25:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Disseminating public-key crypto source code Message-ID: <199701210525.VAA29122@toad.com> > >I've written a few Perl routines for public-key cryptography. I'd >like to freely disseminate the source code (starting with ElGamal) to >as many people as I can, > >It's my understanding that there are two orthogonal restrictions: > > 1) ITAResque: I can't give code to non-U.S. citizens. > 2) PKPesque: Using public-key crypto is an infringement, > although disseminating/possessing the source > code is not. > >While I'm sure these are oversimplifications, it would seem that I can >release my source code over the Internet provided I install a simple >verification mechanism (cf. MIT's PGP distribution) to ensure that >only people claiming to be U.S. citizens have access privileges. > >Am I correct? If so, why aren't more people doing this? > People do do this, but if you are using RSA or other methods patented in the US, you might want to look at them. Is the concept of PK cryptography patented? And of course you are familiar with Bernstein v DoS... [http://www.eff.org/pub/Legal/Cases/Bernstein_v_DoS/HTML/bernstein_961218 _pressrel.html] >The plaintiff in the case, Daniel J. Bernstein, Research Assistant Professor at >the University of Illinois at Chicago, developed an "encryption >algorithm" (a recipe or set of instructions) that he wanted to publish in printed >journals as well as on the Internet. Bernstein sued the >government, claiming that the government's requirements that he register as an >arms dealer and seek government permission before publication >was a violation of his First Amendment right of free speech. This is required by >the Arms Export Control Act and its implementing regulations, >the International Traffic in Arms Regulations. > >In the first phase of this litigation, the government argued that since Bernstein's >ideas were expressed, in part, in computer language (source >code), they were not protected by the First Amendment. On April 15, 1996, >Judge Patel rejected that argument and held for the first time that >computer source code is protected speech for purposes of the First >Amendment. ...here Perl has the advantage of being a scripting language, and so by default comes as source, though if you had written the routines in a scripting langauge like Python, you might find it easier to convince a judge that it was in fact human readable... -- John "BTW IANAL" Lehmann From gotagun at liii.com Mon Jan 20 21:36:02 1997 From: gotagun at liii.com (Jane Jefferson) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:36:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <32E4477E.3F8B@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <199701210535.AAA05654@oak.liii.com> Also Sprach Toto: > > If what you say is true, then Dr. DV K's efforts are quite possibly > the most important issue being addressed in this conference, because > behind free speech, lies the most important issue of all--when does > it start, and when does it stop. Exactly. > The military-industrial complex proclaims this necessary for the > purposes of state-security, and denies that it is used in order to keep > their 'sins' from being exposed. (If you believe this, then please > contact me by private email regarding an ocean-front property I have > available in Tucson, AZ. If you act quickly, I will throw in a set > of the Amazing Ginzu Knives as an added bonus.) The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to individual. If Dr. Vulis is indeed an adjunct professor at Fordham University, I think that perhaps he has been hanging out and drinking too many beers with my former philosophy professor Quentin Lauer. ;-7 > The crypto-cognizant citizen proclaims cryptographical ability as > a means of empowering their rights of free speech. The more intelligent > of them recognize as misinformation the government's feeble claims that > they cannot successfully investigate someone moving tons of illegal > drugs into the country unless they have the capacity to eavesdrop on > the private correspondences of 'all' of their citizens. (Which is the > equivalent, in my mind, of claiming that AIDS cannot be held in check > without knowing the details of all of the citizens sex-lives.) Governments, however, are made up of the very same people who claim to require these rights to privacy. Those people create, codify and enforce the laws. The problem is that the people who find themselves in this position of power are not always the most moral or concerned with the best interest of the majority. And fiendishly, it is the very chaos and anarchy and random chance espoused by proponents of the cypherpunk philosophy that allows these people to gain this power, unchecked! Thus, the real problem ends up being not "how to control the government so that the government doesn't control us", but "how to deal with the government when it goes into control-freak mode". That it will go into such a mode is a given -- based on human nature and history. This is a fundamental cycle of evolution and human behavior. We have to face the fact that humans are predators, and as long as we are, the cycle of this behavior will continue. The human race has not evolved to such a point where privacy is not an essential thing. If tomorrow everyone turned instantly telepathic and we all were capable of knowing each other's thoughts, you'd best believe the suicide rate would be beyond belief. Buisnesses would instantly fail, countries would instantly be absorbed by other countries, many relationships based on love and trust would be destroyed. And during that time, the deadliest person alive - the toughest and the meanest, and the most effective in the face of all the chaos, would not be the person who was capable of preserving their privacy. Rather, it would be the one who was capable of surviving in it's complete absence. This is not to denigrate the efforts of the cypherpunks, but merely to point out an area that they may not have thought of as a method to battle the trend towards fascism. -- Marcus: "They'll try to kill you." | "You won't see me in Xena: "Oh, I still have a few tricks | front, but you can't left up my sleeve...I don't | leave me behind!" have any sleeves!" -- Xena bloopers | -- YES From shamrock at netcom.com Mon Jan 20 21:40:50 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:40:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft Message-ID: <199701210540.VAA29342@toad.com> At 11:46 AM 1/20/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >[microcurrency] >>It will also not catch on until there are better standards involving >>microcurrency transactions amongst the vendors. It would also help if >>there was a single interface (or "helper app") for whatever vendor you >>decided to go with. I am not sure that is feasible. Single interface, perhaps. Sun's Java Wallet is step in this direction. Single helper app, not a chance. The systems are too different, and do not share a sufficient number of properties, to use the same helper app. >as I see it, I think there are a few key standards that need >to be devised: > >1. an html tag that indicates how much a link costs, probably in >the type syntax This could be done, but is, IMHO, too inflexible. >2. modification of http to support a payment mechanism, by sending >a token. Take a look at PEP and UPP. This may not be what you are looking for, but it is a start. Available at any IETF draft repository. [...] >>Currently every vendor of payment schemes has made it proprietary in some >>way. (At least the ones I have seen.) This means that if the user visits >>three different web pages, each using a payment scheme from a different >>vendor, that user has to be signed up with all of those vendors. (Or at >>least have their helper apps.) The systems are *not* interchangeable due to fundamental differences in the design. This is not a software/UI issue. I do not expect the signup requirements to last much longer. To give just one example, take a look at the current discussions on dev-lucre, a list for the Unofficial Cypherpunks Implementation of Ecash. [Sorry, I don't have the archive URL.] http://www.isaac.cs.berkeley.edu/ntlucre/ has the latest version. The list is currently discussing an ActiveX Ecash control. With -lucre, you no longer need to sign up with an issuer. Assuming an ActiveX control, the client software installs itself. As to the merchant software, Stronghold already ships with Ecash support built in. Netscape has announce that Navigator will ship with CyberCash. There is definitely movement at the browser/server end. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From fhell at nether.net Mon Jan 20 21:42:00 1997 From: fhell at nether.net (FrozenHell) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:42:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hard Drive Encryption Message-ID: <3.0.16.19970120192722.37ef8cbc@mail.nether.net> I found a program on the internet called POTASSIUM HYDROXIDE that says it will encrypt your hard drive... then when ever you turn on your computer it will request a password before it even accesses your DOS. If you put in the right password it will load as a TSR that will let your access your encrypted hard drive. But I have a Western Digital Caviar Hard Drive and have the use the W.D. Disk Manager v6.03d that comes with it... this is another program that loads before your DOS... does anyone know if this program Potassium Hydroxide will work with W.D. Disk Manager and work under Win 3.11/95. I don't want to risk gibbling all the info on my hard drive. If not does anyone know of a program that will let me encrypt my hard disk and decrypt it will a password before my DOS is loaded and work with the above programs of mine. If it helps I am using DOS 6.21 with Windows 3.11 ( I'm upgrading to `95 soon ;> ) -FrozenHell (fhell at nether.net) From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 20 21:47:03 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:47:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) In-Reply-To: <199701200308.VAA06655@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32E4581D.2A5A@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > my predictions: > 1) Dale Thorn will become another Kagalenko and will mailbomb mods Unless someone can give me good enough reason to get involved with communications programming, even at a macro level, I doubt I'll be much of a technical threat to c-punks et al. I suspect that the main reason for much of Sandy's fear and loathing of late is not the incessant Spamming of the c-punks list, but rather the presence of a superior, dominant intellect which threatens his space here. Which would you fear most: The government looking over your shoulder, checking for possible ITAR violations, or a relentless critic who's apparently made it his current life's mission to ceaselessly point out your limitations to the whole world? > 2) 90% of cypherpunks-moderated will be about moderation > and censorship This topic should be one of the easiest to cut.... > 3) there will be massive openings of alternative cypherpunks > mailing lists, all doomed to fail Failure or success depends on many factors. Unfortunately, most successes in real life are money-sponsored, and therefore necessarily contain a driving, but hidden agenda. > 4) several alt.* newsgroups like alt.cypherpunks will be created Most people watch TV rather than get involved in anything. Whatever is interesting about that (other than as an academic study) I don't know. > 5) main business of freedom-knights will be shitting and spitting > at cypherpunks in alt.cypherpunks I've been posting some intense material to freedom-knights, but the response has been quite restrained. One could conjecture that the interest level there is not high (as far as c-punks goes), or that the maturity level is higher than other places... > 6) moderators will spend increasing amounts of time on their work In mathematics, when something doesn't compute intuitively, although on paper the proposition looks OK, you'd say "there's something wrong or missing here, it doesn't add up", etc. Moderators spending lots of time moderating postings from the hoi polloi doesn't add up either. > 7) crossposting between alt.cypherpunks and mail.cypherpunks > will be prohibited by alt.cypherpunks FAQ, posted monthly > by Dr. John Martin Grubor This thing about crossposting is way overblown. I was told forcefully once not to crosspost to c-punks and coderpunks, as though one list were a true subset of the other. Posters should be advised of the specific reasons for not "crossposting" to certain list combinations, unless you are referring only to commercial Spam or other 'bot-generated mail. From ericm at lne.com Mon Jan 20 21:52:24 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 21:52:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701210416.UAA28041@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701210550.VAA32028@slack.lne.com> Adam Shostack writes: > The '3 questions' ("Pack your luggage? let it out of your > sight? Taking any gifts?") originated with El Al, where they are the > introduction to a very expensive (and privacy invading) set of > screening questions. The El Al people are trained to watch you as > they ask the questions, and respond to signs of lying or rehersal. > The Americans read the questions off the screen, and pay no attention > to your answers. Some airlines here in the US have set up "check in" terminals near the gate so you can check in there instead of having to deal with human beings at the desk. The terminal asks the magic three questions. No chance for seeing someone's reaction to the questions there (unless of course there's a hidden camera pointed at the terminal, or some sort of biometric device attached). One time I asked a ticket guy if he's ever had anyone say "yes" to the magic questions, his answer was that the one time it happened the person turned out to be an FAA three-questions enforcement squad conducting a check. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 20 22:02:22 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:02:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E45AA6.330A@gte.net> hjk wrote: > Just one thing about the names of the different lists: I received a > mail listing the changes to come. It was very easy to understand that > I am going to get the moderated list if I do not change my subscription. > I'll find out if I will miss something. We'll see. > I wonder who is so brainless, not to understand what's going on. > Do you really think the subscribers are pure Idiots? Well, Heinz. You live in a country full of people, ordinary people, variously called the hoi polloi, the sheeple, the unwashed masses, and other interesting names. Many credible and respected authors and commentators have made references to the masses in one form or another as "stupid, lazy, ignorant, selfish, etc.", or even "almost useless". Now whatever you think of your fellow citizens, or even those of the USA (to name an example), I'm sure is OK on whatever basis you apply your judgement. But I guarantee you that the people on the cypherpunks list are no more or less intelligent than the people who vegetate in front of their TV sets every day, right there where you live, in all probability. If you believe that your fellow citizens vote intelligently, then I respond that cypherpunks vote intelligently. What do you think? From ericm at lne.com Mon Jan 20 22:10:53 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:10:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701210610.WAA29969@toad.com> Adam Shostack writes: > The '3 questions' ("Pack your luggage? let it out of your > sight? Taking any gifts?") originated with El Al, where they are the > introduction to a very expensive (and privacy invading) set of > screening questions. The El Al people are trained to watch you as > they ask the questions, and respond to signs of lying or rehersal. > The Americans read the questions off the screen, and pay no attention > to your answers. Some airlines here in the US have set up "check in" terminals near the gate so you can check in there instead of having to deal with human beings at the desk. The terminal asks the magic three questions. No chance for seeing someone's reaction to the questions there (unless of course there's a hidden camera pointed at the terminal, or some sort of biometric device attached). One time I asked a ticket guy if he's ever had anyone say "yes" to the magic questions, his answer was that the one time it happened the person turned out to be an FAA three-questions enforcement squad conducting a check. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From gotagun at liii.com Mon Jan 20 22:10:53 1997 From: gotagun at liii.com (Jane Jefferson) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:10:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701210610.WAA29970@toad.com> Also Sprach Toto: > > If what you say is true, then Dr. DV K's efforts are quite possibly > the most important issue being addressed in this conference, because > behind free speech, lies the most important issue of all--when does > it start, and when does it stop. Exactly. > The military-industrial complex proclaims this necessary for the > purposes of state-security, and denies that it is used in order to keep > their 'sins' from being exposed. (If you believe this, then please > contact me by private email regarding an ocean-front property I have > available in Tucson, AZ. If you act quickly, I will throw in a set > of the Amazing Ginzu Knives as an added bonus.) The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to individual. If Dr. Vulis is indeed an adjunct professor at Fordham University, I think that perhaps he has been hanging out and drinking too many beers with my former philosophy professor Quentin Lauer. ;-7 > The crypto-cognizant citizen proclaims cryptographical ability as > a means of empowering their rights of free speech. The more intelligent > of them recognize as misinformation the government's feeble claims that > they cannot successfully investigate someone moving tons of illegal > drugs into the country unless they have the capacity to eavesdrop on > the private correspondences of 'all' of their citizens. (Which is the > equivalent, in my mind, of claiming that AIDS cannot be held in check > without knowing the details of all of the citizens sex-lives.) Governments, however, are made up of the very same people who claim to require these rights to privacy. Those people create, codify and enforce the laws. The problem is that the people who find themselves in this position of power are not always the most moral or concerned with the best interest of the majority. And fiendishly, it is the very chaos and anarchy and random chance espoused by proponents of the cypherpunk philosophy that allows these people to gain this power, unchecked! Thus, the real problem ends up being not "how to control the government so that the government doesn't control us", but "how to deal with the government when it goes into control-freak mode". That it will go into such a mode is a given -- based on human nature and history. This is a fundamental cycle of evolution and human behavior. We have to face the fact that humans are predators, and as long as we are, the cycle of this behavior will continue. The human race has not evolved to such a point where privacy is not an essential thing. If tomorrow everyone turned instantly telepathic and we all were capable of knowing each other's thoughts, you'd best believe the suicide rate would be beyond belief. Buisnesses would instantly fail, countries would instantly be absorbed by other countries, many relationships based on love and trust would be destroyed. And during that time, the deadliest person alive - the toughest and the meanest, and the most effective in the face of all the chaos, would not be the person who was capable of preserving their privacy. Rather, it would be the one who was capable of surviving in it's complete absence. This is not to denigrate the efforts of the cypherpunks, but merely to point out an area that they may not have thought of as a method to battle the trend towards fascism. -- Marcus: "They'll try to kill you." | "You won't see me in Xena: "Oh, I still have a few tricks | front, but you can't left up my sleeve...I don't | leave me behind!" have any sleeves!" -- Xena bloopers | -- YES From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 20 22:12:39 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:12:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr Vulis's crypto experiment (Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT) Message-ID: <199701210612.WAA29987@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > my predictions: > 1) Dale Thorn will become another Kagalenko and will mailbomb mods Unless someone can give me good enough reason to get involved with communications programming, even at a macro level, I doubt I'll be much of a technical threat to c-punks et al. I suspect that the main reason for much of Sandy's fear and loathing of late is not the incessant Spamming of the c-punks list, but rather the presence of a superior, dominant intellect which threatens his space here. Which would you fear most: The government looking over your shoulder, checking for possible ITAR violations, or a relentless critic who's apparently made it his current life's mission to ceaselessly point out your limitations to the whole world? > 2) 90% of cypherpunks-moderated will be about moderation > and censorship This topic should be one of the easiest to cut.... > 3) there will be massive openings of alternative cypherpunks > mailing lists, all doomed to fail Failure or success depends on many factors. Unfortunately, most successes in real life are money-sponsored, and therefore necessarily contain a driving, but hidden agenda. > 4) several alt.* newsgroups like alt.cypherpunks will be created Most people watch TV rather than get involved in anything. Whatever is interesting about that (other than as an academic study) I don't know. > 5) main business of freedom-knights will be shitting and spitting > at cypherpunks in alt.cypherpunks I've been posting some intense material to freedom-knights, but the response has been quite restrained. One could conjecture that the interest level there is not high (as far as c-punks goes), or that the maturity level is higher than other places... > 6) moderators will spend increasing amounts of time on their work In mathematics, when something doesn't compute intuitively, although on paper the proposition looks OK, you'd say "there's something wrong or missing here, it doesn't add up", etc. Moderators spending lots of time moderating postings from the hoi polloi doesn't add up either. > 7) crossposting between alt.cypherpunks and mail.cypherpunks > will be prohibited by alt.cypherpunks FAQ, posted monthly > by Dr. John Martin Grubor This thing about crossposting is way overblown. I was told forcefully once not to crosspost to c-punks and coderpunks, as though one list were a true subset of the other. Posters should be advised of the specific reasons for not "crossposting" to certain list combinations, unless you are referring only to commercial Spam or other 'bot-generated mail. From fhell at nether.net Mon Jan 20 22:14:21 1997 From: fhell at nether.net (FrozenHell) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:14:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hard Drive Encryption Message-ID: <199701210614.WAA00109@toad.com> I found a program on the internet called POTASSIUM HYDROXIDE that says it will encrypt your hard drive... then when ever you turn on your computer it will request a password before it even accesses your DOS. If you put in the right password it will load as a TSR that will let your access your encrypted hard drive. But I have a Western Digital Caviar Hard Drive and have the use the W.D. Disk Manager v6.03d that comes with it... this is another program that loads before your DOS... does anyone know if this program Potassium Hydroxide will work with W.D. Disk Manager and work under Win 3.11/95. I don't want to risk gibbling all the info on my hard drive. If not does anyone know of a program that will let me encrypt my hard disk and decrypt it will a password before my DOS is loaded and work with the above programs of mine. If it helps I am using DOS 6.21 with Windows 3.11 ( I'm upgrading to `95 soon ;> ) -FrozenHell (fhell at nether.net) From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 20 22:20:32 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:20:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701210535.AAA05654@oak.liii.com> Message-ID: <32E4601A.B5E@gte.net> Jane Jefferson wrote: > Also Sprach Toto:[snip] > And fiendishly, it is the very chaos and anarchy and random chance > espoused by proponents of the cypherpunk philosophy that allows these > people to gain this power, unchecked![snip] > We have to face the fact that humans are predators, and as long as > we are, the cycle of this behavior will continue. Jane is showing signs of independent thought. Tsk tsk. > The human race has not evolved to such a point where privacy is not an > essential thing. If tomorrow everyone turned instantly telepathic and > we all were capable of knowing each other's thoughts, you'd best believe > the suicide rate would be beyond belief. Buisnesses would instantly > fail, countries would instantly be absorbed by other countries, many > relationships based on love and trust would be destroyed. > And during that time, the deadliest person alive - the toughest and > the meanest, and the most effective in the face of all the chaos, would > not be the person who was capable of preserving their privacy. Rather, > it would be the one who was capable of surviving in it's complete absence. Telepathy would do no good. You can (if you're hooked into someone's "consciousness") see the general outlines of thought, feel some of the emotions, etc., but the construction of one's abstract thoughts can't be interpreted by an observing person or computer. There are too many variables and random influences. Perhaps someday the quantum machines will make headway there. In the meantime, we can imitate, but we can't speak the full language, a la Star Trek IV. BTW, the suicide rate would not go ballistic, since the suicide rate as reported today is largely ficticious anyway. People would switch to survival mode *very* quickly, which would have the beneficial effect of taking their minds off of their pre-survival-crisis problems. From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 20 22:29:11 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:29:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes In-Reply-To: <32E45AA6.330A@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701210620.AAA00567@manifold.algebra.com> [Cc: alex at agate.net] Dale Thorn wrote: > > Many credible and respected authors and commentators have made references > to the masses in one form or another as "stupid, lazy, ignorant, > selfish, etc.", or even "almost useless". > In the classical example, you should say "LYING, FUCKING, THIEVING, STUPID," and so on. The art of insults has developed somewhat. Alexplore is one of the best masters after Dr. Vulis (some would say even better than Dr. Vulis, but that depends on taste). if you do not get it, it is because you need to know the context... - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 20 22:30:51 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:30:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701210535.AAA05654@oak.liii.com> Message-ID: <199701210627.AAA00614@manifold.algebra.com> Jane Jefferson wrote: > > The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > individual. An excellent point, Jane. Worth remembering. - Igor. From jimbell at pacifier.com Mon Jan 20 22:32:15 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:32:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? Message-ID: <199701210631.WAA03064@mail.pacifier.com> At 05:33 PM 1/16/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >At 08:13 PM 1/14/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >>US. Alone, that would have denied non-US patents to RSA. However, such an >>explanation grandly ignores the fact that computer software (let alone >>mathematics in general) was not considered patentable ANYWHERE (?) before >>public-key systems made their appearance in 1976. >... >>I'm still waiting for an "innocent" explanation for the US patent office >>beginning to issue software patents. I don't think there is one. > >The first software patent was Dennis Ritchie's patent on setUID. So what year was that? >Computer security is one area that, if you're going to allow patents >on software at all (which I think are a bad idea, but that's politics) No, it's not JUST politics. It's also (im)practicality. Even if, arguably, software OUGHT TO be patentable, going from a time in which software wasn't patentable to software patentability is essentially impossible. First, it requires (or, at least, ought to require, if they were to do it right...which they didn't) a searchable compilation of all previously existing software ideas and constructs to ensure that obvious or previously-existing ideas were not given patents. Since prior to about 1976 there was no motivation on anyone's part to collect such a database (secrecy being the most useful protection) then it was practically guaranteed that the Patent Office would be unable (or unwilling???) to refuse to grant patents on old ideas. Further, unlike a lot of big-ticket engineering, programming can be done by individuals with a relatively low-cost computer. Many if not most of the software constructs that were later called "patentable" were probably actually invented by people who had no interest in patenting them...and the few greedy ones who did were given the rewards. That's not fair, particularly when they may have been invented during a time in which software patents were known to be impossible to get. Also, since unlike other areas of engineering current programmers didn't have to pay for previous software constructs ("do-loops were free") there should have been distinct limits on the royalties that anybody could ask for in software-patent cases. Another problem is that much of the costs of most software companies are personnel and advertising. Any realistic royalty system (even assuming all other problems were solved) would have to determine what portion of a program's functionality was attributable to a patented concept, which I assert is essentially impossible. Do you charge for execution time? (the guy who patents the "wait loop" would make a fortune!) Length of code? Number of times called? Royalties must, presumably, be limited to a reasonable and practical level, and also (obviously) they may also have to be divided among a number of potential claimants, in the same way that (for instance) a car manufacturer may have to pay royalties on potentially hundreds or even thousands of patents to sell a single car. If no mechanism currently exists to arrive at a fair division of such royalties (about 20 years after the patents for the various encryption systems were filed) , I think it may be presumed that nobody seriously believes that this is possible. In short, I think it's absolutely foolish to believe that any sort of workable system could ever have been arranged to patent software, even if all of the issues above had been addressed fairly. And the reason I asked for an "innocent" explanation is to give people the benefit of the doubt so that they could show that the system was working. It isn't, and you know it. It's not surprising that no REAL LAWYERS (tm) around here were willing to tackle this issue. They know it's all a fraud. >>It also ignores the strong likelihood that the reason for the Patent-Office >>policy change (done, apparently, without benefit of a corresponding law >>change) was because with public-key/RSA there was finally an example of >>software the government wished to deny to the average citizen, >>and the only mechanism (short of secrecy, which was broken) to do so >>was to patent it. > >D,H,R,S, and A didn't _have_ to apply for patents.... >With hardware security products, the NSA has the power to seize and >classify systems which are applying for patents, for no particularly >good reason, and they used to do it often. Actually, I don't think they REALLY "have the power." What I mean by this is simple: Since American patents are supposedly grantable for applications filed up to one year prior, there is no guarantee that they will even see a patent application to grant until long after the cat is out of the bag. For instance, there was >an analog scrambler for CB radios that got its patent applications >seized in about 1980. And most software patent applications for >crypto have involved machinations to avoid getting trapped by this, >like publishing in foreign journals before submitting applications. Why should they have to publish in FOREIGN journals? Like I said before, since up to one year can elapse after disclosure (and, apparently, even longer in the case of the DHM patent, submission to ANY journal, not merely domestic ones, should do to prevent NSA's tricks. (and today, publishing on the Internet should achieve exactly the same results.) Richard Schoeppel commented this way: "Roger Schlafly has made a reasonable case that the DHM patent is invalid because the invention was "published" more than a year before the patent was filed. (He dug up a copy of a preprint they were circulating with a stamped received-date of ?May 1976?.)" What are we to conclude? These sleazebags can't even follow their own rules! Look, I asked for an INNOCENT explanation of software patents. INNOCENT explanations don't include the obvious kind of scams pulled like this. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From adam at rosa.com Mon Jan 20 22:35:18 1997 From: adam at rosa.com (Adam philipp) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:35:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701210416.UAA28041@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970120223411.00713a0c@mail.infonex.com> At 09:23 PM 1/20/97 -0500, you wrote: > Recall that all security is economics. The airlines want the >appearance of security without having to pay for it. > > The '3 questions' ("Pack your luggage? let it out of your >sight? Taking any gifts?") originated with El Al, where they are the >introduction to a very expensive (and privacy invading) set of >screening questions. The El Al people are trained to watch you as >they ask the questions, and respond to signs of lying or rehersal. >The Americans read the questions off the screen, and pay no attention >to your answers. True, however the number of questions asked by El Al decreases amazingly when you answer in Hebrew, however that did not stop me being addressed by five security personnel after a trip where had been doing a photo documentary and was still wearing a photo vest full of black metal cannisters (lenses). Of course when the security head finally approached me I used Hebrew and that was then end of the episode. Unfortunately speaking English is not a very good determination of airline safety. Adam Esq. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-\ | My PGP key is available on my |Unauthorized interception violates | | home page: http://www.rosa.com |federal law (18 USC Section 2700 et| |=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|seq.). In any case, PGP encrypted | |SUB ROSA...see home page... |communications are preferred for | | -=[ FUCK THE CDA]=- |sensitive materials. | \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-/ If A is a success in life, then A = x + y + z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut. Albert Einstein (1879-1955) From blizz at capella.net Mon Jan 20 22:57:26 1997 From: blizz at capella.net (blizz at capella.net) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:57:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Moment of your Time. Message-ID: <199701210701.CAA22866@capella.net> If I could just have a moment of your time, this is an opportunity message being sent out first to those I would think might be interested. I have a network marketing opportunity to make GOOD money with MINIMAL effort. I will not take up your time with the details. If you are serious about making REAL money in the MLM game, just reply with OK in the message subject and I will send you a Webpage that will explain better than I could ever do via Email. This program uses a database to place people in your downline AUTOMATICALLY as they sign up. you can spend little or even NO time recruiting, the choice is yours. I have never claimed to be articulate when sending Email, so I will end it here, but trust me, this is worth AT LEAST taking a look at. After all, if we don't have the time to check out NEW opportunity's, are we really being honest to ourselves in expecting to ever make money at this? If you wish to be removed from my mailing list, just reply to this with REMOVE in the subject line, and you will automatically be taken from my future mailing lists. I hope you choose to reply with OK, you really should at least take a look... Thanks, and GOOD LUCK Either way! From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 20 22:59:18 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 22:59:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701210535.AAA05654@oak.liii.com> Message-ID: <32E484AD.7B39@sk.sympatico.ca> Jane Jefferson wrote: > > If Dr. Vulis is indeed an adjunct professor at Fordham > University, I think that perhaps he has been hanging out and drinking > too many beers with my former philosophy professor Quentin Lauer. ;-7 All the good computer people have degrees in Political Philosophy, and the like. People with actual computer science degrees, etc., seem to be more astute at office politics, however. It's a strange world. > And fiendishly, it is the very chaos and anarchy and random chance > espoused by proponents of the cypherpunk philosophy that allows these > people to gain this power, unchecked! I think that the 'cypherpunk philosophy' is history, now. It seems to me that many of the CypherPunks have gotten their piece of the pie and are mostly concerned with big business Cypher, and wish that the Punks would just go away. There is always an essential element behind every movement, and those who are active in espousing the tenets of that movement, be they the 'suits' or the 'jeans', are seldom any more than mouthpieces for those who continue to work toward essential goals no matter what the surface manifestations of a group seem to indicate. > Thus, the real problem ends up being not "how to control the government > so that the government doesn't control us", but "how to deal with the > government when it goes into control-freak mode". > the deadliest person alive - the toughest and > the meanest, and the most effective in the face of all the chaos, would > not be the person who was capable of preserving their privacy. Rather, > it would be the one who was capable of surviving in it's complete > absence. It might well be that the purpose of evolution is to weed out those who cannot survive in both scenarios. > This is not to denigrate the efforts of the cypherpunks, but merely to > point out an area that they may not have thought of as a method to > battle the trend towards fascism. Many haven't, some have. Between the Hermit and the Fool, stand many who are merely occupying a space. There are those who theorize that genius' and the insane are the forerunners of the new directions humanity will take. I subscribe to the CypherPunks list so that I can monitor both at the same time. Toto From jcr at idiom.com Mon Jan 20 23:08:00 1997 From: jcr at idiom.com (John C. Randolph) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 23:08:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Arkansas Phone Scramblers, etc. Message-ID: <199701210707.XAA04133@idiom.com> I just had an interesting exchange with the latest person to take up residence in my bozo filter. I get this message from some clown I've never heard of, sent from AOL, saying that he wants one of these Radio Shack scrambler frobs, and hinting that he'd be willing to pay lots for it. I sent him back a note pointing out, among other things, that I don't know him, he doesn't know me, and that we're talking about buying and selling a frob that at least one set of JBT's doesn't think he should have. I concluded by telling him that I wouldn't sell him one if I had one, that I wouldn't tell him whether I had one, and that if he wants to have a private conversation with someone, he should just get a copy of PGP phone, like everyone else. He sent me a huffy note, saying I'd better learn some diplomacy. So, what do you think guys? Did I just piss off some federal prosecutor who was hoping to body-grab me to a clueless jusrisdiction like Arkansas to try me for crypto-terrorism, or did I piss off another fucking AOL'er? Amused and Torqued at the same time, -jcr From wcampbel at peganet.com Mon Jan 20 23:25:56 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 23:25:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" Message-ID: <199701210718.CAA16490@mercury.peganet.com> Toto If what you say is true, then Dr. DV K's efforts are quite possibly > the most important issue being addressed in this conference, because > behind free speech, lies the most important issue of all--when does > it start, and when does it stop. As a long time lurker (much longer than many of the numerous relatively recent vociferous posters) I *must* speak up. If the dear "Doctor's" posting are indeed a "grand" experiment in newsgroup (or maillist) sociology, then it seems they are akin to experiments in recent history; if the patient dies, so what? There are other lists... While many of you think that the ability of a list to withstand constant spamming is an important issue; the government is busily working to outlaw encryption and privacy, and I fear that much is lost by the side issue of the "how easily can I kill a list". I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced. > The military-industrial complex proclaims this necessary for the > purposes of state-security, and denies that it is used in order to keep > their 'sins' from being exposed. (If you believe this, then please > contact me by private email regarding an ocean-front property I have > available in Tucson, AZ. If you act quickly, I will throw in a set > of the Amazing Ginzu Knives as an added bonus.) This is very true, but I cannot understand why you think that the attempt to disrupt and destroy this list a necessary step in the task of resisting this governmental effort. > As far as I am concerned, any CypherPunk who believes that the > socio/politico issues surrounding cryptography are not important > enough to be an integral part of this list is falling into the > same type of trap as those who think that they can become good > cryptographers without becoming good cryptanalysts. Again, I can't understand why "killing the messenger" is advancing the issues of privacy and crypto issues. How does the posting of numerous crude anti-Tim May messages promote personal privacy? > > "In peacetime, a warlike man sets upon himself." -- Nietzsche > "In times of war, a peacelike man sets upon others." > Bubba Rom Dos This seems horribly to describe the current situation. =Bill= From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 00:20:33 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 00:20:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? In-Reply-To: <199701210631.WAA03064@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <32E48B73.6F00@sk.sympatico.ca> jim bell wrote: > In short, I think it's absolutely foolish to believe that any sort of > workable system could ever have been arranged to patent software, even if > all of the issues above had been addressed fairly. And the reason I asked > for an "innocent" explanation is to give people the benefit of the doubt so > that they could show that the system was working. It isn't, and you know it. Sure the 'system' is working. Software patents were begun as a means for the government to exert control over the direction of software development. It's the same thing as crypto-export regulations. They established a dick-licking order for those who want to whore their way to riches under government rule. So now the quickest way to export your product is to name it 'Crypto Light'. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 00:20:34 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 00:20:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: You can now subscr. to the moderated/unmoderated/flames lists In-Reply-To: <199701140637.WAA14213@toad.com> Message-ID: <32E4905C.4045@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > I don't like to admit to it, but I've practiced baiting for many years This startling announcement ranks right up there at the top of the 'surprise' scale, along with K.D. Lang's announcement that she is gay. (Like the Butch (crew-cut) hairstyle was not a major hint.) By the way, when I espoused my opinion that the moderation announcement's "your suggestions will be considered" was merely political rhetoric, I was offered (and took) a bet of 50,000 electronic porno byte-credits on whether or not I was right. My opponent and I agreed that lack of any serious recognition of the list member's input would be taken as a sign of my supposition being correct. I am of the belief that I have won the bet. Does anyone have any proof to the contrary? Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 00:20:39 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 00:20:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" In-Reply-To: <199701210718.CAA16490@mercury.peganet.com> Message-ID: <32E498F7.6FDB@sk.sympatico.ca> Bill Campbell wrote: > While many of you think that the ability of a list to withstand > constant spamming is an important issue; the government is busily > working to outlaw encryption and privacy, and I fear that much > is lost by the side issue of the "how easily can I kill a list". The "About Cypherpunks" intro to the list states, "Cypherpunks know how to attack a system and how to defend it." "Cypherpunks love to practice." If I choose to join the "Venemous Snakes" list, I'm not going to complain about getting bit every now and again. > I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the > more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced. Dr. Vulis? There was an 'attempt' to silence him, but it hasn't worked, to date. > I cannot understand why you think that > the attempt to disrupt and destroy this list a necessary step > in the task of resisting this governmental effort. I haven't seen any evidence of an attempt to destroy this list. I've seen many attempts to manipulate the list's direction, but that is another matter. > Again, I can't understand why "killing the messenger" is advancing > the issues of privacy and crypto issues. There was a crypto-messenger named DataETRetch that 'advanced' their version of crypto on this list, and they left their heads on the chopping block on their way out. If your team can't even make it through the scrimmages, then they don't belong in the game. And if you find yourself suggesting, "Why don't we just play 'touch', instead of 'tackle'.", then you're probably getting too old and tired to play in the major leagues. > How does the posting of numerous crude anti-Tim May messages promote > personal privacy? It doesn't. 'Stopping' the annoyance of these messages promotes personal privacy. > > > "In peacetime, a warlike man sets upon himself." -- Nietzsche > > "In times of war, a peacelike man sets upon others." > > Bubba Rom Dos > > This seems horribly to describe the current situation. No shit, Sherlock. Toto From proff at suburbia.net Tue Jan 21 01:17:18 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net (proff at suburbia.net) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 01:17:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math In-Reply-To: <199701201611.IAA12389@toad.com> Message-ID: <19970121091654.3561.qmail@suburbia.net> > >and > > > >4) This bullshit is extremely annoying to those of us who has some real > > training in math, even more so than the regular bullshit on this list. Perhaps your 'real training in math' could show itself and put an end to the discussion. From field at pipeline.com Tue Jan 21 01:18:10 1997 From: field at pipeline.com (Richard L. Field) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 01:18:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970121042128.0a871362@pop.pipeline.com> In reply to Solveig Bernstein's First Amendment challenge questions: I read the new regs as permitting: (i) publication of source code in paper form (including publications reproduced on microfilm or on prerecorded phonograph records), or in the form of a motion picture film and soundtrack (section 734.3(b)(2)); and, separately, (ii) teaching or discussion of information "about" cryptography (section 744.9). The export of other encryption materials (including the distribution to non-US persons of source or object code on diskettes) is restricted, even if the materials are publicly available "educational information" for release by instruction in catalog courses and associated teaching laboratories of academic institutions (section 734.9). Technical assistance activities that go beyond "mere" teaching or discussion of information about cryptography are restricted, if they show "intent" to aid a foreign person in the development or manufacture, outside the United States, of controlled encryption commodities and software. This is a General Prohibition (see section 736.2(b)(7)(ii)). I think one question to be resolved is: could the "mere" teaching about cryptography (which is okay), *coupled* with distribution of source code in paper form (which is otherwise okay because it is not, by itself, subject to the EAR - see note to section 734.3(b)(2) and (b)(3)), be considered a violation of the EAR because it demonstrates "intent" to aid a foreign person in the development of encryption software? One would hope not (see Bernstein), but the new 734.9 seems to imply that such a combination may be restricted. Thus, a potental First Amendment challenge to the new regs would be a challenge to a restriction on teaching coupled with paper publication/distribution of source code. Another would be a challenge to the restriction on non-paper publication/distribution, whether or not coupled with teaching. - Richard Field (For discussion purposes only. Not legal advice or a legal opinion.) On Mon, 20 Jan 1997 14:45:44 -0500 (EST) you wrote (to Declan McCullagh): > >What have the new crypto regs done to the "technical data" and the "public >domain" exemptions from ITAR? > >The problem is this: as I understand it, the Commerce Dept. regs exempt >teaching and print presentations generally, but these exemptions do not >apply to "encryption software." > >Does this mean that the exemptions do not apply to *teaching about* >encryption software or *publications about* encryption software? Or *only* >that the exemptions do not apply to diskette-contained source code or object >code. > >In other words, the new regs might completely decontrol teaching and >publication of something like Professor Bernstein's Snuffle. > >On the other hand, the new regs might, like ITAR, restrict teaching and >publication of Snuffle (as well as publication of source code in diskette >format). > >The purpose of the question is to understand whether a First Amendment >challenge to the new regs is a First Amendment challenge to a restriction on >*teaching, publication, and program distribution* or just a challenge to a >restriction on *program distribution.* > > >Solveig Bernstein, Esq. >(202) 789-5274 >(202) 842-3490 (fax) > >Assistant Director of Telecommunications & Technology Studies >Cato Institute >1000 Mass. Ave. NW >Washington, DC 20001 From perry at alpha.jpunix.com Tue Jan 21 03:42:33 1997 From: perry at alpha.jpunix.com (John A. Perry) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 03:42:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Nex type2.list/pubring.mix Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello Everyone! There is a new type2.list/pubring.mix combination on jpunix.com. The Web version is located at www.jpunix.com and the FTP version is at ftp.jpunix.com. This version reflects the introduction of the wazoo remailer. John Perry KG5RG perry at alpha.jpunix.com PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome! Amateur Radio Address: kg5rg at kg5rg.ampr.org WWW - http://www.jpunix.com PGP 2.62 key for perry at jpunix.com is on the keyservers. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMuSrVFOTpEThrthvAQF3VQP/WnfaCY5FYNyImKDX2p5HqjevMzw98bxR SsiKqWVUTRxEd10rTxPTBfVpq/d+kfDkWs3HQEc/Z2a3LYXwZ/8bFkr9qXTP2wOq L5PjjpD3QwfJVa2wv+DWYgn07rTyKhe5kOti4YfTt//M7F3S0T/BLMuggG/BXKyB ccUyqt16PL4= =+wMo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Tue Jan 21 04:40:15 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 04:40:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701210140.RAA25601@toad.com> Message-ID: <32E4B91C.4652@vail.tivoli.com> Jane Jefferson wrote: > > That appears to be the main brunt of his efforts, to "push the > envelope" of free speech in order to force it's definition. Well, the irritating part is that I think he's pushing the wrong envelope. Why anyone would expect any particular degree of "freedom" to use a service run for free by a private individual is beyond me. I appreciate the service, but I don't take it for granted and I certainly don't take it as an inalienable right. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Tue Jan 21 04:41:27 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 04:41:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quantum computers/Java of a different sort In-Reply-To: <199701202143.NAA19177@toad.com> Message-ID: <32E4B968.28DA@vail.tivoli.com> Mike McNally poorly edited a forwarded note: > ... junk ... Sorry. -- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From trei at process.com Tue Jan 21 06:15:47 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:15:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quantum computers/Java of a different sort Message-ID: <199701211415.GAA06453@toad.com> > From: Mike McNally > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Quantum computers/Java of a different sort > For all you quantum computer fans, see > > http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/html/970117c.htm > -- > Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin Shades of the Infinite Improbability Drive! (cf Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy) Peter Trei trei at process.com From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 21 06:40:27 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:40:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes Message-ID: <199701211440.GAA06625@toad.com> hjk wrote: > Just one thing about the names of the different lists: I received a > mail listing the changes to come. It was very easy to understand that > I am going to get the moderated list if I do not change my subscription. > I'll find out if I will miss something. We'll see. > I wonder who is so brainless, not to understand what's going on. > Do you really think the subscribers are pure Idiots? Well, Heinz. You live in a country full of people, ordinary people, variously called the hoi polloi, the sheeple, the unwashed masses, and other interesting names. Many credible and respected authors and commentators have made references to the masses in one form or another as "stupid, lazy, ignorant, selfish, etc.", or even "almost useless". Now whatever you think of your fellow citizens, or even those of the USA (to name an example), I'm sure is OK on whatever basis you apply your judgement. But I guarantee you that the people on the cypherpunks list are no more or less intelligent than the people who vegetate in front of their TV sets every day, right there where you live, in all probability. If you believe that your fellow citizens vote intelligently, then I respond that cypherpunks vote intelligently. What do you think? From thad at hammerhead.com Tue Jan 21 06:40:29 1997 From: thad at hammerhead.com (Thaddeus J. Beier) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:40:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Question on Diffie-Hellman patent Message-ID: <199701211440.GAA06630@toad.com> > > Diffie-Hellman 4,200,770 Sept. 6, 1977 Apr. 29, 1980 Sept. 6, 1997 > > Hellman-Merkle 4,218,582 Oct. 6, 1977 Aug. 19, 1980 Oct. 6, 1997 > > RSA 4,405,829 Dec. 14, 1977 Sept. 20, 1983 Sept. 20, 2000 > > So who's planning on throwing a big party on Sept. 6th? Will Jim Bizos be > celebrating? :-) Well, Jim Bizdos now has an unlimited license to the DH and HM patents, due to a recent settlement with Cylink, so he probably won't be celebrating. I'd wait 'til the October 6th date for the real party, RSA and Cylink's lawyers have always claimed the HM gave them a claim to all of public key cryptography...that's the one I've been waiting for, and it's only another month :-) This is going to be a very good year. If you look at Roger Schlafly's home page, http://bbs.cruzio.com/~schlafly you'll see that he's been fighting these guys for years; and he concedes now that even with his herculean efforts to move the process along, the trial probably won't come to a head before the patents expire. I'd love to see his estimate of how much their lawyers have spent on this over the years... -- Thaddeus Beier thad at hammerhead.com Visual Effects Supervisor 408) 287-6770 Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/people/thad From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 21 06:55:27 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:55:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701211455.GAA06742@toad.com> Jane Jefferson wrote: > > The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > individual. An excellent point, Jane. Worth remembering. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 21 06:55:28 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:55:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes Message-ID: <199701211455.GAA06743@toad.com> [Cc: alex at agate.net] Dale Thorn wrote: > > Many credible and respected authors and commentators have made references > to the masses in one form or another as "stupid, lazy, ignorant, > selfish, etc.", or even "almost useless". > In the classical example, you should say "LYING, FUCKING, THIEVING, STUPID," and so on. The art of insults has developed somewhat. Alexplore is one of the best masters after Dr. Vulis (some would say even better than Dr. Vulis, but that depends on taste). if you do not get it, it is because you need to know the context... - Igor. From jcr at idiom.com Tue Jan 21 06:55:44 1997 From: jcr at idiom.com (John C. Randolph) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:55:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Arkansas Phone Scramblers, etc. Message-ID: <199701211455.GAA06791@toad.com> I just had an interesting exchange with the latest person to take up residence in my bozo filter. I get this message from some clown I've never heard of, sent from AOL, saying that he wants one of these Radio Shack scrambler frobs, and hinting that he'd be willing to pay lots for it. I sent him back a note pointing out, among other things, that I don't know him, he doesn't know me, and that we're talking about buying and selling a frob that at least one set of JBT's doesn't think he should have. I concluded by telling him that I wouldn't sell him one if I had one, that I wouldn't tell him whether I had one, and that if he wants to have a private conversation with someone, he should just get a copy of PGP phone, like everyone else. He sent me a huffy note, saying I'd better learn some diplomacy. So, what do you think guys? Did I just piss off some federal prosecutor who was hoping to body-grab me to a clueless jusrisdiction like Arkansas to try me for crypto-terrorism, or did I piss off another fucking AOL'er? Amused and Torqued at the same time, -jcr From adam at rosa.com Tue Jan 21 06:55:49 1997 From: adam at rosa.com (Adam philipp) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:55:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701211455.GAA06810@toad.com> At 09:23 PM 1/20/97 -0500, you wrote: > Recall that all security is economics. The airlines want the >appearance of security without having to pay for it. > > The '3 questions' ("Pack your luggage? let it out of your >sight? Taking any gifts?") originated with El Al, where they are the >introduction to a very expensive (and privacy invading) set of >screening questions. The El Al people are trained to watch you as >they ask the questions, and respond to signs of lying or rehersal. >The Americans read the questions off the screen, and pay no attention >to your answers. True, however the number of questions asked by El Al decreases amazingly when you answer in Hebrew, however that did not stop me being addressed by five security personnel after a trip where had been doing a photo documentary and was still wearing a photo vest full of black metal cannisters (lenses). Of course when the security head finally approached me I used Hebrew and that was then end of the episode. Unfortunately speaking English is not a very good determination of airline safety. Adam Esq. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-\ | My PGP key is available on my |Unauthorized interception violates | | home page: http://www.rosa.com |federal law (18 USC Section 2700 et| |=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-|seq.). In any case, PGP encrypted | |SUB ROSA...see home page... |communications are preferred for | | -=[ FUCK THE CDA]=- |sensitive materials. | \=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-+-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-/ If A is a success in life, then A = x + y + z. Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut. Albert Einstein (1879-1955) From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 21 06:55:56 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:55:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701211455.GAA06825@toad.com> Jane Jefferson wrote: > Also Sprach Toto:[snip] > And fiendishly, it is the very chaos and anarchy and random chance > espoused by proponents of the cypherpunk philosophy that allows these > people to gain this power, unchecked![snip] > We have to face the fact that humans are predators, and as long as > we are, the cycle of this behavior will continue. Jane is showing signs of independent thought. Tsk tsk. > The human race has not evolved to such a point where privacy is not an > essential thing. If tomorrow everyone turned instantly telepathic and > we all were capable of knowing each other's thoughts, you'd best believe > the suicide rate would be beyond belief. Buisnesses would instantly > fail, countries would instantly be absorbed by other countries, many > relationships based on love and trust would be destroyed. > And during that time, the deadliest person alive - the toughest and > the meanest, and the most effective in the face of all the chaos, would > not be the person who was capable of preserving their privacy. Rather, > it would be the one who was capable of surviving in it's complete absence. Telepathy would do no good. You can (if you're hooked into someone's "consciousness") see the general outlines of thought, feel some of the emotions, etc., but the construction of one's abstract thoughts can't be interpreted by an observing person or computer. There are too many variables and random influences. Perhaps someday the quantum machines will make headway there. In the meantime, we can imitate, but we can't speak the full language, a la Star Trek IV. BTW, the suicide rate would not go ballistic, since the suicide rate as reported today is largely ficticious anyway. People would switch to survival mode *very* quickly, which would have the beneficial effect of taking their minds off of their pre-survival-crisis problems. From wcampbel at peganet.com Tue Jan 21 06:55:59 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:55:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" Message-ID: <199701211455.GAA06829@toad.com> Toto If what you say is true, then Dr. DV K's efforts are quite possibly > the most important issue being addressed in this conference, because > behind free speech, lies the most important issue of all--when does > it start, and when does it stop. As a long time lurker (much longer than many of the numerous relatively recent vociferous posters) I *must* speak up. If the dear "Doctor's" posting are indeed a "grand" experiment in newsgroup (or maillist) sociology, then it seems they are akin to experiments in recent history; if the patient dies, so what? There are other lists... While many of you think that the ability of a list to withstand constant spamming is an important issue; the government is busily working to outlaw encryption and privacy, and I fear that much is lost by the side issue of the "how easily can I kill a list". I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced. > The military-industrial complex proclaims this necessary for the > purposes of state-security, and denies that it is used in order to keep > their 'sins' from being exposed. (If you believe this, then please > contact me by private email regarding an ocean-front property I have > available in Tucson, AZ. If you act quickly, I will throw in a set > of the Amazing Ginzu Knives as an added bonus.) This is very true, but I cannot understand why you think that the attempt to disrupt and destroy this list a necessary step in the task of resisting this governmental effort. > As far as I am concerned, any CypherPunk who believes that the > socio/politico issues surrounding cryptography are not important > enough to be an integral part of this list is falling into the > same type of trap as those who think that they can become good > cryptographers without becoming good cryptanalysts. Again, I can't understand why "killing the messenger" is advancing the issues of privacy and crypto issues. How does the posting of numerous crude anti-Tim May messages promote personal privacy? > > "In peacetime, a warlike man sets upon himself." -- Nietzsche > "In times of war, a peacelike man sets upon others." > Bubba Rom Dos This seems horribly to describe the current situation. =Bill= From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 06:57:23 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:57:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? Message-ID: <199701211457.GAA06835@toad.com> jim bell wrote: > In short, I think it's absolutely foolish to believe that any sort of > workable system could ever have been arranged to patent software, even if > all of the issues above had been addressed fairly. And the reason I asked > for an "innocent" explanation is to give people the benefit of the doubt so > that they could show that the system was working. It isn't, and you know it. Sure the 'system' is working. Software patents were begun as a means for the government to exert control over the direction of software development. It's the same thing as crypto-export regulations. They established a dick-licking order for those who want to whore their way to riches under government rule. So now the quickest way to export your product is to name it 'Crypto Light'. Toto From jimbell at pacifier.com Tue Jan 21 06:57:39 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 06:57:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: RSA challenge: is it legal to try? Message-ID: <199701211457.GAA06836@toad.com> At 05:33 PM 1/16/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >At 08:13 PM 1/14/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >>US. Alone, that would have denied non-US patents to RSA. However, such an >>explanation grandly ignores the fact that computer software (let alone >>mathematics in general) was not considered patentable ANYWHERE (?) before >>public-key systems made their appearance in 1976. >... >>I'm still waiting for an "innocent" explanation for the US patent office >>beginning to issue software patents. I don't think there is one. > >The first software patent was Dennis Ritchie's patent on setUID. So what year was that? >Computer security is one area that, if you're going to allow patents >on software at all (which I think are a bad idea, but that's politics) No, it's not JUST politics. It's also (im)practicality. Even if, arguably, software OUGHT TO be patentable, going from a time in which software wasn't patentable to software patentability is essentially impossible. First, it requires (or, at least, ought to require, if they were to do it right...which they didn't) a searchable compilation of all previously existing software ideas and constructs to ensure that obvious or previously-existing ideas were not given patents. Since prior to about 1976 there was no motivation on anyone's part to collect such a database (secrecy being the most useful protection) then it was practically guaranteed that the Patent Office would be unable (or unwilling???) to refuse to grant patents on old ideas. Further, unlike a lot of big-ticket engineering, programming can be done by individuals with a relatively low-cost computer. Many if not most of the software constructs that were later called "patentable" were probably actually invented by people who had no interest in patenting them...and the few greedy ones who did were given the rewards. That's not fair, particularly when they may have been invented during a time in which software patents were known to be impossible to get. Also, since unlike other areas of engineering current programmers didn't have to pay for previous software constructs ("do-loops were free") there should have been distinct limits on the royalties that anybody could ask for in software-patent cases. Another problem is that much of the costs of most software companies are personnel and advertising. Any realistic royalty system (even assuming all other problems were solved) would have to determine what portion of a program's functionality was attributable to a patented concept, which I assert is essentially impossible. Do you charge for execution time? (the guy who patents the "wait loop" would make a fortune!) Length of code? Number of times called? Royalties must, presumably, be limited to a reasonable and practical level, and also (obviously) they may also have to be divided among a number of potential claimants, in the same way that (for instance) a car manufacturer may have to pay royalties on potentially hundreds or even thousands of patents to sell a single car. If no mechanism currently exists to arrive at a fair division of such royalties (about 20 years after the patents for the various encryption systems were filed) , I think it may be presumed that nobody seriously believes that this is possible. In short, I think it's absolutely foolish to believe that any sort of workable system could ever have been arranged to patent software, even if all of the issues above had been addressed fairly. And the reason I asked for an "innocent" explanation is to give people the benefit of the doubt so that they could show that the system was working. It isn't, and you know it. It's not surprising that no REAL LAWYERS (tm) around here were willing to tackle this issue. They know it's all a fraud. >>It also ignores the strong likelihood that the reason for the Patent-Office >>policy change (done, apparently, without benefit of a corresponding law >>change) was because with public-key/RSA there was finally an example of >>software the government wished to deny to the average citizen, >>and the only mechanism (short of secrecy, which was broken) to do so >>was to patent it. > >D,H,R,S, and A didn't _have_ to apply for patents.... >With hardware security products, the NSA has the power to seize and >classify systems which are applying for patents, for no particularly >good reason, and they used to do it often. Actually, I don't think they REALLY "have the power." What I mean by this is simple: Since American patents are supposedly grantable for applications filed up to one year prior, there is no guarantee that they will even see a patent application to grant until long after the cat is out of the bag. For instance, there was >an analog scrambler for CB radios that got its patent applications >seized in about 1980. And most software patent applications for >crypto have involved machinations to avoid getting trapped by this, >like publishing in foreign journals before submitting applications. Why should they have to publish in FOREIGN journals? Like I said before, since up to one year can elapse after disclosure (and, apparently, even longer in the case of the DHM patent, submission to ANY journal, not merely domestic ones, should do to prevent NSA's tricks. (and today, publishing on the Internet should achieve exactly the same results.) Richard Schoeppel commented this way: "Roger Schlafly has made a reasonable case that the DHM patent is invalid because the invention was "published" more than a year before the patent was filed. (He dug up a copy of a preprint they were circulating with a stamped received-date of ?May 1976?.)" What are we to conclude? These sleazebags can't even follow their own rules! Look, I asked for an INNOCENT explanation of software patents. INNOCENT explanations don't include the obvious kind of scams pulled like this. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From proff at suburbia.net Tue Jan 21 07:10:31 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net (proff at suburbia.net) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:10:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Take it to sci.math Message-ID: <199701211510.HAA06961@toad.com> > >and > > > >4) This bullshit is extremely annoying to those of us who has some real > > training in math, even more so than the regular bullshit on this list. Perhaps your 'real training in math' could show itself and put an end to the discussion. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 07:10:45 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:10:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: You can now subscr. to the moderated/unmoderated/flames lists Message-ID: <199701211510.HAA06970@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > I don't like to admit to it, but I've practiced baiting for many years This startling announcement ranks right up there at the top of the 'surprise' scale, along with K.D. Lang's announcement that she is gay. (Like the Butch (crew-cut) hairstyle was not a major hint.) By the way, when I espoused my opinion that the moderation announcement's "your suggestions will be considered" was merely political rhetoric, I was offered (and took) a bet of 50,000 electronic porno byte-credits on whether or not I was right. My opponent and I agreed that lack of any serious recognition of the list member's input would be taken as a sign of my supposition being correct. I am of the belief that I have won the bet. Does anyone have any proof to the contrary? Toto From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Tue Jan 21 07:10:49 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:10:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quantum computers/Java of a different sort Message-ID: <199701211510.HAA06980@toad.com> Mike McNally poorly edited a forwarded note: > ... junk ... Sorry. -- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From trei at process.com Tue Jan 21 07:10:53 1997 From: trei at process.com (Peter Trei) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:10:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quantum computers/Java of a different sort Message-ID: <199701211510.HAA06989@toad.com> > From: Mike McNally > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Quantum computers/Java of a different sort > For all you quantum computer fans, see > > http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/html/970117c.htm > -- > Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin Shades of the Infinite Improbability Drive! (cf Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy) Peter Trei trei at process.com From perry at alpha.jpunix.com Tue Jan 21 07:10:58 1997 From: perry at alpha.jpunix.com (John A. Perry) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:10:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Nex type2.list/pubring.mix Message-ID: <199701211510.HAA07001@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello Everyone! There is a new type2.list/pubring.mix combination on jpunix.com. The Web version is located at www.jpunix.com and the FTP version is at ftp.jpunix.com. This version reflects the introduction of the wazoo remailer. John Perry KG5RG perry at alpha.jpunix.com PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome! Amateur Radio Address: kg5rg at kg5rg.ampr.org WWW - http://www.jpunix.com PGP 2.62 key for perry at jpunix.com is on the keyservers. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMuSrVFOTpEThrthvAQF3VQP/WnfaCY5FYNyImKDX2p5HqjevMzw98bxR SsiKqWVUTRxEd10rTxPTBfVpq/d+kfDkWs3HQEc/Z2a3LYXwZ/8bFkr9qXTP2wOq L5PjjpD3QwfJVa2wv+DWYgn07rTyKhe5kOti4YfTt//M7F3S0T/BLMuggG/BXKyB ccUyqt16PL4= =+wMo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Tue Jan 21 07:11:00 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:11:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701211511.HAA07002@toad.com> Jane Jefferson wrote: > > That appears to be the main brunt of his efforts, to "push the > envelope" of free speech in order to force it's definition. Well, the irritating part is that I think he's pushing the wrong envelope. Why anyone would expect any particular degree of "freedom" to use a service run for free by a private individual is beyond me. I appreciate the service, but I don't take it for granted and I certainly don't take it as an inalienable right. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 21 07:11:19 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:11:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" In-Reply-To: <199701210718.CAA16490@mercury.peganet.com> Message-ID: <32E4DC86.37C2@gte.net> Bill Campbell wrote: > Toto As a long time lurker (much longer than many of the numerous > relatively recent vociferous posters) I *must* speak up. > If the dear "Doctor's" posting are indeed a "grand" experiment > in newsgroup (or maillist) sociology, then it seems they are akin to > experiments in recent history; if the patient dies, so what? There are > other lists... > While many of you think that the ability of a list to withstand > constant spamming is an important issue; the government is busily > working to outlaw encryption and privacy, and I fear that much > is lost by the side issue of the "how easily can I kill a list". > I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the > more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced.[snip] > This is very true, but I cannot understand why you think that > the attempt to disrupt and destroy this list a necessary step > in the task of resisting this governmental effort.[mo' snip] > Again, I can't understand why "killing the messenger" is advancing > the issues of privacy and crypto issues. How does the posting of > numerous crude anti-Tim May messages promote personal privacy? From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Jan 21 07:11:33 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:11:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Disseminating public-key crypto source code Message-ID: <199701211511.HAA07025@toad.com> At 01:11 PM 1/20/97 -0500, Jon Orwant wrote: > 2) PKPesque: Using public-key crypto is an infringement, > although disseminating/possessing the source > code is not. Disseminating (and even writing) the source code may be an infringement. 35 USC 271 says: "Infringement of patent (a) Except as otherwise provided in this title, whoever without authority makes, uses, or sells any patented invention, within the United States during the term of the patent therefor, infringes the patent. (b) Whoever actively induces infringement of a patent shall be liable as an infringer. (c) Whoever sells a component of a patented machine, manufacture, combination or composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing a patented process, constituting a material part of the invention, knowing the same to be especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of such patent, and not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial noninfringing use, shall be liable as a contributory infringer. [...]" Sorry. Software/algorithm patents make it difficult to develop and distribute free software. If that pisses you off, tell your congresspeople you don't like software/algorithm patents. Perhaps someday Congress will develop a sensible scheme for "protecting" creators' rights in their software. But they haven't yet. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From field at pipeline.com Tue Jan 21 07:11:40 1997 From: field at pipeline.com (Richard L. Field) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:11:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs Message-ID: <199701211511.HAA07040@toad.com> In reply to Solveig Bernstein's First Amendment challenge questions: I read the new regs as permitting: (i) publication of source code in paper form (including publications reproduced on microfilm or on prerecorded phonograph records), or in the form of a motion picture film and soundtrack (section 734.3(b)(2)); and, separately, (ii) teaching or discussion of information "about" cryptography (section 744.9). The export of other encryption materials (including the distribution to non-US persons of source or object code on diskettes) is restricted, even if the materials are publicly available "educational information" for release by instruction in catalog courses and associated teaching laboratories of academic institutions (section 734.9). Technical assistance activities that go beyond "mere" teaching or discussion of information about cryptography are restricted, if they show "intent" to aid a foreign person in the development or manufacture, outside the United States, of controlled encryption commodities and software. This is a General Prohibition (see section 736.2(b)(7)(ii)). I think one question to be resolved is: could the "mere" teaching about cryptography (which is okay), *coupled* with distribution of source code in paper form (which is otherwise okay because it is not, by itself, subject to the EAR - see note to section 734.3(b)(2) and (b)(3)), be considered a violation of the EAR because it demonstrates "intent" to aid a foreign person in the development of encryption software? One would hope not (see Bernstein), but the new 734.9 seems to imply that such a combination may be restricted. Thus, a potental First Amendment challenge to the new regs would be a challenge to a restriction on teaching coupled with paper publication/distribution of source code. Another would be a challenge to the restriction on non-paper publication/distribution, whether or not coupled with teaching. - Richard Field (For discussion purposes only. Not legal advice or a legal opinion.) On Mon, 20 Jan 1997 14:45:44 -0500 (EST) you wrote (to Declan McCullagh): > >What have the new crypto regs done to the "technical data" and the "public >domain" exemptions from ITAR? > >The problem is this: as I understand it, the Commerce Dept. regs exempt >teaching and print presentations generally, but these exemptions do not >apply to "encryption software." > >Does this mean that the exemptions do not apply to *teaching about* >encryption software or *publications about* encryption software? Or *only* >that the exemptions do not apply to diskette-contained source code or object >code. > >In other words, the new regs might completely decontrol teaching and >publication of something like Professor Bernstein's Snuffle. > >On the other hand, the new regs might, like ITAR, restrict teaching and >publication of Snuffle (as well as publication of source code in diskette >format). > >The purpose of the question is to understand whether a First Amendment >challenge to the new regs is a First Amendment challenge to a restriction on >*teaching, publication, and program distribution* or just a challenge to a >restriction on *program distribution.* > > >Solveig Bernstein, Esq. >(202) 789-5274 >(202) 842-3490 (fax) > >Assistant Director of Telecommunications & Technology Studies >Cato Institute >1000 Mass. Ave. NW >Washington, DC 20001 From mikej2 at exabyte.com Tue Jan 21 07:11:42 1997 From: mikej2 at exabyte.com (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:11:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Disseminating public-key crypto source code Message-ID: <199701211511.HAA07045@toad.com> On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Jon Orwant wrote: > I've written a few Perl routines for public-key cryptography. I'd > like to freely disseminate the source code (starting with ElGamal) to > as many people as I can, > > It's my understanding that there are two orthogonal restrictions: > > 1) ITAResque: I can't give code to non-U.S. citizens. > 2) PKPesque: Using public-key crypto is an infringement, > although disseminating/possessing the source > code is not. > > While I'm sure these are oversimplifications, it would seem that I can > release my source code over the Internet provided I install a simple > verification mechanism (cf. MIT's PGP distribution) to ensure that > only people claiming to be U.S. citizens have access privileges. > > Am I correct? If so, why aren't more people doing this? Point 2 is the easier one -- you can research, create, and distribute patented algorithms for free. It is just in using or selling them that you need to get a license from the patent holder (directly or indirectly). Point 1 is a bit muddier, but the new EAR (which replace the ITAR) actually defines what you need to do to freely distribute cryptographic software in North America, essentially describing something like MIT's PGP distribution system and my system at http://www.sni.net/~mpj/usa/warning.htm (at least as far as is practical): ____ (ii) The export of encryption source code and object code software controlled for EI reasons under ECCN 5D002 on the Commerce Control List (see Supplement No. 1 to part 774 of the EAR) includes downloading, or causing the downloading of, such software to locations (including electronic bulletin boards, Internet file transfer protocol, and World Wide Web sites) outside the U.S., or making such software available for transfer outside the United States, over wire, cable, radio, electromagnetic, photooptical, photoelectric or other comparable communications facilities accessible to persons outside the United States, including transfers from electronic bulletin boards, Internet file transfer protocol and World Wide Web sites, unless the person making the software available takes precautions adequate to prevent unauthorized transfer of such code outside the United States. Such precautions shall include: (A) Ensuring that the facility from which the software is available controls the access to and transfers of such software through such measures as: (1) The access control system, either through automated means or human intervention, checks the address of every system requesting or receiving a transfer and verifies that such systems are located within the United States; (2) The access control system, provides every requesting or receiving party with notice that the transfer includes or would include cryptographic software subject to export controls under the Export Administration Act, and that anyone receiving such a transfer cannot export the software without a license; and (3) Every party requesting or receiving a transfer of such software must acknowledge affirmatively that he or she understands that the cryptographic software is subject to export controls under the Export Administration Act and that anyone receiving the transfer cannot export the software without a license; or (B) Taking other precautions, approved in writing by the Bureau of Export Administration, to prevent transfer of such software outside the U.S. without a license. ____ Point (1) above is done at my site, to something of an approximation, by using a .htaccess file. I'm working on improving this, some, due to some server problems, but I think that it is close enough to meet the "such measures as" criteria, especially since (2) and (3) are met pretty literally by the mechanism that routinely breaks links that attempt to bypass the warning page. Of course, this isn't perfect, and no coderpunk worth his salt would have difficulty bypassing the system if he or she were inclined to break the law, but it does allow me to post strong cryptographic software without worrying about breaking the law. Why don't more people do this? Probably because the law has usually been even more muddy than the above, and at least as irrational, and because it is more of a pain than just posting the stuff, which few people want to flaunt their disregard for the law so publicly. There is another, better way, to comply with the above using CGI scripting, but my ISP is reluctant to let me do so, so far. By the way, there is no automated way to add files to my crypto site, but if you are interested in posting quality crypto software, libraries, and documentation (like maybe some DES challenge code or RC5 cracker code), please email me at mpj at csn.net. Michael Paul Johnson Opinions herein are not necessarily Exabyte's. Work: mpj at exabyte.com http://www.exabyte.com Personal: mpj at csn.net http://www.csn.net/~mpj BBS 303-772-1062 From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 07:11:45 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 07:11:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" Message-ID: <199701211511.HAA07046@toad.com> Bill Campbell wrote: > While many of you think that the ability of a list to withstand > constant spamming is an important issue; the government is busily > working to outlaw encryption and privacy, and I fear that much > is lost by the side issue of the "how easily can I kill a list". The "About Cypherpunks" intro to the list states, "Cypherpunks know how to attack a system and how to defend it." "Cypherpunks love to practice." If I choose to join the "Venemous Snakes" list, I'm not going to complain about getting bit every now and again. > I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the > more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced. Dr. Vulis? There was an 'attempt' to silence him, but it hasn't worked, to date. > I cannot understand why you think that > the attempt to disrupt and destroy this list a necessary step > in the task of resisting this governmental effort. I haven't seen any evidence of an attempt to destroy this list. I've seen many attempts to manipulate the list's direction, but that is another matter. > Again, I can't understand why "killing the messenger" is advancing > the issues of privacy and crypto issues. There was a crypto-messenger named DataETRetch that 'advanced' their version of crypto on this list, and they left their heads on the chopping block on their way out. If your team can't even make it through the scrimmages, then they don't belong in the game. And if you find yourself suggesting, "Why don't we just play 'touch', instead of 'tackle'.", then you're probably getting too old and tired to play in the major leagues. > How does the posting of numerous crude anti-Tim May messages promote > personal privacy? It doesn't. 'Stopping' the annoyance of these messages promotes personal privacy. > > > "In peacetime, a warlike man sets upon himself." -- Nietzsche > > "In times of war, a peacelike man sets upon others." > > Bubba Rom Dos > > This seems horribly to describe the current situation. No shit, Sherlock. Toto From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 21 08:20:23 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:20:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology In-Reply-To: <199701210410.UAA28002@toad.com> Message-ID: <40uV1D91w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . What kind of movies? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 21 08:21:58 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:21:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701210610.WAA29970@toad.com> Message-ID: Jane Jefferson writes: > The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > individual. If Dr. Vulis is indeed an adjunct professor at Fordham > University, I think that perhaps he has been hanging out and drinking > too many beers with my former philosophy professor Quentin Lauer. ;-7 I haven't been teaching at Fordham for a few years. (It's too far and the pay's too low. :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 21 08:41:14 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:41:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" Message-ID: <199701211641.IAA08041@toad.com> Bill Campbell wrote: > Toto As a long time lurker (much longer than many of the numerous > relatively recent vociferous posters) I *must* speak up. > If the dear "Doctor's" posting are indeed a "grand" experiment > in newsgroup (or maillist) sociology, then it seems they are akin to > experiments in recent history; if the patient dies, so what? There are > other lists... > While many of you think that the ability of a list to withstand > constant spamming is an important issue; the government is busily > working to outlaw encryption and privacy, and I fear that much > is lost by the side issue of the "how easily can I kill a list". > I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the > more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced.[snip] > This is very true, but I cannot understand why you think that > the attempt to disrupt and destroy this list a necessary step > in the task of resisting this governmental effort.[mo' snip] > Again, I can't understand why "killing the messenger" is advancing > the issues of privacy and crypto issues. How does the posting of > numerous crude anti-Tim May messages promote personal privacy? From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 21 08:55:45 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:55:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701211655.IAA08156@toad.com> Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . What kind of movies? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 21 08:55:59 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:55:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701211655.IAA08166@toad.com> Jane Jefferson writes: > The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > individual. If Dr. Vulis is indeed an adjunct professor at Fordham > University, I think that perhaps he has been hanging out and drinking > too many beers with my former philosophy professor Quentin Lauer. ;-7 I haven't been teaching at Fordham for a few years. (It's too far and the pay's too low. :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 21 08:59:41 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:59:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Numbers we cannot talk about Message-ID: <853865191.102190.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > I know that Standard mathematical axioms yields lots of interesting > > results, but when it talks of the infinite and we are dealing > > with a practical subject like cryptography or even physics it > > should not be taken too seriously. (With respect to uncountable sets.) > > Some of the applications of these theories are very relevant. For > example, a theorem that proves that it is impossible to write a program > that would determine if any other program would stop or loop forever, is > very relevant and interesting. Absolutely, something does not have to be practical to be interesting, Igor`s example of Cantors double slash argument (useful for example in AI research) is something that seems very abstract until we find a use for it, and most abstract mathematical concepts and theorems of this kind do eventually come into use by some other class of scientists. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 21 08:59:56 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 08:59:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <01BC0792.3DE1F750@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Adam Back wrote in article <5bp18k$1cc at life.ai.mit.edu>... > GSM encrypts only the links to the station - the traffic goes in the > clear through the station. Plus A5 (crypto algorithm used in GSM) is > weak, 40 bits of effective key space. > > It could be worse to have poor crypto, than no crypto, I disagree for two reasons, first there is a big difference between having poor locks and no locks. Most locks can be picked by an expert, they are effective against many theifs however. Second if everyone in the world was using 40 bit email encryption it would prevent most of the "promiscuous" interception of communications. The danger in weak crypto is thinking that it is strong crypto. GSM is weak crypto but stops the type of snooping the Martins engaged in. If you know not to talk about something secret on one then low crypto is better than having a signal anyone can pick up on a device from radio shack. Phill From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 21 09:15:18 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 09:15:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <853865189.102181.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > >> ...but I must say the list has gone downhill sharply since > >> the start of the censorship. > > > >I guess this a classic case of seeing what you want to see. > >(Uh, Paul, the moderation experiment HASN'T STARTED YET.) I knew that when I wrote this, but the fact that Vulis has been banned from the list is most definitely censorship and has lowered the philiosophy of the list (as in original purpose and ideaology) to a lower plane and provoked a number of flame wars which would otherwise have not taken place. > No, he's got it right. The announcement of the moderation experiment > was followed by a decline in interesting threads. I noticed this too but it was not what I was referring to. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com Tue Jan 21 09:38:16 1997 From: jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com (Jeff Barber) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 09:38:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <01BC0792.3DE1F750@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199701211754.MAA13564@jafar.issl.atl.hp.com> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker writes: > Adam Back wrote in article <5bp18k$1cc at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > It could be worse to have poor crypto, than no crypto, > > I disagree for two reasons, [ snip] > The danger in weak crypto is thinking that it is strong crypto. GSM is > weak crypto but stops the type of snooping the Martins engaged in. > If you know not to talk about something secret on one then low > crypto is better than having a signal anyone can pick up on a > device from radio shack. No, the real danger in weak crypto is that the poorly-informed will not think about it *at all*. If we had "poor crypto", Newt probably wouldn't have been embarrassed by this sort of casual interception, and the issue wouldn't have been raised in the public mind. But our communications still wouldn't be safe from more determined attackers. Brouhahas like these are good for the pro-(strong-)crypto agenda. -- Jeff From korinne at datasec.net Tue Jan 21 09:46:25 1997 From: korinne at datasec.net (Korinne) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 09:46:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: DATANET SECURITY 97 PROGRAM Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970121124807.00a319e0@datasec.net> Conference program Datanet Security 1997 Annual International Conference and Exhibition on Wide Area Network Security FEBRUARY 17 - 18 - 19 - 20, 1997 HYATT REGENCY MIAMI HOTEL & CONVENTION CENTER All lectures and presentations have been confirmed Keynote speakers: Monday February 17, 1997 The 1997 Datanet Security conference will be opened with a keynote address by Dr. Ruth A. David, Deputy Director Science & Technology of the Central Intelligence Agency. Following the opening address, Mr. Stuart A. Baker will deliver a keynote speech "Legal Aspects of Network Security". Stuart Baker is partner with Steptoe & Johnson in Washington DC, and former lead counsel for the National Security Agency. Keynote speakers: Tuesday February 18, 1997 The second day of the Annual Datanet Security Conference is highlighted with a presentation by Dr. Rob Kolstad "Non-Security Issues Affecting the Future of the Internet". Rob Kolstad is President of BSDI Inc. "What's Slowing down Deployment of Security ?" is the title of the next keynote address by Novell's Chief Security Architect, Dr. Radia Perlman. She was featured in the 20th anniversary edition of Data Communications magazine as one of 20 most influential people in the field of computer networking. Keynote speaker: Wednesday February 19, 1997 This conference day we feature Mr. Scott Charney as a prominent keynote speaker. Scott Charney is the principal government authority on computer crime. He heads the federal prosecutors and leads the Computer Crime and Intellectual Properties Section within the Department of Justice. ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM Monday February 17, 1997 ELECTRONIC INTELLIGENCE "Intelligence Behind the Journal Intelligence" - Olivier Schmidt Olivier Schmidt is founding editor of several important international professional news journals and expert publications. Among these "Parapolitics", "Intelligence Newsletter" and "Intelligence". He co-authored "Intelligences Secretes" and "OSS et la Resistance Francaise". He lives and works in Paris, France. "The King of Secret Readers: Edgar Allen Poe, William Friedman, and the Logic of the Cold War" - Professor Shawn Rosenheim Shawn J. Rosenheim is Associate Professor of English at Williams College (Williamstown, Mass.), and a founding member of the Communications Technologies Research Group. His most recent publication is "The Cryptographic Imagination: Secret Writing from Edgar Poe to the Internet" (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996) DISCUSSION PANEL Traditional versus New Technologies: A Challenge for the Intelligence Communities Session and Panel Chairman - David Whipple David Whipple is Executive Director of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers, AFIO. As no other Mr. Whipple is able to illustrate the traditional methods of information gathering. INTERNET SECURITY The Changing Role of the Firewall - Stephen Flaig Mr. Flaig is Vice President for LanOptics Inc., developers of the Guardian firewall. Network Access Flexibility through RADIUS - David Dawson David Dawson is General Manager Network Security Business Unit for Ascend Communications Inc. Previously he was Chief Executive Officer of Morningstar Technologies Inc. He holds a BS in Electrical Engineering from the US Military Academy at West Point. Internet Security and the IBM Firewall - Peter Crotty Peter Crotty is worldwide responsible for IBM's technical firewall support program. Secure Access: If you don't have security everywhere, you don't have it anywhere ! - Doug LaBorde Mr. LaBorde is Manager with the Network Security Business Unit of Ascend Communications. NT SECURITY Windows NT Security: Networked Perspectives - Charles Rutstein Charles Rutstein is Principal Consultant with Price Waterhouse, and has extensive front line computer and network security experience. He authored several books on computer viruses. His latest work, dealing with Windows NT security, has just been released. NT Internet Security - Firewalls, Web-servers, and Vulnerabilities - Bill Stout Bill Stout is network security analyst and senior systems administrator with Hitachi Data Systems. He specializes in Windows NT security issues. VIRUSES Viruses and the Internet; email, Java, Active-X; the new virus carriers - Thierry Giron Thierry Giron holds a Computer Science Hon. degree from Middlesex University (London, UK), and a Business degree from ESC in Reims, France. He joined Trend Micro in Taiwan in 1992, and is since Trend's Customer Engineering Manager for the North American offices. Minimizing the Virus Threat - Glenn Jordan Glenn Jordan is the leading virus technology expert with Dr. Solomon, and is an established member of the Computer Anti-virus Research Organization, an international network of anti-virus researchers. Mr. Jordan is a graduate of the University of North Carolina. Tuesday February 18, 1997 INTERNET SECURITY Cyber Thieves - Gregg Lebovitz Gregg Lebovitz is Director of Security Products at BBN Planet. Mr. Lebovitz spent 15 years at Carnegy-Mellon University, designing, implementing and deploying network routers and distributed applications. Accounting for Square-Root Attacks in Cryptographic Design - Michael Wiener Michael Wiener is senior cryptologist with Entrust Technologies (formerly Nortel Secure Networks). His expertise is in the area of cryptanalysis, authentication, and key-exchange protocols, public-key infrastructures, design of cryptographic systems, and high-speed implementations of public-key cryptosystems. He is agraduate of the University of Waterloo (Canada). Virtual Private Networking: Integrating Internet and Intranet Security - Tony Rosati Tony Rosati is co-founder and Vice President for TimeStep Corporation. He leads design teams ranging from the development of public-key and DES based integrated circuits to the development of system level communications security solutions utilizing cryptographic techniques. Approaching End-to-End Security - Paul Ferguson Paul Ferguson is a senior expert with Cisco Systems. His principal disciplines are Internet security, large-scale routing and design architecture. NETWORK SECURITY Assurance in Products for the Internet - Alan Borrett Alan Borrett is member of the UK IT Evaluation & Certification Scheme, under authority of Her Majesty�s Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) Computer Security in the Third World: The Mexican Case - Prof. Guillermo Mallen Professor Mallen teaches and researches at the Ibero-Americana University in Mexico. He is a former President of the Mexican Academy of Informatics. Single Point Security: The Unisys Vision for Enterprise Security Administration - William Buffam William Buffam is software architect with Unisys Corp. His background is in operating systems, networking, and solution engineering. He holds a Computer Science degree from the University of Manchester. Security Solutions for the Internet - Eli Herscovitz Mr. Herscovitz is founder of RadGuard Ltd., provider of secure datanetwork systems. He chairs the Networking Security Standardization Committee of the Standards Institute of Israel. TUTORIAL Hacker Tools & Techniques and Intrusion Testing - A dual presentation by Edward Skoudis and Cynthia Cullen Cynthia Cullen is a senior consultant with Bell Communications Research Security and Fraud Management. Edward Skoudis is a senior expert in network security issues with Bellcore's Navesink Research Center. Wednesday February 19, 1997 COMPUTER CRIME Network Security's Future - Glenn Gianino Glenn Gianino is Vice President of Advanced Technology with Computer Associates International. His responsibilities included all systems software and hardware including micro, midrange, and mainframe systems, as well as all networking, SNA, wide area networks and Internet services. His most recent assignment involves networking security on all platforms and operating systems. Mining the Information Klondike: CINet, a tool to fight organized crime - Robert Heibel Robert Heibel is Director of the research/intelligence analyst program at Mercyhurst College (PA). A 25-year veteran of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, he served as its Deputy Chief of Counterterrorism. Mr. Heibel is also Executive Director of the Center for Information Research, Analysis, and Training at Mercyhurst. Mr. Heibel is a graduate of Georgetown University. Digital Cash is hard to regulate - Prof. Michael Froomkin Professor Michael Froomkin is associate professor at the University of Miami, School of Law at Coral Gables. He specializes in Internet law and related aspects. Professor Froomkin is a graduate of the Yale Law School, and has a M.Phil. in history of international relations from Cambridge University (UK). He is a Fellow of the Cyberspace Law Institute. Smart Cards: the Coming Wave - James Chen James Chen is founder and President of V-One Corp., a provider of network and internetwork security solutions. Previously Mr Chen was head of the ground network engineering division for Intelsat, responsible for satellite launches. Electronic Commerce on the Internet - Tom Carty Tom Carty is Director of CyberTrust, a division of GTE. Mr. Carty was responsible for the information security privacy organization and architecting key management systems with GTE. He is a graduate of the University of Connecticut and Boston University. ATM: An Emerging Network Technology - Michael Guzelian Michael Guzelian has over 15 years experience in and knowledge of authentication, bandwidth-on-demand, and security issues that face large public networks. DISCUSSION PANEL High Integrity/Mission Critical Systems Session and Panel Chairman - Donald L. Evans Presentations by: Donald Evans, Timothy Stacey and Robert Smock Donald Evans is senior security engineer and senior member of the Johnson Space Center Mission Operations Directorate AIS Security Engineering Team, providing assistance to NASA in developing and maintaining the IS security program for the Space Station and Shuttle ground based programs. He is an advisory board member for the NSA Systems Security Engineering Capability Maturity Model, and a member of the Presidential Sub-committee of the US Security Policy Board. Timothy Stacey was involved with security development for NASA's Space Shuttle and Space Station programs and software engineering in support of NASA and the US Air Force Space Command Systems. He is currently a information security expert with SAIC Space Operations. Robert Smock is head of Flight Operations Information Security Program at United Space Alliance, responsible for providing the primary government contractor support for the protection of NASA's ground-based information resources, which support Space Shuttle and Space Station flight operations at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas.Mr Smock holds a degree in Computer Science. TUTORIAL Network Security: PRIVATE Communication in a PUBLIC World Dr. Radia Perlman and Charlie Kaufman Radia Perlman is Chief Security Architect for Novell, Inc. She is known for the invention of the spamming tree algorithm used by bridges, and many of the algorithms used for routing, including the design of a network that can withstand a denial of service attack. She is the author of two textbooks. She has a PhD from MIT. Charlie Kaufman is security architect for Lotus Notes/Domino. He is the chair of the web transaction security working group of the IETF. He is on the National Academy of Sciences expert panel on computer system trustworthiness. He is coauthor with Radia Perlman, of the book "Network Security: Private Communications in a Public World". Thursday February 20, 1997 INTERNET SECURITY Fighting Piracy on the Net - Peter Beruk Peter Beruk is Director of Domestic Anti-Piracy with the Software Publishers Association. Internet and Server Security - Joshua Peleg Joshua Peleg is the Director of Technical services with Memco Software. Mr. Pelegs expertise is in security, disaster recovery and system level programming. Joshua gained much of his experience while in the Israeli military defense forces. Is your Company a Hackers Help Desk ? - Steve Ritger Steve Ritger is security engineer with SRA International. His expertise is information and network security as well as fraud detection and prevention. JAVA SECURITY Security and "Live" content: A Java Perspective - Peter Coffee Peter Coffee is advanced technologies analyst for PC Week Labs. He has taught information systems management, management science and expert systems development for Pepperdine University, Chapman College, and UCLA. He is the author of "How to program Java". Mr. Coffee is a graduate of MIT and Pepperdine University. TUTORIAL World Wide Web Security Arthur Donkers Arthur Donkers is founder of Le Reseau, an independent security consulting firm in The Netherlands (Europe). He is a graduate of Delft University of Technology, and holds a degree in Electrical Engineering. He authors a monthly column on system administration and security aspects in SysAdmin Magazine. ------------0---------------- Datanet Security 97 is sponsored by the National Association of Webmasters, SysAdmin Magazine, Sprint, and CMP Network Computing Magazine. ---------------------------0-------------------------- Participation in Datanet Security 97 is $ 845. This includes admission to all conference sessions, tutorials and discussion panels, as well as lunches during the four days, a banquet, and a cruise to the Bahama islands (including breakfast, lunch, dinner and show). You can pay on-line via a secure web transaction with all major credit cards. A special hotel arrangement has been made with Hyatt Regency Miami, making discounted room rates available to all participants. The web page with full information is available at http://www.datasec.net Alternatively you can fax 941 775 1533, or email ds97 at datasec.net. ========================================================================= From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 10:24:19 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:24:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701210535.AAA05654@oak.liii.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Jane Jefferson wrote: > Also Sprach Toto: > > > > If what you say is true, then Dr. DV K's efforts are quite possibly > > the most important issue being addressed in this conference, because > > behind free speech, lies the most important issue of all--when does > > it start, and when does it stop. > > Exactly. > > > The military-industrial complex proclaims this necessary for the > > purposes of state-security, and denies that it is used in order to keep > > their 'sins' from being exposed. (If you believe this, then please > > contact me by private email regarding an ocean-front property I have > > available in Tucson, AZ. If you act quickly, I will throw in a set > > of the Amazing Ginzu Knives as an added bonus.) > > The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > individual. If Dr. Vulis is indeed an adjunct professor at Fordham > University, I think that perhaps he has been hanging out and drinking > too many beers with my former philosophy professor Quentin Lauer. ;-7 You know smoking causes wrinkles... :) From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 10:25:39 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:25:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701210627.AAA00614@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Jane Jefferson wrote: > > > > The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > > and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > > individual. > > An excellent point, Jane. Worth remembering. Why not archive it ...as it may be worth something someday.... oksas From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 10:33:55 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:33:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701210140.RAA25601@toad.com> Message-ID: <32E51979.5369@sk.sympatico.ca> Mike McNally wrote: > Why anyone would expect any particular degree of > "freedom" to use a service run for free by a private individual > is beyond me. I agree, totally. Just because an individual claims, rightly or wrongly, to be a big defender of freedom, involving himself or herself in causes like those of the Electronic Freedom Foundation, does not take away their right to stomp on anyone who disagrees with them on their own private list. To claim otherwise would be as ludicrous as denying the person running the Anonymizer the right to expose the identities of the people he feels might perhaps be abusing his private system, or using it for nefarious purposes, such as hiding their identity from others. Toto > I appreciate the service, but I don't take it for granted and I > certainly don't take it as an inalienable right. > > ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ > Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin > mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 > ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From marc at deepsea.sys.web-uk.net Tue Jan 21 10:40:28 1997 From: marc at deepsea.sys.web-uk.net (Marc) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:40:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: HOW AM I MEANT TO GET OFF THIS LIST! Message-ID: This thing keeps saying im not on it but am! someone help me. From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 21 10:48:02 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:48:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. Message-ID: <01BC07A2.1CDA0D80@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Mission: Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? The Web was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. Requirements: A scheme which makes blocking of individual IP addresses impractical. Architecture: The Web allows for proxies such as provided by the CERN server (and versions of Apache etc). A proxy server configured to accept connections from domains enforcing blocking (china, Singapore etc) can serve as a means of circumventing the restrictions. The problem then arises, how can the victims of censorship find out about the holes in the curtain? I believe that it would not be difficult to persuade large numbers of people to mirror a list of sites maintained at a central location. The blue ribbon campaign attracted a lot of interest on the same topic. Activity that brought to light the political aspect of Web censorship would help the domestic anti-CDA effort. Considerations: [i.e. areas needing brainstorming] 1) Copyright. Clearly copyright holders such as CNN etc would need to be involved. Although proxies have long been a part of the Web and the scheme does not threaten their interests it would be as well to get them on board at an early stage. 2) How can one prevent the proxies themselves being blocked? Some ideas that come to mind: 2a) Only issue new sites gradually so that blocking requires continuous updates. 2b) Use DHCP to change network addresses regularly. 2c) Some crypto hack I can't quite work out (hence the post to cypher punks). I can phrase the challenge more compactly though. We have two sets of opposed groups A and M. The A group wish to establish a continued conversation with groups B and C. M is willing to permit communication with group B but not C. Whenever M discovers that a member of group B is willing to act on behalf of group C, M transfers that member to the C group. The problem is to keep A's channels of communication open despite the efforts of M for very large group sizes. I'm not sure if this is a pure crypto challenge or a game theory problem. Comments? If people are willing to work on this I can provide some facilities and act as a media contact. Phill From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 21 10:49:45 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:49:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <01BC07A2.188A3B60@crecy.ai.mit.edu> get everything needed on a signed cheque. > >A check is no good, most checks are now printed on paper with special lines >that are supposed to become obvious after copying. A signed letter or even >a mailing envelope would probably be better. Actually for the purposes of fax you can trace the signature off the check and then photocopy the traced outline. If you use Mellonex film you can get a very good impression. > Also, scotch tape makes those >pexky shadows disapear like magic. My dad uses it to make multiple versions >of make-up math tests that trivially look like the origional in order to >goad persons who were sick on test day so that they could get the answers >from someone else into printing down those answers and getting less than >random probability. (multiple choice) When I used to do layout of artwork for a magazine we used to use white out to get rid of the shadow lines. There is a particularly good version available in the UK which comes in a red bottle with a flow cap on it. Much better than the crappy pot 'n brush system which is always going hard as the solvent evaporates. Phill PS: I hasten to add that my experience of fraud techniques comes from trying to stop them. PPS: In the days of electronic mail why do people need PS's? From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 10:50:06 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 10:50:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology In-Reply-To: <40uV1D91w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . > > What kind of movies? You're too young to watch these..:) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 11:26:22 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 11:26:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E53432.DC6@sk.sympatico.ca> > > Lynx 2.6 is the "latest" for UNIX and they "got" mine. However, > >someone suggesed that it may have been done through finger as well, and > >since my ocmputer is a UNIX box...the people using UNIX shells are gonna > >get nailed too... > > Couple of things you can do: > > 1. Comment out "fingerd" in /etc/inetd.conf and refresh > 2. Install a more secure "fingerd" such that it only > allows "finger `userid at node.domain`" instead of > "finger `@node.domain`". > > While I've seen #2 in action, I don't know where to go to snarf it. I just > use #1. Anyone know where to 'snarf it'? From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 21 11:43:44 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 11:43:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <01BC07A9.10CE1520@crecy.ai.mit.edu> >No, the real danger in weak crypto is that the poorly-informed will not >think about it *at all*. If we had "poor crypto", Newt probably wouldn't >have been embarrassed by this sort of casual interception, and the issue >wouldn't have been raised in the public mind. But our communications >still wouldn't be safe from more determined attackers. Brouhahas like >these are good for the pro-(strong-)crypto agenda. Not the way we've being going on, Zero coverage of the crypto issue, zip, nada. That points to EFF and CDT not being on the ball on the crypto issue. Phill From jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com Tue Jan 21 12:03:15 1997 From: jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com (Jeff Barber) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:03:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <01BC07A9.10CE1520@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199701212019.PAA13783@jafar.issl.atl.hp.com> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker writes: > >No, the real danger in weak crypto is that the poorly-informed will not > >think about it *at all*. If we had "poor crypto", Newt probably wouldn't > >have been embarrassed by this sort of casual interception, and the issue > >wouldn't have been raised in the public mind. But our communications > >still wouldn't be safe from more determined attackers. Brouhahas like > >these are good for the pro-(strong-)crypto agenda. > > Not the way we've being going on, Zero coverage of the > crypto issue, zip, nada. It was pointed out (in network newscasts, for example) that cellular communications are completely unprotected and available for the taking by anyone with a radio scanner. I count this as good exposure even if the alternatives weren't explicitly discussed. -- Jeff From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 12:08:00 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:08:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: HOW AM I MEANT TO GET OFF THIS LIST! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E53982.3794@sk.sympatico.ca> Marc wrote: > > This thing keeps saying im not on it but am! > someone help me. It wouldn't hurt to provide details of what commands you are sending to the majordomo and what you receive back from it. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 12:11:41 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:11:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701212011.MAA11021@toad.com> Mike McNally wrote: > Why anyone would expect any particular degree of > "freedom" to use a service run for free by a private individual > is beyond me. I agree, totally. Just because an individual claims, rightly or wrongly, to be a big defender of freedom, involving himself or herself in causes like those of the Electronic Freedom Foundation, does not take away their right to stomp on anyone who disagrees with them on their own private list. To claim otherwise would be as ludicrous as denying the person running the Anonymizer the right to expose the identities of the people he feels might perhaps be abusing his private system, or using it for nefarious purposes, such as hiding their identity from others. Toto > I appreciate the service, but I don't take it for granted and I > certainly don't take it as an inalienable right. > > ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ > Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin > mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 > ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 12:14:05 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:14:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701212014.MAA11058@toad.com> On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Jane Jefferson wrote: > > > > The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > > and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > > individual. > > An excellent point, Jane. Worth remembering. Why not archive it ...as it may be worth something someday.... oksas From jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com Tue Jan 21 12:14:29 1997 From: jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com (Jeff Barber) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:14:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701212014.MAA11069@toad.com> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker writes: > Adam Back wrote in article <5bp18k$1cc at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > It could be worse to have poor crypto, than no crypto, > > I disagree for two reasons, [ snip] > The danger in weak crypto is thinking that it is strong crypto. GSM is > weak crypto but stops the type of snooping the Martins engaged in. > If you know not to talk about something secret on one then low > crypto is better than having a signal anyone can pick up on a > device from radio shack. No, the real danger in weak crypto is that the poorly-informed will not think about it *at all*. If we had "poor crypto", Newt probably wouldn't have been embarrassed by this sort of casual interception, and the issue wouldn't have been raised in the public mind. But our communications still wouldn't be safe from more determined attackers. Brouhahas like these are good for the pro-(strong-)crypto agenda. -- Jeff From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 21 12:14:53 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:14:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT Message-ID: <199701212014.MAA11084@toad.com> > >> ...but I must say the list has gone downhill sharply since > >> the start of the censorship. > > > >I guess this a classic case of seeing what you want to see. > >(Uh, Paul, the moderation experiment HASN'T STARTED YET.) I knew that when I wrote this, but the fact that Vulis has been banned from the list is most definitely censorship and has lowered the philiosophy of the list (as in original purpose and ideaology) to a lower plane and provoked a number of flame wars which would otherwise have not taken place. > No, he's got it right. The announcement of the moderation experiment > was followed by a decline in interesting threads. I noticed this too but it was not what I was referring to. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 21 12:15:41 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:15:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Numbers we cannot talk about Message-ID: <199701212015.MAA11107@toad.com> > > I know that Standard mathematical axioms yields lots of interesting > > results, but when it talks of the infinite and we are dealing > > with a practical subject like cryptography or even physics it > > should not be taken too seriously. (With respect to uncountable sets.) > > Some of the applications of these theories are very relevant. For > example, a theorem that proves that it is impossible to write a program > that would determine if any other program would stop or loop forever, is > very relevant and interesting. Absolutely, something does not have to be practical to be interesting, Igor`s example of Cantors double slash argument (useful for example in AI research) is something that seems very abstract until we find a use for it, and most abstract mathematical concepts and theorems of this kind do eventually come into use by some other class of scientists. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 12:15:45 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:15:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701212015.MAA11113@toad.com> On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Jane Jefferson wrote: > Also Sprach Toto: > > > > If what you say is true, then Dr. DV K's efforts are quite possibly > > the most important issue being addressed in this conference, because > > behind free speech, lies the most important issue of all--when does > > it start, and when does it stop. > > Exactly. > > > The military-industrial complex proclaims this necessary for the > > purposes of state-security, and denies that it is used in order to keep > > their 'sins' from being exposed. (If you believe this, then please > > contact me by private email regarding an ocean-front property I have > > available in Tucson, AZ. If you act quickly, I will throw in a set > > of the Amazing Ginzu Knives as an added bonus.) > > The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > individual. If Dr. Vulis is indeed an adjunct professor at Fordham > University, I think that perhaps he has been hanging out and drinking > too many beers with my former philosophy professor Quentin Lauer. ;-7 You know smoking causes wrinkles... :) From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 21 12:16:35 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:16:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701212016.MAA11119@toad.com> Adam Back wrote in article <5bp18k$1cc at life.ai.mit.edu>... > GSM encrypts only the links to the station - the traffic goes in the > clear through the station. Plus A5 (crypto algorithm used in GSM) is > weak, 40 bits of effective key space. > > It could be worse to have poor crypto, than no crypto, I disagree for two reasons, first there is a big difference between having poor locks and no locks. Most locks can be picked by an expert, they are effective against many theifs however. Second if everyone in the world was using 40 bit email encryption it would prevent most of the "promiscuous" interception of communications. The danger in weak crypto is thinking that it is strong crypto. GSM is weak crypto but stops the type of snooping the Martins engaged in. If you know not to talk about something secret on one then low crypto is better than having a signal anyone can pick up on a device from radio shack. Phill From korinne at datasec.net Tue Jan 21 12:16:44 1997 From: korinne at datasec.net (Korinne) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:16:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: DATANET SECURITY 97 PROGRAM Message-ID: <199701212016.MAA11127@toad.com> Conference program Datanet Security 1997 Annual International Conference and Exhibition on Wide Area Network Securit= y FEBRUARY 17 - 18 - 19 - 20, 1997 HYATT REGENCY MIAMI HOTEL & CONVENTION CENTER All lectures and presentations have been confirmed Keynote speakers: Monday February 17, 1997 The 1997 Datanet Security conference will be opened with a keynote address by Dr. Ruth A. David, Deputy Director Science & Technology of the Central Intelligence Agency. =20 Following the opening address, Mr. Stuart A. Baker will deliver a keynote speech "Legal Aspects of Network Security". Stuart Baker is partner with Steptoe & Johnson in Washington DC, and former lead counsel for the National Security Agency. Keynote speakers: Tuesday February 18, 1997 The second day of the Annual Datanet Security Conference is highlighted with a presentation by Dr. Rob Kolstad "Non-Security Issues Affecting the Future of the Internet". Rob Kolstad is President of BSDI Inc. "What's Slowing down Deployment of Security ?" is the title of the next keynote address by Novell's Chief Security Architect, Dr. Radia Perlman. She was featured in the 20th anniversary edition of Data Communications magazine as one of 20 most influential people in the field of computer networking.=20 Keynote speaker: Wednesday February 19, 1997 This conference day we feature Mr. Scott Charney as a prominent keynote speaker. Scott Charney is the principal government authority on computer crime. He heads the federal prosecutors and leads the Computer Crime and Intellectual Properties Section within the Department of Justice.=20 ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY PROGRAM Monday February 17, 1997 ELECTRONIC INTELLIGENCE "Intelligence Behind the Journal Intelligence" - Olivier Schmidt Olivier Schmidt is founding editor of several important international professional news journals and expert publications. Among these "Parapolitics", "Intelligence Newsletter" and "Intelligence". He co-authored "Intelligences Secretes" and "OSS et la Resistance Francaise". He lives and works in Paris, France. "The King of Secret Readers: Edgar Allen Poe, William Friedman, and the Logic of the Cold War" - Professor Shawn Rosenheim Shawn J. Rosenheim is Associate Professor of English at Williams College (Williamstown, Mass.), and a founding member of the Communications Technologies Research Group. His most recent publication is "The Cryptographic Imagination: Secret Writing from Edgar Poe to the Internet" (Johns Hopkins University Press, 1996) DISCUSSION PANEL Traditional versus New Technologies: A Challenge for the Intelligence Communities Session and Panel Chairman - David Whipple David Whipple is Executive Director of the Association of Former Intelligence Officers, AFIO. As no other Mr. Whipple is able to illustrate the traditional methods of information gathering.=20 INTERNET SECURITY The Changing Role of the Firewall - Stephen Flaig Mr. Flaig is Vice President for LanOptics Inc., developers of the Guardian firewall. Network Access Flexibility through RADIUS - David Dawson David Dawson is General Manager Network Security Business Unit for Ascend Communications Inc. Previously he was Chief Executive Officer of Morningstar Technologies Inc. He holds a BS in Electrical Engineering from the US Military Academy at West Point. Internet Security and the IBM Firewall - Peter Crotty Peter Crotty is worldwide responsible for IBM's technical firewall support program. Secure Access: If you don't have security everywhere, you don't have it anywhere ! - Doug LaBorde Mr. LaBorde is Manager with the Network Security Business Unit of Ascend Communications. NT SECURITY Windows NT Security: Networked Perspectives - Charles Rutstein Charles Rutstein is Principal Consultant with Price Waterhouse, and has extensive front line computer and network security experience. He authored several books on computer viruses. His latest work, dealing with Windows NT security, has just been released. NT Internet Security - Firewalls, Web-servers, and Vulnerabilities - Bill Stout Bill Stout is network security analyst and senior systems administrator with Hitachi Data Systems. He specializes in Windows NT security issues. VIRUSES Viruses and the Internet; email, Java, Active-X; the new virus carriers - Thierry Giron Thierry Giron holds a Computer Science Hon. degree from Middlesex University (London, UK), and a Business degree from ESC in Reims, France. He joined Trend Micro in Taiwan in 1992, and is since Trend's Customer Engineering Manager for the North American offices. Minimizing the Virus Threat - Glenn Jordan Glenn Jordan is the leading virus technology expert with Dr. Solomon, and is an established member of the Computer Anti-virus Research Organization, an international network of anti-virus researchers. Mr. Jordan is a graduate of the University of North Carolina. Tuesday February 18, 1997 INTERNET SECURITY Cyber Thieves - Gregg Lebovitz Gregg Lebovitz is Director of Security Products at BBN Planet. Mr. Lebovitz spent 15 years at Carnegy-Mellon University, designing, implementing and deploying network routers and distributed applications. Accounting for Square-Root Attacks in Cryptographic Design - Michael Wiener Michael Wiener is senior cryptologist with Entrust Technologies (formerly Nortel Secure Networks). His expertise is in the area of cryptanalysis, authentication, and key-exchange protocols, public-key infrastructures, design of cryptographic systems, and high-speed implementations of public-key cryptosystems. He is agraduate of the University of Waterloo (Canada).=20 Virtual Private Networking: Integrating Internet and Intranet Security - Tony Rosati Tony Rosati is co-founder and Vice President for TimeStep Corporation. He leads design teams ranging from the development of public-key and DES based integrated circuits to the development of system level communications security solutions utilizing cryptographic techniques. =20 Approaching End-to-End Security - Paul Ferguson Paul Ferguson is a senior expert with Cisco Systems. His principal disciplines are Internet security, large-scale routing and design architecture. NETWORK SECURITY Assurance in Products for the Internet - Alan Borrett Alan Borrett is member of the UK IT Evaluation & Certification Scheme, under authority of Her Majesty=92s Government Communications Headquarters (= GCHQ) Computer Security in the Third World: The Mexican Case - Prof. Guillermo Mallen Professor Mallen teaches and researches at the Ibero-Americana University in Mexico. He is a former President of the Mexican Academy of Informatics.=20 Single Point Security: The Unisys Vision for Enterprise Security Administration - William Buffam William Buffam is software architect with Unisys Corp. His background is in operating systems, networking, and solution engineering. He holds a Computer Science degree from the University of Manchester. Security Solutions for the Internet - Eli Herscovitz Mr. Herscovitz is founder of RadGuard Ltd., provider of secure datanetwork systems. He chairs the Networking Security Standardization Committee of the Standards Institute of Israel. TUTORIAL Hacker Tools & Techniques and Intrusion Testing - A dual presentation by Edward Skoudis and Cynthia Cullen Cynthia Cullen is a senior consultant with Bell Communications Research Security and Fraud Management. Edward Skoudis is a senior expert in network security issues with Bellcore's Navesink Research Center. Wednesday February 19, 1997 COMPUTER CRIME Network Security's Future - Glenn Gianino Glenn Gianino is Vice President of Advanced Technology with Computer Associates International. His responsibilities included all systems software and hardware including micro, midrange, and mainframe systems, as well as all networking, SNA, wide area networks and Internet services. His most recent assignment involves networking security on all platforms and operating systems. Mining the Information Klondike: CINet, a tool to fight organized crime - Robert Heibel Robert Heibel is Director of the research/intelligence analyst program at Mercyhurst College (PA). A 25-year veteran of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, he served as its Deputy Chief of Counterterrorism. Mr. Heibel is also Executive Director of the Center for Information Research, Analysis, and Training at Mercyhurst. Mr. Heibel is a graduate of Georgetown University. Digital Cash is hard to regulate - Prof. Michael Froomkin Professor Michael Froomkin is associate professor at the University of Miami, School of Law at Coral Gables. He specializes in Internet law and related aspects. Professor Froomkin is a graduate of the Yale Law School, and has a M.Phil. in history of international relations from Cambridge University (UK). He is a Fellow of the Cyberspace Law Institute. Smart Cards: the Coming Wave - James Chen James Chen is founder and President of V-One Corp., a provider of network and internetwork security solutions. Previously Mr Chen was head of the ground network engineering division for Intelsat, responsible for satellite launches.=20 Electronic Commerce on the Internet - Tom Carty Tom Carty is Director of CyberTrust, a division of GTE. Mr. Carty was responsible for the information security privacy organization and architecting key management systems with GTE. He is a graduate of the University of Connecticut and Boston University. ATM: An Emerging Network Technology - Michael Guzelian Michael Guzelian has over 15 years experience in and knowledge of authentication, bandwidth-on-demand, and security issues that face large public networks. DISCUSSION PANEL High Integrity/Mission Critical Systems Session and Panel Chairman - Donald L. Evans Presentations by: Donald Evans, Timothy Stacey and Robert Smock Donald Evans is senior security engineer and senior member of the Johnson Space Center Mission Operations Directorate AIS Security Engineering Team, providing assistance to NASA in developing and maintaining the IS security program for the Space Station and Shuttle ground based programs. He is an advisory board member for the NSA Systems Security Engineering Capability Maturity Model, and a member of the Presidential Sub-committee of the US Security Policy Board. Timothy Stacey was involved with security development for NASA's Space Shuttle and Space Station programs and software engineering in support of NASA and the US Air Force Space Command Systems. He is currently a information security expert with SAIC Space Operations. Robert Smock is head of Flight Operations Information Security Program at United Space Alliance, responsible for providing the primary government contractor support for the protection of NASA's ground-based information resources, which support Space Shuttle and Space Station flight operations at the Johnson Space Center in Houston, Texas.Mr Smock holds a degree in Computer Science. TUTORIAL Network Security: PRIVATE Communication in a PUBLIC World Dr. Radia Perlman and Charlie Kaufman Radia Perlman is Chief Security Architect for Novell, Inc. She is known for the invention of the spamming tree algorithm used by bridges, and many of the algorithms used for routing, including the design of a network that can withstand a denial of service attack. She is the author of two textbooks. She has a PhD from MIT. Charlie Kaufman is security architect for Lotus Notes/Domino. He is the chair of the web transaction security working group of the IETF. He is on the National Academy of Sciences expert panel on computer system trustworthiness. He is coauthor with Radia Perlman, of the book "Network Security: Private Communications in a Public World". Thursday February 20, 1997 INTERNET SECURITY Fighting Piracy on the Net - Peter Beruk Peter Beruk is Director of Domestic Anti-Piracy with the Software Publishers Association. Internet and Server Security - Joshua Peleg Joshua Peleg is the Director of Technical services with Memco Software. Mr. Pelegs expertise is in security, disaster recovery and system level programming. Joshua gained much of his experience while in the Israeli military defense forces. Is your Company a Hackers Help Desk ? - Steve Ritger Steve Ritger is security engineer with SRA International. His expertise is information and network security as well as fraud detection and prevention. JAVA SECURITY Security and "Live" content: A Java Perspective - Peter Coffee Peter Coffee is advanced technologies analyst for PC Week Labs. He has taught information systems management, management science and expert systems development for Pepperdine University, Chapman College, and UCLA. He is the author of "How to program Java". Mr. Coffee is a graduate of MIT and Pepperdine University. TUTORIAL World Wide Web Security Arthur Donkers Arthur Donkers is founder of Le Reseau, an independent security consulting firm in The Netherlands (Europe). He is a graduate of Delft University of Technology, and holds a degree in Electrical Engineering. He authors a monthly column on system administration and security aspects in SysAdmin Magazine. ------------0---------------- =20 Datanet Security 97 is sponsored by the National Association of Webmasters, SysAdmin Magazine, Sprint, and CMP Network Computing Magazine.=20 ---------------------------0-------------------------- Participation in Datanet Security 97 is $ 845. This includes admission to all conference sessions, tutorials and discussion panels, as well as lunches during the four days, a banquet, and a cruise to the Bahama islands (including breakfast, lunch, dinner and show). You can pay on-line via a secure web transaction with all major credit cards. A special hotel arrangement has been made with Hyatt Regency Miami, making discounted room rates available to all participants. The web page with full information is available at http://www.datasec.net Alternatively you can fax 941 775 1533, or email ds97 at datasec.net. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 12:25:31 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:25:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701212025.MAA11236@toad.com> On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . > > What kind of movies? You're too young to watch these..:) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 12:26:19 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:26:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd Message-ID: <199701212026.MAA11261@toad.com> > > Lynx 2.6 is the "latest" for UNIX and they "got" mine. However, > >someone suggesed that it may have been done through finger as well, and > >since my ocmputer is a UNIX box...the people using UNIX shells are gonna > >get nailed too... > > Couple of things you can do: > > 1. Comment out "fingerd" in /etc/inetd.conf and refresh > 2. Install a more secure "fingerd" such that it only > allows "finger `userid at node.domain`" instead of > "finger `@node.domain`". > > While I've seen #2 in action, I don't know where to go to snarf it. I just > use #1. Anyone know where to 'snarf it'? From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 21 12:26:53 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:26:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701212026.MAA11273@toad.com> >No, the real danger in weak crypto is that the poorly-informed will not >think about it *at all*. If we had "poor crypto", Newt probably wouldn't >have been embarrassed by this sort of casual interception, and the issue >wouldn't have been raised in the public mind. But our communications >still wouldn't be safe from more determined attackers. Brouhahas like >these are good for the pro-(strong-)crypto agenda. Not the way we've being going on, Zero coverage of the crypto issue, zip, nada. That points to EFF and CDT not being on the ball on the crypto issue. Phill From jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com Tue Jan 21 12:27:02 1997 From: jeffb at issl.atl.hp.com (Jeff Barber) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:27:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701212027.MAA11296@toad.com> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker writes: > >No, the real danger in weak crypto is that the poorly-informed will not > >think about it *at all*. If we had "poor crypto", Newt probably wouldn't > >have been embarrassed by this sort of casual interception, and the issue > >wouldn't have been raised in the public mind. But our communications > >still wouldn't be safe from more determined attackers. Brouhahas like > >these are good for the pro-(strong-)crypto agenda. > > Not the way we've being going on, Zero coverage of the > crypto issue, zip, nada. It was pointed out (in network newscasts, for example) that cellular communications are completely unprotected and available for the taking by anyone with a radio scanner. I count this as good exposure even if the alternatives weren't explicitly discussed. -- Jeff From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 21 12:27:03 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:27:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701212027.MAA11297@toad.com> get everything needed on a signed cheque. > >A check is no good, most checks are now printed on paper with special lines >that are supposed to become obvious after copying. A signed letter or even >a mailing envelope would probably be better. Actually for the purposes of fax you can trace the signature off the check and then photocopy the traced outline. If you use Mellonex film you can get a very good impression. > Also, scotch tape makes those >pexky shadows disapear like magic. My dad uses it to make multiple versions >of make-up math tests that trivially look like the origional in order to >goad persons who were sick on test day so that they could get the answers >from someone else into printing down those answers and getting less than >random probability. (multiple choice) When I used to do layout of artwork for a magazine we used to use white out to get rid of the shadow lines. There is a particularly good version available in the UK which comes in a red bottle with a flow cap on it. Much better than the crappy pot 'n brush system which is always going hard as the solvent evaporates. Phill PS: I hasten to add that my experience of fraud techniques comes from trying to stop them. PPS: In the days of electronic mail why do people need PS's? From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 21 12:27:18 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:27:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. Message-ID: <199701212027.MAA11310@toad.com> Mission: Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? The Web was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. Requirements: A scheme which makes blocking of individual IP addresses impractical. Architecture: The Web allows for proxies such as provided by the CERN server (and versions of Apache etc). A proxy server configured to accept connections from domains enforcing blocking (china, Singapore etc) can serve as a means of circumventing the restrictions. The problem then arises, how can the victims of censorship find out about the holes in the curtain? I believe that it would not be difficult to persuade large numbers of people to mirror a list of sites maintained at a central location. The blue ribbon campaign attracted a lot of interest on the same topic. Activity that brought to light the political aspect of Web censorship would help the domestic anti-CDA effort. Considerations: [i.e. areas needing brainstorming] 1) Copyright. Clearly copyright holders such as CNN etc would need to be involved. Although proxies have long been a part of the Web and the scheme does not threaten their interests it would be as well to get them on board at an early stage. 2) How can one prevent the proxies themselves being blocked? Some ideas that come to mind: 2a) Only issue new sites gradually so that blocking requires continuous updates. 2b) Use DHCP to change network addresses regularly. 2c) Some crypto hack I can't quite work out (hence the post to cypher punks). I can phrase the challenge more compactly though. We have two sets of opposed groups A and M. The A group wish to establish a continued conversation with groups B and C. M is willing to permit communication with group B but not C. Whenever M discovers that a member of group B is willing to act on behalf of group C, M transfers that member to the C group. The problem is to keep A's channels of communication open despite the efforts of M for very large group sizes. I'm not sure if this is a pure crypto challenge or a game theory problem. Comments? If people are willing to work on this I can provide some facilities and act as a media contact. Phill From vznuri at netcom.com Tue Jan 21 12:33:49 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 12:33:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Netscape to use Cybercash? In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970120210810.006dd5cc@192.100.81.126> Message-ID: <199701212033.MAA29427@netcom17.netcom.com> (S.Schear tells me that he thinks the lack of anonymity in payment schemes is what is primarily what is holding them back, not good GUI interfaces. I consider this hogwash, but maybe we can agree to disagree.) Lucky Green writes: >Netscape has announce that Navigator will ship with CyberCash. >There is definitely movement at the browser/server end. whoa, I missed this. was there any discussion on this list? or is it just because we are drowning in noise? any more specifics? I personally am hoping for a point-and-click interface with the piggybank/cost HTML tag scenario I described. also, any ETA? From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jan 21 13:20:24 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:20:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Netscape to use Cybercash? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970121132141.006ec8e0@192.100.81.126> At 12:33 PM 1/21/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >Lucky Green writes: >>Netscape has announce that Navigator will ship with CyberCash. >>There is definitely movement at the browser/server end. > >whoa, I missed this. was there any discussion on this list? or >is it just because we are drowning in noise? any more specifics? Netscape put out a press release on this in October (?). That's all I know. Look at their web site. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From vznuri at netcom.com Tue Jan 21 13:44:28 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:44:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Netscape to use Cybercash? Message-ID: <199701212144.NAA12421@toad.com> (S.Schear tells me that he thinks the lack of anonymity in payment schemes is what is primarily what is holding them back, not good GUI interfaces. I consider this hogwash, but maybe we can agree to disagree.) Lucky Green writes: >Netscape has announce that Navigator will ship with CyberCash. >There is definitely movement at the browser/server end. whoa, I missed this. was there any discussion on this list? or is it just because we are drowning in noise? any more specifics? I personally am hoping for a point-and-click interface with the piggybank/cost HTML tag scenario I described. also, any ETA? From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jan 21 13:44:36 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:44:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Netscape to use Cybercash? Message-ID: <199701212144.NAA12429@toad.com> At 12:33 PM 1/21/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >Lucky Green writes: >>Netscape has announce that Navigator will ship with CyberCash. >>There is definitely movement at the browser/server end. > >whoa, I missed this. was there any discussion on this list? or >is it just because we are drowning in noise? any more specifics? Netscape put out a press release on this in October (?). That's all I know. Look at their web site. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From talon57 at well.com Tue Jan 21 14:05:16 1997 From: talon57 at well.com (Brian D Williams) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 14:05:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: [NONCRYPTO] speaking of ADSL Message-ID: <199701212204.OAA12740@well.com> ADSL fans may be interested to know that Ameritech has a 200 unit ADSL trial underway in Wheaton Il as I speak. It is going very well. The units are currently running 1.5Mbs, (T-1) but are scheduled to go to 3Mbs later this year. Next year rumor is 6Mbs. In an interesting example of "Brazil Effect", ADSL may first come to older areas, because they are all direct copper. If I could only get ADSL cards for my DMS100. ;) Brian Network Premise engineer Ameritech Data Center Chicago Extropian Cypherpunk From sales at quantcom.com Tue Jan 21 14:13:48 1997 From: sales at quantcom.com (CV Communications) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 14:13:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Customers For You!! Message-ID: <21270787100381@quantcom.com> The following message has been brought to you by Quantum Communications. If you would like advertising rates and information, send an email to info at quantcom.com or visit our website http://www.quantcom.com If you prefer NOT to receive promotional messages inthe future, send an email to remove at quantcom.com Quantum Communications BULK EMAIL ADVERTISING SERVICE OFFERS: * GUARANTEED RESPONSE RATE! * HIGHEST QUALITY LIST (compiled 100% in-house, never bought or re-sold, continuously updated and maintained)! * WE SEND ALL MAIL! (never get shut off by your ISP!) * LARGEST DATABASE (over 5 million email addresses)! * LOWEST RATES IN THE INDUSTRY! * 100% APPROVED FINANCING (no credit checks - you are APPROVED)! * WE OFFER WEB PAGE HOSTING AND OTHER RELATED SERVICES AS WELL * COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES INCLUDED FREE OF CHARGE (email forwarding, flame filtering, autoresponders, copy design assistance)! * COMPLETE RANGE OF SERVICE OFFERINGS (stand-alone bulk email, co-op "MEGA-MAILER", custom-built targeted mailings)! * REFERENCES FROM HAPPY CLIENTS! * VISIT OUR WEB SITE AT http://www.quantcom.com For complete details on our services, pricing, no-nonsense response guarantee, and all other pertinent info, call our sales department @ (603) 772-4096, or send an email to info at quantcom.com. When requesting info via email, please be sure to include your voice phone # and best time to call, unless you would prefer not to be contacted via telephone to follow up. From adam at homeport.org Tue Jan 21 14:31:41 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 14:31:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701212026.MAA11273@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701212223.RAA26149@homeport.org> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: | >No, the real danger in weak crypto is that the poorly-informed will not | >think about it *at all*. If we had "poor crypto", Newt probably wouldn't | >have been embarrassed by this sort of casual interception, and the issue | >wouldn't have been raised in the public mind. But our communications | >still wouldn't be safe from more determined attackers. Brouhahas like | >these are good for the pro-(strong-)crypto agenda. | | Not the way we've being going on, Zero coverage of the | crypto issue, zip, nada. That points to EFF and CDT not | being on the ball on the crypto issue. Was on the NYT op-ed page on Monday. Something about scanners had a few closing paragraphs about the ITARs with a comment from (David Sobel)? Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 14:40:31 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 14:40:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: [NOISE] Re: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701212240.OAA13169@toad.com> At 08:35 PM 1/20/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > In short, I believe that if the issue of free speech is not one of >the central issues on the CypherPunks list, then the list is merely >one more heartless, unfeeling extension of the Great Machine which >is grinding inexorably forward toward the day when we will all have >its numbers tattoo'd on our forearms. That machine will be the SIXTH model made by a little firm on the thirteenth floor of an office building. It will operate on several thousand 6X86 processors. It will operate either on MSDOS 6.0 or UNIX V6R4, depending on how soon it is completed. And it won't be our forearms, we can cover those with sleeves. It will be our brow. (please excuse the spelling). From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 14:40:38 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 14:40:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft Message-ID: <199701212240.OAA13179@toad.com> At 09:13 PM 1/20/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >At 11:46 AM 1/20/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >>1. an html tag that indicates how much a link costs, probably in >>the type syntax > >This could be done, but is, IMHO, too inflexible. > Also, with tags, I could download the page with good old fashioned netscape 3.0 Gold, (possibly the last browser without this), allowing me to get the entire page, neutralize the tag either by hand or with a simple app. and view the site sans payment. The blocks that I see to this are server push upon receipt of cash and encrypted pages only accessable upon (automatic) payment, not unlike pay-per-view satellite television. The problem here is the patent that was stirring up trouble here a few months ago. The one that Compuserve stood up against involving the use of this on computer networks. I really think that a tag alone wouldn't be worth much, not without a CGI script to verify it or a JAVA app. to run it. Please correct me if I am in error. From camcc at abraxis.com Tue Jan 21 14:41:19 1997 From: camcc at abraxis.com (Alec) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 14:41:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970121174238.00687e7c@smtp1.abraxis.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 786 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 21 14:58:50 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 14:58:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [NOISE] Re: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701212240.OAA13169@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701212252.QAA01519@manifold.algebra.com> Sean Roach wrote: > That machine will be the SIXTH model made by a little firm on the thirteenth > floor of an office building. > It will operate on several thousand 6X86 processors. > It will operate either on MSDOS 6.0 or UNIX V6R4, depending on how soon it > is completed. > > And it won't be our forearms, we can cover those with sleeves. It will be > our brow. (please excuse the spelling). > yeah, 6000 processors, all managed by MS-DOS. And 30,000 couriers alone. - Igor. From talon57 at well.com Tue Jan 21 15:00:04 1997 From: talon57 at well.com (Brian D Williams) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:00:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [NONCRYPTO] speaking of ADSL Message-ID: <199701212300.PAA13458@toad.com> ADSL fans may be interested to know that Ameritech has a 200 unit ADSL trial underway in Wheaton Il as I speak. It is going very well. The units are currently running 1.5Mbs, (T-1) but are scheduled to go to 3Mbs later this year. Next year rumor is 6Mbs. In an interesting example of "Brazil Effect", ADSL may first come to older areas, because they are all direct copper. If I could only get ADSL cards for my DMS100. ;) Brian Network Premise engineer Ameritech Data Center Chicago Extropian Cypherpunk From adam at homeport.org Tue Jan 21 15:10:56 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:10:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701212310.PAA13624@toad.com> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: | >No, the real danger in weak crypto is that the poorly-informed will not | >think about it *at all*. If we had "poor crypto", Newt probably wouldn't | >have been embarrassed by this sort of casual interception, and the issue | >wouldn't have been raised in the public mind. But our communications | >still wouldn't be safe from more determined attackers. Brouhahas like | >these are good for the pro-(strong-)crypto agenda. | | Not the way we've being going on, Zero coverage of the | crypto issue, zip, nada. That points to EFF and CDT not | being on the ball on the crypto issue. Was on the NYT op-ed page on Monday. Something about scanners had a few closing paragraphs about the ITARs with a comment from (David Sobel)? Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From marc at deepsea.sys.web-uk.net Tue Jan 21 15:17:53 1997 From: marc at deepsea.sys.web-uk.net (Marc) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:17:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: HOW AM I MEANT TO GET OFF THIS LIST! In-Reply-To: <32E53982.3794@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > Marc wrote: > > > > This thing keeps saying im not on it but am! > > someone help me. > > It wouldn't hurt to provide details of what commands you are sending > to the majordomo and what you receive back from it. > > Toto > I have done the un do thing will al options and it removed me when i first did it. But im still on it neway? What more detials can i provide? From blake at bcdev.com Tue Jan 21 15:21:32 1997 From: blake at bcdev.com (Blake Coverett) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:21:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <01BC07C7.DF618D90@bcdev.com> Toto writes: > Just because an individual claims, rightly or wrongly, to be a > big defender of freedom, involving himself or herself in causes > like those of the Electronic Freedom Foundation, does not take > away their right to stomp on anyone who disagrees with them on > their own private list. Of course > To claim otherwise would be as ludicrous as denying the person > running the Anonymizer the right to expose the identities of the > people he feels might perhaps be abusing his private system, or > using it for nefarious purposes, such as hiding their identity > from others. I suspect you intended that to be sarcasm, but to be honest I wouldn't have caught it at all if I wasn't already aware of your views in this area. The person hosting the Anonymizer *does* have the right to do exactly this. I don't believe they would do so, but that is a reputation issue not a question of my rights. If I had entered into a contract with the provider of a service of this nature then I would have a 'right' to expect their contractual obligations to be fulfilled, but that is not the case with the Anonymizer and certainly not with toad.com. regards, -Blake (freedom of the press for those with presses) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 21 15:29:12 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:29:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: CypherPunks Supports UCE Spammers! In-Reply-To: <21270787100381@quantcom.com> Message-ID: <32E56DE6.517A@sk.sympatico.ca> CV Communications wrote: > The following message has been brought to you by Quantum Communications. > If you would like advertising rates and information, send an email to info at quantcom.com I find it interesting that those who control the CypherPunks list would go to great lengths to censor the free speech of list members, and yet be perfectly willing to allow those who wish to view all postings by list members to be subjected to bulk UCE bombing by those outside the list. Am I just blowing smoke in suggesting that this may be just a big FUCK YOU! to the list members who don't want to 'toe the line' in regard to list member censorship? Is there 'anyone' on the list who 'wants' to receive UCE/Spam? If there is, I would certainly like to see the posts indicating their desire to receive it. I am sure that their desire can be realized beyond their wildest dreams. I have no problem with John taking control of his own private list, in order to control its content and future direction, but I think that it is rude beyond belief to make great pretentions of taking actions for 'the good of the list' and yet not lift a single finger to prevent toad.com from aiding in the proliferation of UCE/Spam. Other lists are able to block UCE/Spam, and make an effort to do so, without using it as a 'tool', or an 'excuse', to censor the content of their list by list subscribers. It is obvious that toad.com shows no interest in halting their role as an accessory in the promotion of UCE/Spam, but has the time and energy to censor their list members. The words 'pettiness' and 'bullshit' come to mind, when I view the way that 'moderation' has been approached on this list. If you reply to this post, please do so politely. I'm a sensitive guy, and my feelings are easily hurt. Toto From smith at sctc.com Tue Jan 21 15:33:48 1997 From: smith at sctc.com (Rick Smith) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:33:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition Message-ID: <199701212311.RAA15832@shade.sctc.com> pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz wrote: : I was talking to someone recently about the feasibilty of keyword-scanning : phone conversations.... My first "real" job in the computer industry was for a garage shop doing speech recognition. We did a demo system in 1977 for Rome Labs that did exactly what you're asking about: scanning a stream of continuous speech over a telephone line looking for key words. It was tolerably effective: I forget the success rate but it was above 90%. But we were never asked to go past the research prototype. We did it the "hard way" in that we were trying to solve the "talk to the computer" problem which is harder than the "look for something suspicious worth looking closer at" problem. I expect they were looking for something to cut down on their false positives and perhaps we weren't significantly better than what they were already doing. : "Discrete Utterance Speech Recognition without Time Alignment", John Shore : and David Burton, IEEE Trans.Information Theory, Vol.29, No.4 (July 1983), : p.473. : :This generates a feature vector every 10-30ms from input speech which is :compared to pre-generated reference sequences. It also has references to many :other papers covering the same area. When I worked in the field "discrete utterance" was the buzz phrase for talking with - pauses - between - each - word. Ecch. Our commercial systems at the time (late '70s) used discrete speech without time alignment since we could process 8 input channels simultaneously. Ahhh. The joys of microcoding for a 74S181 ALU. Rick. smith at sctc.com secure computing corporation From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 15:41:11 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:41:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701212341.PAA13971@toad.com> At 12:35 AM 1/21/97 -0500, Jane Jefferson wrote: >Governments, however, are made up of the very same people who claim >to require these rights to privacy. Those people create, codify and >enforce the laws. The problem is that the people who find themselves in >this position of power are not always the most moral or concerned with >the best interest of the majority. > >And fiendishly, it is the very chaos and anarchy and random chance >espoused by proponents of the cypherpunk philosophy that allows these >people to gain this power, unchecked! > >Thus, the real problem ends up being not "how to control the government >so that the government doesn't control us", but "how to deal with the >government when it goes into control-freak mode". That it will go into >such a mode is a given -- based on human nature and history. This is >a fundamental cycle of evolution and human behavior. We have to face >the fact that humans are predators, and as long as we are, the >cycle of this behavior will continue. Also, remember, that those people willing to put up with the responsibility of leadership are more often more extreme control freaks than the rest of the population. Persons asked on the street if they wanted to be president of the United States have often said no way, yet every four years we have at least two people willing to put up with the hassle in order to be the most powerful man in the country. What we need is a leader who is willing to put up with it for h[is/er] people/cause, but has no desire to stay any longer than absolutely necessary. Then we need another just like h[im/er] for the next term. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 15:41:27 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:41:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" Message-ID: <199701212341.PAA13985@toad.com> At 02:22 AM 1/21/97 -0800, Toto wrote: >Bill Campbell wrote: > >> I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the >> more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced. > > Dr. Vulis? There was an 'attempt' to silence him, but it hasn't >worked, to date. > I believe he is referring to silencing the list, not Vulis. As long as the members of this list are argueing over semantics, the government has one less challenger in the fight over our rights. Remember, one of the oldest tactics of war is to turn the enemy against itself. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 15:41:32 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:41:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs Message-ID: <199701212341.PAA13998@toad.com> At 04:17 AM 1/21/97 -0500, Richard L. Field wrote: ... > I read the new regs as permitting: (i) publication of source code in >paper form (including publications reproduced on microfilm or on prerecorded >phonograph records), or in the form of a motion picture film and soundtrack >(section 734.3(b)(2)); and, separately, (ii) teaching or discussion of >information "about" cryptography (section 744.9). The export of other >encryption materials (including the distribution to non-US persons of source >or object code on diskettes) is restricted, even if the materials are >publicly available "educational information" for release by instruction in >catalog courses and associated teaching laboratories of academic >institutions (section 734.9). ... This has often reminded me of something that occurred around 1776. I can't remember if it was before or after. Remember how the colonies got sophisticated spinning gear? I believe it was spinning gear. Great Britain had a ban on the export of functional models, diagrams or manufacturing instructions to one particular class of equipment. This was so that they could maintain the monopoly on cheaply made cloth, holding the outlying colonies in line by maintaining a dependancy. One man memorized the structure of one of these machines and then came to the American shores, where he reproduced it workably. I can't remember the name of the man or the machine, just that it was used in the manufacture of cloth, the "spinning jenny" i think. Nor can I remember the date. From mpj at csn.net Tue Jan 21 15:43:08 1997 From: mpj at csn.net (Michael Johnson) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:43:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: North American crypto archive Message-ID: [I'm not on this list, so please CC: me on replies. Thanks!] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- There is another change to the way I distribute strong cryptographic software at my ftp site (ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/). The strong cryptographic software is still in a hidden directory with a name that changes periodically, but access is via a password protected web form at http://www.sni.net/~mpj/na/ that has the current hidden directory name expanded in it. To get your very own user name and password, please fill out the form at http://www.sni.net/~mpj/getcrypt.htm, and then watch your email box. This change is to comply with the new Export Administration Regulation (EAR) changes that require "checking the destination machine's address" to ensure that it is in the USA or Canada to avoid being accused of exporting without a license. My many friends outside of North America need not feel left out, however, as I have a nice listing of some good crypto sites that they can legally access at http://www.sni.net/~mpj/freecryp.htm, which probably points to places with most, if not all, of the cryptographic programs that are archived at my site. Although the hoops are not so hard to navigate at crypto sites outside of North America, I hope that a well-connected site in Colorado will provide faster downloads for people in the USA and Canada. This ftp site is rather busy, so if your connection is refused, please try back at a time that is less busy. If you have some high quality, strong cryptographic software or libraries that you would like me to host, please let me know at mpj at csn.net. Space is limited, but I have room for a few more things, like programs to take on the RSA challenge contests, etc. Peace to you. Michael Paul Johnson mpj at csn.net PO Box 1151 http://www.sni.net/~mpj Longmont CO 80502-1151 USA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.7.1 iQEVAgUBMuVgv2+Iqt/O4EnZAQFCmQgAjgWszTVkWNE5PeYayjsIOTqGFODueqdx gpRZbHhKspZTFlmPfxuB0p2wqflAcKrnC2QhJWJs2Je10vLKNE/4P8dif31I62zc vDJPnpsuXZnjfC1Wo+iPozrpO+0oYb8k9KH/MZNTPDUWpeT2f35tkg2Kzg+eW/2Z 6jJnbLB/IfzZlTb4/bwF12wwUiNNbAR54hnxR1tMaa4wEA+Ti5eFEKtWobhn6hLH HP5fyvSa/adYUj3z8F3As7k/ClcWkyd0ygUVsWXeMphD7nxEEH6Z2JW3OrvyRbjh l//8Egaaz1IgZf+i11C/o/nIJWac0JBqRcSsDBaqMC01+RfN5zrJvw== =TIwr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 21 15:55:39 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:55:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: [NOISE] Re: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701212355.PAA14206@toad.com> Sean Roach wrote: > That machine will be the SIXTH model made by a little firm on the thirteenth > floor of an office building. > It will operate on several thousand 6X86 processors. > It will operate either on MSDOS 6.0 or UNIX V6R4, depending on how soon it > is completed. > > And it won't be our forearms, we can cover those with sleeves. It will be > our brow. (please excuse the spelling). > yeah, 6000 processors, all managed by MS-DOS. And 30,000 couriers alone. - Igor. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 15:57:58 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:57:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft Message-ID: <199701212357.PAA14286@toad.com> At 09:13 PM 1/20/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >At 11:46 AM 1/20/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >>1. an html tag that indicates how much a link costs, probably in >>the type syntax > >This could be done, but is, IMHO, too inflexible. > Also, with tags, I could download the page with good old fashioned netscape 3.0 Gold, (possibly the last browser without this), allowing me to get the entire page, neutralize the tag either by hand or with a simple app. and view the site sans payment. The blocks that I see to this are server push upon receipt of cash and encrypted pages only accessable upon (automatic) payment, not unlike pay-per-view satellite television. The problem here is the patent that was stirring up trouble here a few months ago. The one that Compuserve stood up against involving the use of this on computer networks. I really think that a tag alone wouldn't be worth much, not without a CGI script to verify it or a JAVA app. to run it. Please correct me if I am in error. From blake at bcdev.com Tue Jan 21 15:58:05 1997 From: blake at bcdev.com (Blake Coverett) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:58:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701212358.PAA14296@toad.com> Toto writes: > Just because an individual claims, rightly or wrongly, to be a > big defender of freedom, involving himself or herself in causes > like those of the Electronic Freedom Foundation, does not take > away their right to stomp on anyone who disagrees with them on > their own private list. Of course > To claim otherwise would be as ludicrous as denying the person > running the Anonymizer the right to expose the identities of the > people he feels might perhaps be abusing his private system, or > using it for nefarious purposes, such as hiding their identity > from others. I suspect you intended that to be sarcasm, but to be honest I wouldn't have caught it at all if I wasn't already aware of your views in this area. The person hosting the Anonymizer *does* have the right to do exactly this. I don't believe they would do so, but that is a reputation issue not a question of my rights. If I had entered into a contract with the provider of a service of this nature then I would have a 'right' to expect their contractual obligations to be fulfilled, but that is not the case with the Anonymizer and certainly not with toad.com. regards, -Blake (freedom of the press for those with presses) From mpj at csn.net Tue Jan 21 15:58:09 1997 From: mpj at csn.net (Michael Johnson) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:58:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: North American crypto archive Message-ID: <199701212358.PAA14297@toad.com> [I'm not on this list, so please CC: me on replies. Thanks!] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- There is another change to the way I distribute strong cryptographic software at my ftp site (ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/). The strong cryptographic software is still in a hidden directory with a name that changes periodically, but access is via a password protected web form at http://www.sni.net/~mpj/na/ that has the current hidden directory name expanded in it. To get your very own user name and password, please fill out the form at http://www.sni.net/~mpj/getcrypt.htm, and then watch your email box. This change is to comply with the new Export Administration Regulation (EAR) changes that require "checking the destination machine's address" to ensure that it is in the USA or Canada to avoid being accused of exporting without a license. My many friends outside of North America need not feel left out, however, as I have a nice listing of some good crypto sites that they can legally access at http://www.sni.net/~mpj/freecryp.htm, which probably points to places with most, if not all, of the cryptographic programs that are archived at my site. Although the hoops are not so hard to navigate at crypto sites outside of North America, I hope that a well-connected site in Colorado will provide faster downloads for people in the USA and Canada. This ftp site is rather busy, so if your connection is refused, please try back at a time that is less busy. If you have some high quality, strong cryptographic software or libraries that you would like me to host, please let me know at mpj at csn.net. Space is limited, but I have room for a few more things, like programs to take on the RSA challenge contests, etc. Peace to you. Michael Paul Johnson mpj at csn.net PO Box 1151 http://www.sni.net/~mpj Longmont CO 80502-1151 USA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.7.1 iQEVAgUBMuVgv2+Iqt/O4EnZAQFCmQgAjgWszTVkWNE5PeYayjsIOTqGFODueqdx gpRZbHhKspZTFlmPfxuB0p2wqflAcKrnC2QhJWJs2Je10vLKNE/4P8dif31I62zc vDJPnpsuXZnjfC1Wo+iPozrpO+0oYb8k9KH/MZNTPDUWpeT2f35tkg2Kzg+eW/2Z 6jJnbLB/IfzZlTb4/bwF12wwUiNNbAR54hnxR1tMaa4wEA+Ti5eFEKtWobhn6hLH HP5fyvSa/adYUj3z8F3As7k/ClcWkyd0ygUVsWXeMphD7nxEEH6Z2JW3OrvyRbjh l//8Egaaz1IgZf+i11C/o/nIJWac0JBqRcSsDBaqMC01+RfN5zrJvw== =TIwr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 15:59:48 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:59:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" Message-ID: <199701212359.PAA14326@toad.com> At 02:22 AM 1/21/97 -0800, Toto wrote: >Bill Campbell wrote: > >> I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the >> more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced. > > Dr. Vulis? There was an 'attempt' to silence him, but it hasn't >worked, to date. > I believe he is referring to silencing the list, not Vulis. As long as the members of this list are argueing over semantics, the government has one less challenger in the fight over our rights. Remember, one of the oldest tactics of war is to turn the enemy against itself. From smith at sctc.com Tue Jan 21 15:59:49 1997 From: smith at sctc.com (Rick Smith) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 15:59:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition Message-ID: <199701212359.PAA14327@toad.com> pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz wrote: : I was talking to someone recently about the feasibilty of keyword-scanning : phone conversations.... My first "real" job in the computer industry was for a garage shop doing speech recognition. We did a demo system in 1977 for Rome Labs that did exactly what you're asking about: scanning a stream of continuous speech over a telephone line looking for key words. It was tolerably effective: I forget the success rate but it was above 90%. But we were never asked to go past the research prototype. We did it the "hard way" in that we were trying to solve the "talk to the computer" problem which is harder than the "look for something suspicious worth looking closer at" problem. I expect they were looking for something to cut down on their false positives and perhaps we weren't significantly better than what they were already doing. : "Discrete Utterance Speech Recognition without Time Alignment", John Shore : and David Burton, IEEE Trans.Information Theory, Vol.29, No.4 (July 1983), : p.473. : :This generates a feature vector every 10-30ms from input speech which is :compared to pre-generated reference sequences. It also has references to many :other papers covering the same area. When I worked in the field "discrete utterance" was the buzz phrase for talking with - pauses - between - each - word. Ecch. Our commercial systems at the time (late '70s) used discrete speech without time alignment since we could process 8 input channels simultaneously. Ahhh. The joys of microcoding for a 74S181 ALU. Rick. smith at sctc.com secure computing corporation From camcc at abraxis.com Tue Jan 21 16:03:25 1997 From: camcc at abraxis.com (Alec) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:03:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701220003.QAA14414@toad.com> At 12:27 AM 1/21/97 -0600, you wrote: :Jane Jefferson wrote: :> :> The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", :> and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to :> individual. : :An excellent point, Jane. Worth remembering. : : - Igor. Not only from individual to individual. Please consider the changes in the concepts of "sin", "freedom", "good", and "evil" which occur over time even within the same individual; to wit the on and off again love affair with our nation's past "enemies; individual responses to drug use especially alcohol; premarital sex (ok for me but not my daughter). This constant flux within both society and individual makes creation and implementation of rules extremely difficult and hazardous. Alec From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 16:04:46 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:04:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [NOISE] Re: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701220004.QAA14425@toad.com> At 08:35 PM 1/20/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > In short, I believe that if the issue of free speech is not one of >the central issues on the CypherPunks list, then the list is merely >one more heartless, unfeeling extension of the Great Machine which >is grinding inexorably forward toward the day when we will all have >its numbers tattoo'd on our forearms. That machine will be the SIXTH model made by a little firm on the thirteenth floor of an office building. It will operate on several thousand 6X86 processors. It will operate either on MSDOS 6.0 or UNIX V6R4, depending on how soon it is completed. And it won't be our forearms, we can cover those with sleeves. It will be our brow. (please excuse the spelling). From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 16:19:41 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:19:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs Message-ID: <199701220019.QAA14630@toad.com> At 04:17 AM 1/21/97 -0500, Richard L. Field wrote: ... > I read the new regs as permitting: (i) publication of source code in >paper form (including publications reproduced on microfilm or on prerecorded >phonograph records), or in the form of a motion picture film and soundtrack >(section 734.3(b)(2)); and, separately, (ii) teaching or discussion of >information "about" cryptography (section 744.9). The export of other >encryption materials (including the distribution to non-US persons of source >or object code on diskettes) is restricted, even if the materials are >publicly available "educational information" for release by instruction in >catalog courses and associated teaching laboratories of academic >institutions (section 734.9). ... This has often reminded me of something that occurred around 1776. I can't remember if it was before or after. Remember how the colonies got sophisticated spinning gear? I believe it was spinning gear. Great Britain had a ban on the export of functional models, diagrams or manufacturing instructions to one particular class of equipment. This was so that they could maintain the monopoly on cheaply made cloth, holding the outlying colonies in line by maintaining a dependancy. One man memorized the structure of one of these machines and then came to the American shores, where he reproduced it workably. I can't remember the name of the man or the machine, just that it was used in the manufacture of cloth, the "spinning jenny" i think. Nor can I remember the date. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 21 16:20:11 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:20:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701220020.QAA14642@toad.com> At 12:35 AM 1/21/97 -0500, Jane Jefferson wrote: >Governments, however, are made up of the very same people who claim >to require these rights to privacy. Those people create, codify and >enforce the laws. The problem is that the people who find themselves in >this position of power are not always the most moral or concerned with >the best interest of the majority. > >And fiendishly, it is the very chaos and anarchy and random chance >espoused by proponents of the cypherpunk philosophy that allows these >people to gain this power, unchecked! > >Thus, the real problem ends up being not "how to control the government >so that the government doesn't control us", but "how to deal with the >government when it goes into control-freak mode". That it will go into >such a mode is a given -- based on human nature and history. This is >a fundamental cycle of evolution and human behavior. We have to face >the fact that humans are predators, and as long as we are, the >cycle of this behavior will continue. Also, remember, that those people willing to put up with the responsibility of leadership are more often more extreme control freaks than the rest of the population. Persons asked on the street if they wanted to be president of the United States have often said no way, yet every four years we have at least two people willing to put up with the hassle in order to be the most powerful man in the country. What we need is a leader who is willing to put up with it for h[is/er] people/cause, but has no desire to stay any longer than absolutely necessary. Then we need another just like h[im/er] for the next term. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 21 16:30:39 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:30:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: HOW AM I MEANT TO GET OFF THIS LIST! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <36kw1D1w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Marc writes: > > This thing keeps saying im not on it but am! > someone help me. > Sandy is totally incompetent. S/he should commt suicide. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 21 16:30:40 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:30:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Nurdane Oksas writes: > On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . > > > > What kind of movies? > > You're too young to watch these..:) I'm older than you... Do you mean I'm too old to watch these? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 21 16:30:52 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:30:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. In-Reply-To: <01BC07A2.1CDA0D80@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" writes: > Mission: > > Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? The Web > was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. Phil, when I saw the subject, I thought this was another article condemning Gilmore, Sandfort, and their disgraceful censorship. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From manager at usaphone.com Tue Jan 21 16:52:27 1997 From: manager at usaphone.com (manager at usaphone.com) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:52:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: For Your Information Message-ID: We wanted to write to you first regarding an exciting development. On behalf of our customers, we are compiling a mailing list of people like you, who would like to receive notification when our clients run specials, sales, contests and other Internet promotions. We plan to bring you the latest and most exciting opportunities on the web. You e-mail address will never be sold or given out. We will never be a company that sends you e-mail constantly about multi-level marketing and scams. All of our offers will be genuine and be monitored by us for quality. You need not do anything to remain on our list. If you choose to receive E-mail, you may discontinue any time in the future just by replying with the word REMOVE in the subject field. If you would like to be removed from our list IMMEDIATLY and without question, reply with REMOVE in the subject field. You can also send email to mailto:manager at usaphone.com. Thank you for your time. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 21 16:56:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 16:56:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701220056.QAA15164@toad.com> Nurdane Oksas writes: > On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . > > > > What kind of movies? > > You're too young to watch these..:) I'm older than you... Do you mean I'm too old to watch these? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From BUSINESS at VNET.NET Tue Jan 21 17:00:18 1997 From: BUSINESS at VNET.NET (CHAMBER OF COMMERCE) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 17:00:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Adult Chamber of Commerce is now open Message-ID: <32E566AC@VNET.NET> ARE YOU A BUSINESS OWNER WITH A WEB SITE? We got your E-mail address from your Business newsgroup posting. We did not put your E-mail address on a mailing list! IF YOU ARE A BUSINESS OWNER WITH A WEB SITE, you should know that The Adult Chamber of Commerce represents professional ADULT businesses on the Web. The amount of traffic to our Web site is astounding. A massive portion of the Web has Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants, your neighbors, and all sorts of people (buyers) visiting dult sites. It's just the nature of the Web. YOU CAN CAPTURE SOME OF THIS MASSIVE TRAFFIC TO YOUR WEB SITE through a Membership in The Adult Chamber of Commerce. All member companies, Adult & Non-Adult, get listed in the Chamber member links section with an icon that indicates you do business in accordance with the Better Business Practices of The Adult Chamber of Commerce. This listing literally guarantees significant additional traffic to your Web site. Membership in The Adult Chamber of Commerce is omething you should consider if you are interested in getting greater exposure on the Web. Member companies proudly display the Adult Chamber Logo on their web sites. Each company is checked out before membership is approved. Since it costs a business as little as $240 annually for membership, it's not expensive for a company to tell others that they support the only professional organization for responsible ADULT businesses. A business applies for membership at the Adult Chamber Web site and visitors reularly check to see if the company [they're planning to buy from] is a Member in Good Standing. The Adult Chamber of Commerce web site is the place to find the BEST & most responsible companies on the Web. ============================================== Visit and Bookmark http://www.adultchamber.com ============================================== Here is how we tell buyers about the Chamber: The Adult Chamber of Commerce is on the Internet to prtect you. ALWAYS look for the Adult Chamber Logo BEFORE BUYING ANYTHING ADULT. The Chamber is here to help separate professional adult companies from the many thousands that are online. Visit the Chamber links often! IF YOU OWN A BUSINESS, applying for MEMBERSHIP to The Adult Chamber of Commerce is easy. The Web site has an online application. Memberships are processed daily and increasing traffic to your Web site is as easy as becoming a member! The chamber has other services besides increasing trffic to your Web site. We design, re-design and host Web site professionally. Visit www.adultchamber.com for the whole story and you will see why membership is a good idea for any business. We hope to see your company support the Chamber. From markm at voicenet.com Tue Jan 21 17:21:07 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 17:21:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. In-Reply-To: <199701212027.MAA11310@toad.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > 2) How can one prevent the proxies themselves being blocked? Some > ideas that come to mind: > > 2a) Only issue new sites gradually so that blocking requires > continuous updates. I'm not sure how effective this would be. This depends mostly on security through obscurity. If the censors are very dedicated to making sure that all sites containing offending content are blocked, then there might be a few hours between the time when the mirror is set up and when it gets blocked. I prefer to think of the solution to this problem as a denial of service attack rather than just relying on obscurity. If the goal is to make sure that a large number of people have access to the mirrors, then the chances are it will be blocked fairly quickly. If many different diverse sites set up mirrors, this would effectively cut off that country's access to the web. This still does rely on some obscurity, such as being able to change URLs on a site frequently so the whole site has to be blocked instead of just the offending URL. A series of linguistic instructions on generating the URL could easily evade any bot seeking out notices of new URLs. This might be spelling out the URL, telling the user to find the MD5 hash of a specified string (a cgi interface for md5sum might be useful for this example), or any obscure method of encoding an URL that should be easy for any person to understand, but impossible for a program to parse. > 2b) Use DHCP to change network addresses regularly. If this change is regular enough, then it might force the censors to block the whole network and not just the host. Definitely a positive. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMuVsNyzIPc7jvyFpAQGTDwf/UYZ/pZr1WP5KPAJi6NEI1L+3xJR295gW jpHV1pYVweKbozTK3ZJKfL9kaF+nP/0e2UjBAtYTgMJyLxetzjg1lmMhM3r7aR6g 0oBUO79lnWUwnhsxafWmTVlr+6p1wgwSsHAPsdkn/zNQVz1EZc/o5SbmzR2js+6B szLbq7Vid6ap0pshU2NcuEvKmCijMW0cRNeJoaaIBkdMh3SD/FKS/gwSjWqhIefJ 4hthXXu29X7QZk/e8NTbuJY+tiGvKSjmLEZFxUmPXlG6DbRm2HV8FhPNStZhUFN4 MkB+ADvEc3noCxyB3w2y+ThoK41o8caDzWJGWjJ9zf+GGtusWNcYHA== =JS38 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 21 17:26:41 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 17:26:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) Message-ID: >>This is the approach taken by PGPfone also. If the value of the >>conversations was high (>$100,000?) passable voice imitation wouldn't >>be that hard I suspect. > >I have long considered how easy it would be to use a sound card to modify >the human voice to match within certain tolerances the voice of another. > >There are currently on the market, phones specifically designed to modify >the voice of the user so that kids can answer as adults, women can answer as >thier own protective boyfriends, bosses can answer anonymous calls as the >secretary, etc... > >There are currently on the market keyboards that allow you to sample some >real world sound and use it as a voice in your music, (the model I saw, a >toy produced by Radio Shack, simply sped up or slowed down the sound to >achieve this.) > >I have thought, if a machine were to take the incoming voice, analize >(apologies for spelling) it to get a spectrum signature, a pattern that can >be added or subtracted from another, and could then add the difference >between that and the victims signature to the users voice, then real-time, >on-the-fly con jobs would be easy. > >The only thing that the user would be responsible for would be the accent, >and the day-to-day vocabulary of the victim. > >I told a friend about this and he confirmed that such was available if you >knew where to look. A friend of mine, an expert on signal processing, vocei systhesis and recognition, showed me a journal article (think it was an IEEE) in 1990 of some university researchers who had prototyped just such a device. Never followed up, but it seems entirely reasonable a practicle. In fact I'm surprised that Hollywood hasn't latched onto this in order to dub film stars to different languages w/o loosing their recognizable voice characteristics. --Steve From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Tue Jan 21 17:33:34 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 17:33:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701212345.PAA17403@sirius.infonex.com> Is there a moderated list available which expunges only Dale? The good Dr., though vicious, is really quite clever, though vicious. Dale is only a bore. Only. Hugs to all. From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Tue Jan 21 17:40:06 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 17:40:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] Accounts payable Message-ID: <199701220018.QAA23035@sirius.infonex.com> As `homo' as he might be, Timmy May is not of the species `Homo Sapiens', but rather `Papio Mephitis'. Unlike human beings, he has not descended from apes --- yet. .oooO Oooo. ( ) _ _ ( ) \ ( / ) ( \ ) / ----\_)-/ (---) \-(_/---- ( ) ( ) oooO Oooo From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 21 18:00:27 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:00:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) Message-ID: <199701220200.SAA16125@toad.com> >>This is the approach taken by PGPfone also. If the value of the >>conversations was high (>$100,000?) passable voice imitation wouldn't >>be that hard I suspect. > >I have long considered how easy it would be to use a sound card to modify >the human voice to match within certain tolerances the voice of another. > >There are currently on the market, phones specifically designed to modify >the voice of the user so that kids can answer as adults, women can answer as >thier own protective boyfriends, bosses can answer anonymous calls as the >secretary, etc... > >There are currently on the market keyboards that allow you to sample some >real world sound and use it as a voice in your music, (the model I saw, a >toy produced by Radio Shack, simply sped up or slowed down the sound to >achieve this.) > >I have thought, if a machine were to take the incoming voice, analize >(apologies for spelling) it to get a spectrum signature, a pattern that can >be added or subtracted from another, and could then add the difference >between that and the victims signature to the users voice, then real-time, >on-the-fly con jobs would be easy. > >The only thing that the user would be responsible for would be the accent, >and the day-to-day vocabulary of the victim. > >I told a friend about this and he confirmed that such was available if you >knew where to look. A friend of mine, an expert on signal processing, vocei systhesis and recognition, showed me a journal article (think it was an IEEE) in 1990 of some university researchers who had prototyped just such a device. Never followed up, but it seems entirely reasonable a practicle. In fact I'm surprised that Hollywood hasn't latched onto this in order to dub film stars to different languages w/o loosing their recognizable voice characteristics. --Steve From markm at voicenet.com Tue Jan 21 18:00:50 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:00:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. Message-ID: <199701220200.SAA16134@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > 2) How can one prevent the proxies themselves being blocked? Some > ideas that come to mind: > > 2a) Only issue new sites gradually so that blocking requires > continuous updates. I'm not sure how effective this would be. This depends mostly on security through obscurity. If the censors are very dedicated to making sure that all sites containing offending content are blocked, then there might be a few hours between the time when the mirror is set up and when it gets blocked. I prefer to think of the solution to this problem as a denial of service attack rather than just relying on obscurity. If the goal is to make sure that a large number of people have access to the mirrors, then the chances are it will be blocked fairly quickly. If many different diverse sites set up mirrors, this would effectively cut off that country's access to the web. This still does rely on some obscurity, such as being able to change URLs on a site frequently so the whole site has to be blocked instead of just the offending URL. A series of linguistic instructions on generating the URL could easily evade any bot seeking out notices of new URLs. This might be spelling out the URL, telling the user to find the MD5 hash of a specified string (a cgi interface for md5sum might be useful for this example), or any obscure method of encoding an URL that should be easy for any person to understand, but impossible for a program to parse. > 2b) Use DHCP to change network addresses regularly. If this change is regular enough, then it might force the censors to block the whole network and not just the host. Definitely a positive. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMuVsNyzIPc7jvyFpAQGTDwf/UYZ/pZr1WP5KPAJi6NEI1L+3xJR295gW jpHV1pYVweKbozTK3ZJKfL9kaF+nP/0e2UjBAtYTgMJyLxetzjg1lmMhM3r7aR6g 0oBUO79lnWUwnhsxafWmTVlr+6p1wgwSsHAPsdkn/zNQVz1EZc/o5SbmzR2js+6B szLbq7Vid6ap0pshU2NcuEvKmCijMW0cRNeJoaaIBkdMh3SD/FKS/gwSjWqhIefJ 4hthXXu29X7QZk/e8NTbuJY+tiGvKSjmLEZFxUmPXlG6DbRm2HV8FhPNStZhUFN4 MkB+ADvEc3noCxyB3w2y+ThoK41o8caDzWJGWjJ9zf+GGtusWNcYHA== =JS38 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 21 18:04:09 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:04:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition (fwd) Message-ID: <199701220211.UAA06443@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 17:11:24 -0600 > From: Rick Smith > > simultaneously. Ahhh. The joys of microcoding for a 74S181 ALU. Now there is a blast from the past. I was working at UT Austin in '82 on my EE. I had to work part-time at the school for a non-classified project for the DoD (only way they would let students work on projects on the main campus). We were building a non-Von Neumann RTL (mono-bus computer) based router for the ARPANet using the 181's clocked at 40MHz (fastest they were reliable at) as the ALU's behind the registers. Couldn't find a way to saturate the machine (had 64 serial ports driving 64 Z80's @ 4MHz sitting on the RTL bus as addresses registers) on I/O. One of the guys working on the project was taking an electronic music class from one of the members of Journey (who was teaching a 1 time 1 semester class on electronic music) so we ended up using it as a synthesizer. Worked damn well. Don't know what the DoD did with it afterwards. Thanks for the reminder of some fond memories. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From MAILER-DAEMON at worf.qntm.com Tue Jan 21 18:06:17 1997 From: MAILER-DAEMON at worf.qntm.com (Mail Delivery Subsystem) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:06:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Returned mail: User unknown Message-ID: <199701220206.SAA16223@toad.com> While connected to mail.qntm.com. [146.174.80.52] (tcp): >>> RCPT To: <<< 550 ... User unknown 550 ... User unknown To: CV Communications , remove at qntm.com Subject: Re: Customers For You!! From: "cypherpunks at toad.com" Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:04:27 -0600 FUCK YOU SPAMMER At 04:27 PM 1/21/97 -0500, you wrote: >The following message has been brought to you by Quantum Communications. >If you would like advertising rates and information, send an email to info at quantcom.com >or visit our website http://www.quantcom.com >If you prefer NOT to receive promotional messages inthe future, send an email to >remove at quantcom.com > >Quantum Communications BULK EMAIL ADVERTISING SERVICE OFFERS: > >* GUARANTEED RESPONSE RATE! > >* HIGHEST QUALITY LIST (compiled 100% in-house, never bought or >re-sold, continuously updated and maintained)! > >* WE SEND ALL MAIL! (never get shut off by your ISP!) > >* LARGEST DATABASE (over 5 million email addresses)! > >* LOWEST RATES IN THE INDUSTRY! > >* 100% APPROVED FINANCING (no credit checks - you are APPROVED)! > >* WE OFFER WEB PAGE HOSTING AND OTHER RELATED SERVICES AS WELL > >* COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES INCLUDED FREE OF CHARGE (email forwarding, >flame filtering, autoresponders, copy design assistance)! > >* COMPLETE RANGE OF SERVICE OFFERINGS (stand-alone bulk email, co-op >"MEGA-MAILER", custom-built targeted mailings)! > >* REFERENCES FROM HAPPY CLIENTS! > >* VISIT OUR WEB SITE AT http://www.quantcom.com > >For complete details on our services, pricing, no-nonsense response >guarantee, and all other pertinent info, call our sales department @ >(603) 772-4096, or send an email to info at quantcom.com. When requesting >info via email, please be sure to include your voice phone # and best >time to call, unless you would prefer not to be contacted via >telephone to follow up. > > > > > From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 21 18:32:54 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:32:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) (fwd) Message-ID: <199701220239.UAA06540@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 17:29:05 -0800 > From: Steve Schear > Subject: Re: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) > > followed up, but it seems entirely reasonable a practicle. In fact I'm > surprised that Hollywood hasn't latched onto this in order to dub film > stars to different languages w/o loosing their recognizable voice > characteristics. In this regards you people (en toto) need to do a little more real world research in this area. Voice recognition is and has been easy to do for decades. As to what Hollywood is doing, not only are they doing voice masking but your local radio station does it on a regular basis [1] for a few $1,000's in hardware and software. [1] Video Toaster User Dec. 1996 Toaster Talk - "Learning from radio" pp. 6 Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 21 18:40:32 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:40:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition (fwd) Message-ID: <199701220240.SAA16615@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 17:11:24 -0600 > From: Rick Smith > > simultaneously. Ahhh. The joys of microcoding for a 74S181 ALU. Now there is a blast from the past. I was working at UT Austin in '82 on my EE. I had to work part-time at the school for a non-classified project for the DoD (only way they would let students work on projects on the main campus). We were building a non-Von Neumann RTL (mono-bus computer) based router for the ARPANet using the 181's clocked at 40MHz (fastest they were reliable at) as the ALU's behind the registers. Couldn't find a way to saturate the machine (had 64 serial ports driving 64 Z80's @ 4MHz sitting on the RTL bus as addresses registers) on I/O. One of the guys working on the project was taking an electronic music class from one of the members of Journey (who was teaching a 1 time 1 semester class on electronic music) so we ended up using it as a synthesizer. Worked damn well. Don't know what the DoD did with it afterwards. Thanks for the reminder of some fond memories. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 18:50:14 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 18:50:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . > > > > > > What kind of movies? > > > > You're too young to watch these..:) > > I'm older than you... Do you mean I'm too old to watch these? Yes physically you are older and wiser; And watching 'wild orchid' would be detrimental to your health. thinking of you, oksas! From PATRICK at msiconsulting.com Tue Jan 21 19:07:14 1997 From: PATRICK at msiconsulting.com (MSI: Patrick D. O'Brien) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 19:07:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: REMOVE Message-ID: REMOVE From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 19:21:00 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 19:21:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > > snow writes: > > > > > > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > > > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with cl > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily fo > > > > > > > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the per > > > > > > > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at t > > > > > > > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage > > > > > > > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, > > > > > > > so what's the problem? > > > > > > > > > > > > Cold temps... > > > > > > > > > > What can naked people do to keep warm??? > > > > > > > > steal blankets from nearby passenger.. > > > > > > I once saw a movie where they had a heroin (or cocaine?) processing lab > > > and everybody was supposed to work naked so it would be hard to steal > > > some of the product. Of course in the movie all the employees were good- > > > looking women (Oksas would have been the big star!). > > > > Thank you for the complement; You've only seen me with clothes :) > > I can tell. > > > Would you like to share my blanket? > > Sure! A true gentleman (like me) is always ready, willing, and able to share > a security blanket with a lady. I am very embarassed... > > "Something nekkid's in the air!" > i think i am in trouble ;) > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 19:40:42 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 19:40:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701220340.TAA17356@toad.com> On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > ADSL will be the best for movies... i can't wait . > > > > > > What kind of movies? > > > > You're too young to watch these..:) > > I'm older than you... Do you mean I'm too old to watch these? Yes physically you are older and wiser; And watching 'wild orchid' would be detrimental to your health. thinking of you, oksas! From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 21 19:40:45 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 19:40:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) (fwd) Message-ID: <199701220340.TAA17362@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 17:29:05 -0800 > From: Steve Schear > Subject: Re: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) > > followed up, but it seems entirely reasonable a practicle. In fact I'm > surprised that Hollywood hasn't latched onto this in order to dub film > stars to different languages w/o loosing their recognizable voice > characteristics. In this regards you people (en toto) need to do a little more real world research in this area. Voice recognition is and has been easy to do for decades. As to what Hollywood is doing, not only are they doing voice masking but your local radio station does it on a regular basis [1] for a few $1,000's in hardware and software. [1] Video Toaster User Dec. 1996 Toaster Talk - "Learning from radio" pp. 6 Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From jya at pipeline.com Tue Jan 21 19:44:43 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 19:44:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Seismic Crypto Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970122033948.00705368@pop.pipeline.com> In a NYT report today on a "mysterious" blast in the Australian outback in 1993, there's mention of "seismic weapons" and research on them by Nicholas Tesla in the 1930s. Would any of our weapons connoisseurs have more info on what these are and how they were supposed to work? Electrical, chemical, nuclear? That Aussie blast has still not been identified except that it was something in the nuclear weapon, earthquake or meteorite range. The Arum sect, which owned 500,000 acres in the viciniity, was a suspect for a while but later cleared, although it was looking into seismic weapons. Will send the story: WHA_the Or read it at www.nytimes.com From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 21 19:55:31 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 19:55:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701220355.TAA17584@toad.com> On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > > snow writes: > > > > > > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via UPS ; > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > > > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the disease. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring with cl > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavily fo > > > > > > > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the per > > > > > > > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go for > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing at t > > > > > > > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's baggage > > > > > > > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows, > > > > > > > so what's the problem? > > > > > > > > > > > > Cold temps... > > > > > > > > > > What can naked people do to keep warm??? > > > > > > > > steal blankets from nearby passenger.. > > > > > > I once saw a movie where they had a heroin (or cocaine?) processing lab > > > and everybody was supposed to work naked so it would be hard to steal > > > some of the product. Of course in the movie all the employees were good- > > > looking women (Oksas would have been the big star!). > > > > Thank you for the complement; You've only seen me with clothes :) > > I can tell. > > > Would you like to share my blanket? > > Sure! A true gentleman (like me) is always ready, willing, and able to share > a security blanket with a lady. I am very embarassed... > > "Something nekkid's in the air!" > i think i am in trouble ;) > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > From blancw at MICROSOFT.com Tue Jan 21 19:57:05 1997 From: blancw at MICROSOFT.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 19:57:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Purpose of the List Message-ID: If the cpunk list discusses only crypto, then mathematician-programmers will do their cold work in an isolation which eliminates the need to think about the consequences of their actions. So discussions on philosophy, society, etc., are important, to remind everyone of the context within which this subject operates. However, if "community feeling" is the only thing created on the list, and crypto is no longer the focal topic, then what is to be accomplished: the list will become just a playing ground for wayward KOTM PhDs who are not welcome in most other cyberspaces. So the question of "how will this impact society", must maintain association with "but how does this relate to crypto?". (unless the list has changed its stripes, evolving into something completely different, which many will agree it has). .. Blanc From jya at pipeline.com Tue Jan 21 20:10:44 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:10:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Seismic Crypto Message-ID: <199701220410.UAA17798@toad.com> In a NYT report today on a "mysterious" blast in the Australian outback in 1993, there's mention of "seismic weapons" and research on them by Nicholas Tesla in the 1930s. Would any of our weapons connoisseurs have more info on what these are and how they were supposed to work? Electrical, chemical, nuclear? That Aussie blast has still not been identified except that it was something in the nuclear weapon, earthquake or meteorite range. The Arum sect, which owned 500,000 acres in the viciniity, was a suspect for a while but later cleared, although it was looking into seismic weapons. Will send the story: WHA_the Or read it at www.nytimes.com From blancw at microsoft.com Tue Jan 21 20:12:24 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:12:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Purpose of the List Message-ID: <199701220412.UAA17812@toad.com> If the cpunk list discusses only crypto, then mathematician-programmers will do their cold work in an isolation which eliminates the need to think about the consequences of their actions. So discussions on philosophy, society, etc., are important, to remind everyone of the context within which this subject operates. However, if "community feeling" is the only thing created on the list, and crypto is no longer the focal topic, then what is to be accomplished: the list will become just a playing ground for wayward KOTM PhDs who are not welcome in most other cyberspaces. So the question of "how will this impact society", must maintain association with "but how does this relate to crypto?". (unless the list has changed its stripes, evolving into something completely different, which many will agree it has). .. Blanc From rwright at adnetsol.com Tue Jan 21 20:15:55 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:15:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI Gets 500 Mil to Tap Your Communications Message-ID: <199701220416.UAA21632@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> ||| FBI moderates its communications-surveillance request ||| TBTF for 5/4/95 [6] In 1995 the FBI asked for and was granted $500 million to augment the government's ability to tap communications (of this total $100M has been released to the FBI so far). Privacy advocates expressed outrage at the FBI's stated capacity goal: to be able to listen in on 1% of installed telephone lines at any time. This translates to about 1.6 million taps simultaneous of all kinds: pen registers, trap-and-trace, and wiretaps. The FBI withdrew its initial proposal under fire and on 1/14 submitted a revised proposal -- press release at [7], analysis at [8]. Unlike the earlier draft, this essay lays out its assumptions and straightforwardly projects needed capacity growth. The result is a capacity figure of fewer than 60,000 intercepts, less that 4% of the original request. This level of capability would allow the FBI simultaneously to monitor more than 500 phone lines in an area with the population of Manhatta still an enormous increase on historical numbers of intercepts. [6] [7] [8] Fuck the FBI. Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 21 20:42:12 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:42:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Nikola Tesla Message-ID: <199701220449.WAA06765@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:39:48 -0500 > From: John Young > Subject: Seismic Crypto > > In a NYT report today on a "mysterious" blast in the > Australian outback in 1993, there's mention of "seismic > weapons" and research on them by Nicholas Tesla > in the 1930s. First, it's Nikola Tesla. At least do the man the honor of getting his name correct (he is a personal hero of mine), I mean he ONLY invented the AC power system we use today, the first commercial power generation plant at Niagra Falls in the world, the first torpedo which he sold to the Russians because the USN was too stupid to buy it, radio, remote control via radio, wireless power transmission, etc... Second, there is a LOT of hogwash attributed to Nikola which he in actuality never worked on (ie death rays, flying saucers to the interior of the Earth, etc.). If you would like to learn more about him then check out "The Writings and Inventions of Nikola Tesla", it was proofed by him prior to its publication. You will also find in most bookstores a copy of all his American patents in "The Collected Patents of Nikola Tesla". I apologize for not providing ISBN's but my copies are 30 miles away in my shop being used to build Tesla Coils. I would strongly suggest avoiding the Tesla Society as it is, in my opinion, populated by a bunch of UFO and conspiracy crazies (though a small percentage of their articles are useable). His work on 'artificial earthquakes' dealt with his studies on mechanical coupling between tuned oscillators. He was finaly 'asked' to leave because he would get 4-5 square block areas of New York rocking, much to the chagrin of the residents, by coupling pile-driver like oscillators to the building he lived in. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From mpj at csn.net Tue Jan 21 20:43:07 1997 From: mpj at csn.net (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:43:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: North American crypto site -- correction Message-ID: <199701220429.VAA12571@teal.csn.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Correction: the "front door" to the North American crypto site is http://www.sni.net/~mpj/usa/getcrypt.htm (the /usa was missing in in an earlier post) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.0 Personal Edition iQEVAgUBMuWW/W+Iqt/O4EnZAQHnSAgAmMNA1UcEsd8wTkLz50ayj16t8SCFnfLs y86ZwxUd0aD7PoyMwGXbr2KkY9E9/I+CQAf9P56DbxDSCWWPzZA0Tydy0Zb+yeH1 +hIoFYMJbWi4nj34B1OtiZeNW9QbWxqyD7CUu8gdaRncxM83tsFY9UAQd8+wyV3w IFyrT6MZj+WLNBh1IhzkKTSdJzNW1mool97hm2KHH/nVuSYtBiVixmeTXkyoB5NU NfesjceO9g0PrVl0jW7NE1kOCJteFI2AAEaAKVYLVYvgvEdGSUkO0DnAXzVFCGKv Eb7/Wk0S7YVEFgVfamxsHvu/PoofVnvXX92UtXPhcHmbobqANA/yfg== =2ZhX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Jesus Christ is coming back with power and glory! Are you READY? mailto:mpj at csn.net Bible site-> http://www.sni.net/~mpj Is 40:31 BBS 303-772-1062 PGPprint=3E67A5800DFBD16A 6D52D3A91C074E41 From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 21 20:48:44 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:48:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970121174238.00687e7c@smtp1.abraxis.com> Message-ID: <32E59C0E.29DE@gte.net> Alec wrote: > :Jane Jefferson wrote: > :> The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > :> and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > :> individual. > Not only from individual to individual. > Please consider the changes in the concepts of "sin", "freedom", "good", > and "evil" which occur over time even within the same individual; to > wit the on and off again love affair with our nation's past "enemies; > individual responses to drug use especially alcohol; premarital sex > (ok for me but not my daughter). > This constant flux within both society and individual makes creation > and implementation of rules extremely difficult and hazardous. The idea that "sin" and "evil" are abstract and somewhat arbitrary is merely a human (and therefore faulty) perception. If God can be perfect by definition (for sake of argument), then "sin" is taking one's attention from God's intent and turning to man's intent, which is inherently selfish. "Evil" is the selfish thing you do, when you should do the unselfish thing. These are not that difficult to understand, but are easily twisted by selfish minds. A gentleman wrote to Southern Partisan magazine a few years ago and said "Real freedom is not the license to do whatever you want, but rather the liberty to do what you ought to do". From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 21 20:53:42 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 20:53:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Purpose of the List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E59D1E.C23@gte.net> Blanc Weber wrote: > If the cpunk list discusses only crypto, then mathematician-programmers > will do their cold work in an isolation which eliminates the need to > think about the consequences of their actions. > So discussions on philosophy, society, etc., are important, to remind > everyone of the context within which this subject operates. > However, if "community feeling" is the only thing created on the list, > and crypto is no longer the focal topic, then what is to be > accomplished: the list will become just a playing ground for wayward > KOTM PhDs who are not welcome in most other cyberspaces. > So the question of "how will this impact society", must maintain > association with "but how does this relate to crypto?". (unless the > list has changed its stripes, evolving into something completely > different, which many will agree it has). It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jan 21 21:34:08 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:34:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970121213536.006e9ce4@192.100.81.126> I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks, -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jan 21 21:55:27 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:55:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? Message-ID: <199701220555.VAA18973@toad.com> I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. Any advice would be appreciated. Thanks, -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From mpj at csn.net Tue Jan 21 21:55:30 1997 From: mpj at csn.net (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:55:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: North American crypto site -- correction Message-ID: <199701220555.VAA18981@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Correction: the "front door" to the North American crypto site is http://www.sni.net/~mpj/usa/getcrypt.htm (the /usa was missing in in an earlier post) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.0 Personal Edition iQEVAgUBMuWW/W+Iqt/O4EnZAQHnSAgAmMNA1UcEsd8wTkLz50ayj16t8SCFnfLs y86ZwxUd0aD7PoyMwGXbr2KkY9E9/I+CQAf9P56DbxDSCWWPzZA0Tydy0Zb+yeH1 +hIoFYMJbWi4nj34B1OtiZeNW9QbWxqyD7CUu8gdaRncxM83tsFY9UAQd8+wyV3w IFyrT6MZj+WLNBh1IhzkKTSdJzNW1mool97hm2KHH/nVuSYtBiVixmeTXkyoB5NU NfesjceO9g0PrVl0jW7NE1kOCJteFI2AAEaAKVYLVYvgvEdGSUkO0DnAXzVFCGKv Eb7/Wk0S7YVEFgVfamxsHvu/PoofVnvXX92UtXPhcHmbobqANA/yfg== =2ZhX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Jesus Christ is coming back with power and glory! Are you READY? mailto:mpj at csn.net Bible site-> http://www.sni.net/~mpj Is 40:31 BBS 303-772-1062 PGPprint=3E67A5800DFBD16A 6D52D3A91C074E41 From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 21 21:55:35 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:55:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Purpose of the List Message-ID: <199701220555.VAA18989@toad.com> Blanc Weber wrote: > If the cpunk list discusses only crypto, then mathematician-programmers > will do their cold work in an isolation which eliminates the need to > think about the consequences of their actions. > So discussions on philosophy, society, etc., are important, to remind > everyone of the context within which this subject operates. > However, if "community feeling" is the only thing created on the list, > and crypto is no longer the focal topic, then what is to be > accomplished: the list will become just a playing ground for wayward > KOTM PhDs who are not welcome in most other cyberspaces. > So the question of "how will this impact society", must maintain > association with "but how does this relate to crypto?". (unless the > list has changed its stripes, evolving into something completely > different, which many will agree it has). It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 21 21:55:40 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:55:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701220555.VAA18997@toad.com> Alec wrote: > :Jane Jefferson wrote: > :> The heart and soul of the problem is that "sin", "freedom", "good", > :> and "evil" are abstract concepts which fluctuate from individual to > :> individual. > Not only from individual to individual. > Please consider the changes in the concepts of "sin", "freedom", "good", > and "evil" which occur over time even within the same individual; to > wit the on and off again love affair with our nation's past "enemies; > individual responses to drug use especially alcohol; premarital sex > (ok for me but not my daughter). > This constant flux within both society and individual makes creation > and implementation of rules extremely difficult and hazardous. The idea that "sin" and "evil" are abstract and somewhat arbitrary is merely a human (and therefore faulty) perception. If God can be perfect by definition (for sake of argument), then "sin" is taking one's attention from God's intent and turning to man's intent, which is inherently selfish. "Evil" is the selfish thing you do, when you should do the unselfish thing. These are not that difficult to understand, but are easily twisted by selfish minds. A gentleman wrote to Southern Partisan magazine a few years ago and said "Real freedom is not the license to do whatever you want, but rather the liberty to do what you ought to do". From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 21 21:55:47 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:55:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Nikola Tesla Message-ID: <199701220555.VAA19005@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:39:48 -0500 > From: John Young > Subject: Seismic Crypto > > In a NYT report today on a "mysterious" blast in the > Australian outback in 1993, there's mention of "seismic > weapons" and research on them by Nicholas Tesla > in the 1930s. First, it's Nikola Tesla. At least do the man the honor of getting his name correct (he is a personal hero of mine), I mean he ONLY invented the AC power system we use today, the first commercial power generation plant at Niagra Falls in the world, the first torpedo which he sold to the Russians because the USN was too stupid to buy it, radio, remote control via radio, wireless power transmission, etc... Second, there is a LOT of hogwash attributed to Nikola which he in actuality never worked on (ie death rays, flying saucers to the interior of the Earth, etc.). If you would like to learn more about him then check out "The Writings and Inventions of Nikola Tesla", it was proofed by him prior to its publication. You will also find in most bookstores a copy of all his American patents in "The Collected Patents of Nikola Tesla". I apologize for not providing ISBN's but my copies are 30 miles away in my shop being used to build Tesla Coils. I would strongly suggest avoiding the Tesla Society as it is, in my opinion, populated by a bunch of UFO and conspiracy crazies (though a small percentage of their articles are useable). His work on 'artificial earthquakes' dealt with his studies on mechanical coupling between tuned oscillators. He was finaly 'asked' to leave because he would get 4-5 square block areas of New York rocking, much to the chagrin of the residents, by coupling pile-driver like oscillators to the building he lived in. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From rwright at adnetsol.com Tue Jan 21 21:57:16 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 21:57:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI Gets 500 Mil to Tap Your Communications Message-ID: <199701220557.VAA19021@toad.com> ||| FBI moderates its communications-surveillance request ||| TBTF for 5/4/95 [6] In 1995 the FBI asked for and was granted $500 million to augment the government's ability to tap communications (of this total $100M has been released to the FBI so far). Privacy advocates expressed outrage at the FBI's stated capacity goal: to be able to listen in on 1% of installed telephone lines at any time. This translates to about 1.6 million taps simultaneous of all kinds: pen registers, trap-and-trace, and wiretaps. The FBI withdrew its initial proposal under fire and on 1/14 submitted a revised proposal -- press release at [7], analysis at [8]. Unlike the earlier draft, this essay lays out its assumptions and straightforwardly projects needed capacity growth. The result is a capacity figure of fewer than 60,000 intercepts, less that 4% of the original request. This level of capability would allow the FBI simultaneously to monitor more than 500 phone lines in an area with the population of Manhatta still an enormous increase on historical numbers of intercepts. [6] [7] [8] Fuck the FBI. Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 21 22:12:25 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:12:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: In-Reply-To: <199701212345.PAA17403@sirius.infonex.com> Message-ID: <32E5AFA8.768E@gte.net> Mixmaster wrote: > Is there a moderated list available which expunges only Dale? > The good Dr., though vicious, is really quite clever, though vicious. > Dale is only a bore. Only. > Hugs to all. I laughed so hard I nearly peed my pants. BTW, does the word "peed" make this post go into the dumper?? [hee hee] From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 21 22:19:52 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:19:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701220611.AAA06975@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:50:15 -0500 > From: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" > Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. > > Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any particular view on them. If Billy-Bob wants to shoot himself in the foot, let him. Might be purty funny to watch. > The Web was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share data in a easily digestible format. The web and technology in general have no more ethics or morality intrinsicly in them than a 5/8" open end wrench. Blocking and filtering are an expression of human choice and the implimentation thereof. You don't like it, don't live there and don't try to call there. You or I have no more right to be on a Chinese or Singapore Internet than they have in coming into yours or my home without an invitation. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From dsmith at prairienet.org Tue Jan 21 22:20:04 1997 From: dsmith at prairienet.org (David E. Smith) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:20:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970122002100.0069b564@midwest.net> At 09:35 PM 1/21/97 -0800, you wrote: >I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. >Any advice would be appreciated. IBM or Mac? Methinks (and I haven't tried it, but I think I will soon) that at least on the IBM side, the usual realm of existing software (SecureDrive/SecureDevice are the first things that come to mind) ought to work. After the Iomega ZIP drivers are in place, the Zip drive is 'just another drive' as far as most applications can see. dave From wcampbel at peganet.com Tue Jan 21 22:46:41 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:46:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" Message-ID: <199701220638.BAA02052@mercury.peganet.com> Sean Roach wrote: > At 02:22 AM 1/21/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > >Bill Campbell wrote: > > > >> I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the > >> more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced. > > > > Dr. Vulis? There was an 'attempt' to silence him, but it hasn't > >worked, to date. > > > I believe he is referring to silencing the list, not Vulis. As long as the > members of this list are argueing over semantics, the government has one > less challenger in the fight over our rights. > Remember, one of the oldest tactics of war is to turn the enemy against itself. I thought my meaning was obvious, but thanks for pointing it out to those who didn't get it. When I first began reading this list, I realized that a lot of important information was being put out; and it certainly raised my awareness of issues that I had not previously thought about. I believe that many other subscribers to the list also were exposed to many of these concepts, and that many subscribers to the list were people who could make a difference. I fear that many have now left the list, since it now seems to resemble, in many ways, a list consisting of high school age "wannabes" who think it's really cool to attack people just because they can. The downward spiral into inconsequential meaningless postings began with posts containing the word "fart". So cool, dudes. =Bill= From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 21 22:51:13 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:51:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: ADSL (Was: GSM technology Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970120223838.00635068@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: > Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? They're not widely available yet; I don't know if any of the (US) phone companies offer it as more than trials. One limitation is that the technology works over copper wire, so it has to be offered at your local telco wire center. Of course, your local telco has to have something useful to do with the bits once the user sends them to the telco, and has to have some useful bits to send the user. This means they've got to haggle about standards for 5 more years (or just do the right thing and deploy IP, with some respectable bandwidth to the outside world) (or deploy ATM to get a layer 2 connection to something outside.) Don't know if the telcos have a clue about pricing, either. It's obviously got to be more than cost, but they'll probably thrash around a lot the way they did with IP.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 21 22:51:20 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:51:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Wow. Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970120211054.005bb498@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 12:58 AM 1/19/97 -0500, Amanda Walker wrote: >I'm off to look for a mailing list where people are ACTUALLY DISCUSSING >CRYPTOGRAPHY AND IMPLEMENTING CRYPTOSYSTEMS. This list may still be >called "cypherpunks", but it doesn't have much cypherpunk left in it, as >far as I can tell. To some extent it's bad timing - there's been enough flaming on the list (including a few bad apples really harassing it) that John Gilmore decided it was time to start moderating the list, and that's led to a bunch of flames about moderation. But it was getting pretty bad. About a year ago the coderpunks at toad.com list got started; it's just for discussing code and related issues, not politics. It's moderated by the "Please be nice, and we'll kick you off for abuse" method, and it's worked out fine, though it's usually quiet. Also, a month or two ago, Perry Metzger started cryptography at c2.net , which is a bit more general but not for flaming. Perry moderates it. Both use -request to find the listbot. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 21 22:52:57 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:52:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: mailing list Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970120211347.005bb498@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 02:54 AM 1/18/97 -0500, roamer.fau wrote: >Please place me on your mailing list. > Thank You, > Mark > > cypherpunks-request at toad.com "help" # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 21 22:53:00 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:53:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Donna Rice, etc. Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970120213409.005bb498@popd.ix.netcom.com> >Yes, it's the very same Bimbo who scuttled Gary Hart's campaign, I think you have to give Gary all the credit for that; the "Hey, I'm not doing anything wrong and you could follow me around 24 hours a day and not find anything" bit convinced me that Hart was a major flake, and doing it when the only credible Democrat to take over after him was Walter F@#&! Mondale was just unconscionable. If he'd said something like "Get Off My Ass" or "Reagan's not on his first wife, so what's your point" or "my marriage is off limits" or whatever I'd have had some respect, and for a Democrat he hadn't seemed to be that bad. > but when she tries to tell me what I should or shouldn't be able to > see, my reply *must* be: > Fuck you, you hypocritical, ignorant, little slut. >I am also going to take issue with her trysting with a married man. >I wish Hart's wife had verbally beaten the living shit out of her. She's a _former_ bimbo, who has ostensibly rehabilitated herself. Not that that puts her in a position to throw stones at other people.. >Obligatory Crypto Policy reference: Why couldn't she have scuttled >Feurher Clinton's career, instead? Not enough room to fool around on a bass-fishing boat? # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From ott0matic at hotmail.com Tue Jan 21 22:56:05 1997 From: ott0matic at hotmail.com (Otto Matic) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:56:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fascist cocksuckers: 0, Freedom of speech: 1 Message-ID: <19970122065600.27658.qmail@hotmail.com> >> John Young wrote: >> > Governments in China, Burma and >> > Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with >> > minimal success. >> >> Do you have any pointers to information in regard to this, or are you >> just being a goddamn tease? > >For example, the fascist cocksuckers Sandfart and Geekmore have been >totally impotent in their failed attempts to suppress free speech. > >Gilmore's as inept as the governments of China, Burma and Singapore combined. > > FUCK CENSORSHIP. FUCK EFF (EFFEMINATE FASCISTS FOUNDATION). > >--- > Seems as if you've been censored! Bummer, dude! 0tto otto =-=-=-=-=- Otto Matic "Fuckin' A, Miller!" Bud, Repo Man --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From ott0matic at hotmail.com Tue Jan 21 22:59:56 1997 From: ott0matic at hotmail.com (Otto Matic) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 22:59:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. Message-ID: <19970122065951.28605.qmail@hotmail.com> >From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Tue Jan 21 16:57:46 1997 >"Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" writes: > >> Mission: >> >> Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think >> this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? The Web >> was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice >> between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of >> speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. > >Phil, when I saw the subject, I thought this was another article >condemning Gilmore, Sandfort, and their disgraceful censorship. What's up with this one getting censored? You didn't say cocksucker or fuck or anything? Otto otto =-=-=-=-=- Otto Matic "Fuckin' A, Miller!" Bud, Repo Man --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From shamrock at netcom.com Tue Jan 21 23:18:09 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 23:18:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970121231633.006e2694@192.100.81.126> At 12:21 AM 1/22/97 -0600, David E. Smith wrote: >At 09:35 PM 1/21/97 -0800, you wrote: >>I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. >>Any advice would be appreciated. > >IBM or Mac? Parallel on Win95. Thanks, -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Tue Jan 21 23:25:56 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 23:25:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition Message-ID: <85391794600049@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> I've found another collection of references on speech scanning/recognition, the February 1989 CACM, p.193, contains 38 references going back to 1980. It'd be an interesting exercise for anyone with access to a large library to trace back through these (some of them look promising, like a 1980 book "Trends in Speech Recognition" from which a number of references are taken) to see how far back you can go and at what point certain things became feasible. The CACM references would be a good starting point for a search. Peter. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 22 00:32:20 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:32:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" In-Reply-To: <199701220638.BAA02052@mercury.peganet.com> Message-ID: <32E5CD25.74BB@gte.net> Bill Campbell wrote: > Sean Roach wrote: > > At 02:22 AM 1/21/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > > >Bill Campbell wrote: > > I believe he is referring to silencing the list, not Vulis. As long as the > > members of this list are argueing over semantics, the government has one > > less challenger in the fight over our rights. > > Remember, one of the oldest tactics of war is to turn the enemy against itself. > I fear that many have now left the list, since it now seems to resemble, > in many ways, a list consisting of high school age "wannabes" who think > it's really cool to attack people just because they can. The downward > spiral into inconsequential meaningless postings began with posts > containing the word "fart". So cool, dudes. The list only suffers when you guys stop posting crypto/political info. For example, if tomorrow there are 100 new posts, and 10 of them are crypto/political relevant, and 10 more are like this one (I'm ignoring the other 80 for this example), then the list is only 10% relevant. Take away these 10, and it's 11.1%, but 10 less posts to read. Turn these 10 into something relevant, and voila(!), the list is now 20% relevant. You see, it's up to you, Bill. From proff at suburbia.net Wed Jan 22 01:09:10 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net (proff at suburbia.net) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 01:09:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation (fwd) Message-ID: <19970122090827.7572.qmail@suburbia.net> >From owner-freebsd-hackers at freefall.freebsd.org Wed Jan 22 09:05:30 1997 Return-Path: Delivered-To: proff at suburbia.net Received: (qmail 7399 invoked from network); 22 Jan 1997 09:05:21 -0000 Received: from mail.webspan.net (206.154.70.7) by suburbia.net with SMTP; 22 Jan 1997 09:05:21 -0000 Received: from freefall.freebsd.org (freefall.FreeBSD.ORG [204.216.27.18]) by mail.webspan.net (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id EAA22296; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:00:50 -0500 (EST) Received: from localhost (daemon at localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA22550; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:25:14 -0800 (PST) Received: (from root at localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id AAA22415 for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:20:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from ajax.wcs.uq.edu.au (ajax.wcs.uq.edu.au [130.102.222.4]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA22410 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 00:20:25 -0800 (PST) Received: (from gdr at localhost) by ajax.wcs.uq.edu.au (8.6.8/8.6.6) id SAA11281; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:18:43 +1000 From: Gary Roberts Message-Id: <199701220818.SAA11281 at ajax.wcs.uq.edu.au> Subject: Re: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation To: jkh at time.cdrom.com (Jordan K. Hubbard) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:18:42 +1000 (EST) Cc: hackers at FreeBSD.ORG In-Reply-To: <1045.853896142 at time.cdrom.com> from "Jordan K. Hubbard" at Jan 21, 97 05:22:22 pm Organisation: The University of Queensland Phone: +617 3844 0400 Reply-To: gdr at wcs.uq.edu.au X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Sender: owner-hackers at FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Jordan K. Hubbard writes: > But that doesn't even raise the biggest issue, which is: > > > Freddy Kruger (Kruger at ElmStreet.org) has submitted the > > following policy topic for discussion: > > > > > FreeBSD should move from a.out to ELF. > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > [ ... various amounts of discussion for 5 days ... ] > > Freddy raises the issue and 10 people vote on it, 7 feeling ELF-ish > enough that the motion "passes." > > Now what? We've got this as a supposed piece of "FreeBSD Policy" now > and users will surely expect it to be implemented or there wouldn't be ... Actually, I think you'll find he was proposing a two stage process where the above example only allows a further vote to be taken as to whether or not it should become `policy'. This second stage is where you spend your vote tokens if you want to stop something passing. You are really alluding to the possibility of things `passing' due to apathy of the vast majority. That could be easily fixed. I imaging that people with `vote tokens' have them because they are registered as `adherents' to the FreeBSD religion. The Votebot could send each adherent a re-registration slip, say every three months. No reply means you are automatically removed from the adherents list and your voting rights disappear. You can easily re-instate yourself at any time and your previous vote tokens (if any) are then restored. In this way you trim out people who have lost the religion. At the first stage of voting, a decision to have a real vote on a policy change will *only* be made if (a) a significant fraction of adherents take part in the vote AND (b) there is a majority of `yes' over `no'. That way, if there is general apathy, the thing dies. At the second `real vote' stage, you must then decide whether to spend your vote tokens. Once again, things `pass' only if a quorum is involved and there is a majority of `yes' over `no' votes. The required quorum could be quite different for the first and second stages of voting. For example, the quorum to decide whether or not to put things to a vote could be set at say 20% which would not stifle the process but the quorum to actually change policy could be say 40 - 50% to make sure that a vocal minority couldn't `roll' the silent majority. Terry did offer to implement the voting system. Why not take him up on his offer with the first question to be decided being:- Q. Should changes in FreeBSD policy be made by an auto-voting system? and if you get a `yes' on that then the second could be:- Q. Does the Emperor have some clothes after all?? :-). Seriously, it might be useful to have the user community vote on important policy issues (like a.out versus ELF) knowing that there is really no binding commitment on volunteers to do anything if it doesn't suit the volunteers. I'm sure everyone really does understand and accept that. It would also be useful to kill off discussion that has exceeded its use-by date (like this thread) by putting it to a vote and then getting on with more useful things. All the above is, of course, IMHO. Cheers, -- Gary Roberts (gdr at wcs.uq.edu.au) (Ph +617 3844 0400 Fax +617 3844 0444) 4th Floor, South Bank House, 234 Grey St, South Bank QLD 4101 Australia. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 22 02:17:25 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 02:17:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701220611.AAA06975@einstein> Message-ID: <32E5F6F0.38F8@sk.sympatico.ca> Jim Choate wrote: > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > particular view on them. And Germany was Hitler and the Nazi Party's own country. Do you really want Clinton and GingWretch having a say in how we run our web? (I don't). It may be 'their' country ('their' being the government), but it is 'their' world ('their' being the people). There was a reason that the Western powers didn't return East Germans who broke the laws of their country by climbing over the wall and running for freedom. Making information available does not 'force' a view on anyone. > > The Web was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > > speech. I want a couple of whatever this guy is on. > Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share > data in a easily digestible format. No. The internet was conceived so that the DOD could monitor the communications of physicists and researchers who thought it was awfully nice of the government to provide this wonderful method of sharing data and information. Toto From field at pipeline.com Wed Jan 22 02:29:10 1997 From: field at pipeline.com (Richard L. Field) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 02:29:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970122053234.44ff22a8@pop.pipeline.com> That would be Samuel Slater, who built his mill in Pawtucket, Rhode Island (still there, on Roosevelt Avenue) in 1793. He reproduced his former boss's factory from memory in order to collect on a bounty offered in the US on the export-restricted patent. - Richard Field At 06:39 PM 1/21/97 -0500, Sean Roach wrote: >This has often reminded me of something that occurred around 1776. >I can't remember if it was before or after. >Remember how the colonies got sophisticated spinning gear? >I believe it was spinning gear. >Great Britain had a ban on the export of functional models, diagrams or >manufacturing instructions to one particular class of equipment. This was >so that they could maintain the monopoly on cheaply made cloth, holding the >outlying colonies in line by maintaining a dependancy. >One man memorized the structure of one of these machines and then came to >the American shores, where he reproduced it workably. > >I can't remember the name of the man or the machine, just that it was used >in the manufacture of cloth, the "spinning jenny" i think. Nor can I >remember the date. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 22 04:10:43 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:10:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: ADSL (Was: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701221210.EAA23233@toad.com> At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: > Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? They're not widely available yet; I don't know if any of the (US) phone companies offer it as more than trials. One limitation is that the technology works over copper wire, so it has to be offered at your local telco wire center. Of course, your local telco has to have something useful to do with the bits once the user sends them to the telco, and has to have some useful bits to send the user. This means they've got to haggle about standards for 5 more years (or just do the right thing and deploy IP, with some respectable bandwidth to the outside world) (or deploy ATM to get a layer 2 connection to something outside.) Don't know if the telcos have a clue about pricing, either. It's obviously got to be more than cost, but they'll probably thrash around a lot the way they did with IP.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Wed Jan 22 04:10:45 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:10:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701221210.EAA23236@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 21 Jan 1997 13:50:15 -0500 > From: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" > Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. > > Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any particular view on them. If Billy-Bob wants to shoot himself in the foot, let him. Might be purty funny to watch. > The Web was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share data in a easily digestible format. The web and technology in general have no more ethics or morality intrinsicly in them than a 5/8" open end wrench. Blocking and filtering are an expression of human choice and the implimentation thereof. You don't like it, don't live there and don't try to call there. You or I have no more right to be on a Chinese or Singapore Internet than they have in coming into yours or my home without an invitation. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 22 04:12:25 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:12:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Wow. Message-ID: <199701221212.EAA23249@toad.com> At 12:58 AM 1/19/97 -0500, Amanda Walker wrote: >I'm off to look for a mailing list where people are ACTUALLY DISCUSSING >CRYPTOGRAPHY AND IMPLEMENTING CRYPTOSYSTEMS. This list may still be >called "cypherpunks", but it doesn't have much cypherpunk left in it, as >far as I can tell. To some extent it's bad timing - there's been enough flaming on the list (including a few bad apples really harassing it) that John Gilmore decided it was time to start moderating the list, and that's led to a bunch of flames about moderation. But it was getting pretty bad. About a year ago the coderpunks at toad.com list got started; it's just for discussing code and related issues, not politics. It's moderated by the "Please be nice, and we'll kick you off for abuse" method, and it's worked out fine, though it's usually quiet. Also, a month or two ago, Perry Metzger started cryptography at c2.net , which is a bit more general but not for flaming. Perry moderates it. Both use -request to find the listbot. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From dsmith at prairienet.org Wed Jan 22 04:12:25 1997 From: dsmith at prairienet.org (David E. Smith) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:12:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? Message-ID: <199701221212.EAA23248@toad.com> At 09:35 PM 1/21/97 -0800, you wrote: >I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. >Any advice would be appreciated. IBM or Mac? Methinks (and I haven't tried it, but I think I will soon) that at least on the IBM side, the usual realm of existing software (SecureDrive/SecureDevice are the first things that come to mind) ought to work. After the Iomega ZIP drivers are in place, the Zip drive is 'just another drive' as far as most applications can see. dave From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 22 04:12:26 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:12:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Donna Rice, etc. Message-ID: <199701221212.EAA23251@toad.com> >Yes, it's the very same Bimbo who scuttled Gary Hart's campaign, I think you have to give Gary all the credit for that; the "Hey, I'm not doing anything wrong and you could follow me around 24 hours a day and not find anything" bit convinced me that Hart was a major flake, and doing it when the only credible Democrat to take over after him was Walter F@#&! Mondale was just unconscionable. If he'd said something like "Get Off My Ass" or "Reagan's not on his first wife, so what's your point" or "my marriage is off limits" or whatever I'd have had some respect, and for a Democrat he hadn't seemed to be that bad. > but when she tries to tell me what I should or shouldn't be able to > see, my reply *must* be: > Fuck you, you hypocritical, ignorant, little slut. >I am also going to take issue with her trysting with a married man. >I wish Hart's wife had verbally beaten the living shit out of her. She's a _former_ bimbo, who has ostensibly rehabilitated herself. Not that that puts her in a position to throw stones at other people.. >Obligatory Crypto Policy reference: Why couldn't she have scuttled >Feurher Clinton's career, instead? Not enough room to fool around on a bass-fishing boat? # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From wcampbel at peganet.com Wed Jan 22 04:14:06 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:14:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" Message-ID: <199701221214.EAA23262@toad.com> Sean Roach wrote: > At 02:22 AM 1/21/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > >Bill Campbell wrote: > > > >> I feel we at a *critical* crossroads in this debate, and one of the > >> more important voices has *very* effectively been silenced. > > > > Dr. Vulis? There was an 'attempt' to silence him, but it hasn't > >worked, to date. > > > I believe he is referring to silencing the list, not Vulis. As long as the > members of this list are argueing over semantics, the government has one > less challenger in the fight over our rights. > Remember, one of the oldest tactics of war is to turn the enemy against itself. I thought my meaning was obvious, but thanks for pointing it out to those who didn't get it. When I first began reading this list, I realized that a lot of important information was being put out; and it certainly raised my awareness of issues that I had not previously thought about. I believe that many other subscribers to the list also were exposed to many of these concepts, and that many subscribers to the list were people who could make a difference. I fear that many have now left the list, since it now seems to resemble, in many ways, a list consisting of high school age "wannabes" who think it's really cool to attack people just because they can. The downward spiral into inconsequential meaningless postings began with posts containing the word "fart". So cool, dudes. =Bill= From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 22 04:14:06 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:14:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: In-Reply-To: <32E5AFA8.768E@gte.net> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Tue, 21 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Mixmaster wrote: > > > Is there a moderated list available which expunges only Dale? > > The good Dr., though vicious, is really quite clever, though vicious. > > Dale is only a bore. Only. > > Hugs to all. > > I laughed so hard I nearly peed my pants. BTW, does the word > "peed" make this post go into the dumper?? [hee hee] > > No. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jan 22 04:25:33 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:25:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? Message-ID: <199701221225.EAA23441@toad.com> At 12:21 AM 1/22/97 -0600, David E. Smith wrote: >At 09:35 PM 1/21/97 -0800, you wrote: >>I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. >>Any advice would be appreciated. > >IBM or Mac? Parallel on Win95. Thanks, -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 22 04:25:37 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:25:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering "experiment" Message-ID: <199701221225.EAA23457@toad.com> Bill Campbell wrote: > Sean Roach wrote: > > At 02:22 AM 1/21/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > > >Bill Campbell wrote: > > I believe he is referring to silencing the list, not Vulis. As long as the > > members of this list are argueing over semantics, the government has one > > less challenger in the fight over our rights. > > Remember, one of the oldest tactics of war is to turn the enemy against itself. > I fear that many have now left the list, since it now seems to resemble, > in many ways, a list consisting of high school age "wannabes" who think > it's really cool to attack people just because they can. The downward > spiral into inconsequential meaningless postings began with posts > containing the word "fart". So cool, dudes. The list only suffers when you guys stop posting crypto/political info. For example, if tomorrow there are 100 new posts, and 10 of them are crypto/political relevant, and 10 more are like this one (I'm ignoring the other 80 for this example), then the list is only 10% relevant. Take away these 10, and it's 11.1%, but 10 less posts to read. Turn these 10 into something relevant, and voila(!), the list is now 20% relevant. You see, it's up to you, Bill. From field at pipeline.com Wed Jan 22 04:25:42 1997 From: field at pipeline.com (Richard L. Field) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:25:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Technical data" exemptions in new crypto regs Message-ID: <199701221225.EAA23462@toad.com> That would be Samuel Slater, who built his mill in Pawtucket, Rhode Island (still there, on Roosevelt Avenue) in 1793. He reproduced his former boss's factory from memory in order to collect on a bounty offered in the US on the export-restricted patent. - Richard Field At 06:39 PM 1/21/97 -0500, Sean Roach wrote: >This has often reminded me of something that occurred around 1776. >I can't remember if it was before or after. >Remember how the colonies got sophisticated spinning gear? >I believe it was spinning gear. >Great Britain had a ban on the export of functional models, diagrams or >manufacturing instructions to one particular class of equipment. This was >so that they could maintain the monopoly on cheaply made cloth, holding the >outlying colonies in line by maintaining a dependancy. >One man memorized the structure of one of these machines and then came to >the American shores, where he reproduced it workably. > >I can't remember the name of the man or the machine, just that it was used >in the manufacture of cloth, the "spinning jenny" i think. Nor can I >remember the date. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 22 04:25:44 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:25:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701221225.EAA23463@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > particular view on them. And Germany was Hitler and the Nazi Party's own country. Do you really want Clinton and GingWretch having a say in how we run our web? (I don't). It may be 'their' country ('their' being the government), but it is 'their' world ('their' being the people). There was a reason that the Western powers didn't return East Germans who broke the laws of their country by climbing over the wall and running for freedom. Making information available does not 'force' a view on anyone. > > The Web was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > > speech. I want a couple of whatever this guy is on. > Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share > data in a easily digestible format. No. The internet was conceived so that the DOD could monitor the communications of physicists and researchers who thought it was awfully nice of the government to provide this wonderful method of sharing data and information. Toto From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Jan 22 04:27:13 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 04:27:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keyword scanning/speech recognition Message-ID: <199701221227.EAA23480@toad.com> I've found another collection of references on speech scanning/recognition, the February 1989 CACM, p.193, contains 38 references going back to 1980. It'd be an interesting exercise for anyone with access to a large library to trace back through these (some of them look promising, like a 1980 book "Trends in Speech Recognition" from which a number of references are taken) to see how far back you can go and at what point certain things became feasible. The CACM references would be a good starting point for a search. Peter. From azur at netcom.com Wed Jan 22 06:02:43 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 06:02:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI Gets 500 Mil to Tap Your Communications Message-ID: >||| FBI moderates its communications-surveillance request ||| > >TBTF for 5/4/95 [6] > >In 1995 the FBI asked for and was granted $500 million to augment the >government's ability to tap communications (of this total $100M has >been released to the FBI so far). Privacy advocates expressed outrage >at the FBI's stated capacity goal: to be able to listen in on 1% of >installed telephone lines at any time. This translates to about 1.6 >million taps simultaneous of all kinds: pen registers, trap-and-trace, >and wiretaps. The FBI withdrew its initial proposal under fire and on >1/14 submitted a revised proposal -- press release at [7], analysis >at [8]. Unlike the earlier draft, this essay lays out its assumptions >and straightforwardly projects needed capacity growth. The result is >a capacity figure of fewer than 60,000 intercepts, less that 4% of >the original request. This level of capability would allow the FBI >simultaneously to monitor more than 500 phone lines in an area with >the population of Manhatta still an enormous increase on historical >numbers of intercepts. > >[6] >[7] >[8] > At least as important was their request to legally tap any telephone line for 48 hours w/o a warrant. What ever happended to that? -- Steve From azur at netcom.com Wed Jan 22 06:10:34 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 06:10:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI Gets 500 Mil to Tap Your Communications Message-ID: <199701221410.GAA24357@toad.com> >||| FBI moderates its communications-surveillance request ||| > >TBTF for 5/4/95 [6] > >In 1995 the FBI asked for and was granted $500 million to augment the >government's ability to tap communications (of this total $100M has >been released to the FBI so far). Privacy advocates expressed outrage >at the FBI's stated capacity goal: to be able to listen in on 1% of >installed telephone lines at any time. This translates to about 1.6 >million taps simultaneous of all kinds: pen registers, trap-and-trace, >and wiretaps. The FBI withdrew its initial proposal under fire and on >1/14 submitted a revised proposal -- press release at [7], analysis >at [8]. Unlike the earlier draft, this essay lays out its assumptions >and straightforwardly projects needed capacity growth. The result is >a capacity figure of fewer than 60,000 intercepts, less that 4% of >the original request. This level of capability would allow the FBI >simultaneously to monitor more than 500 phone lines in an area with >the population of Manhatta still an enormous increase on historical >numbers of intercepts. > >[6] >[7] >[8] > At least as important was their request to legally tap any telephone line for 48 hours w/o a warrant. What ever happended to that? -- Steve From azur at netcom.com Wed Jan 22 06:14:22 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 06:14:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: ADSL (Was: GSM technology Message-ID: >At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: >> Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? > >They're not widely available yet; I don't know if any of the (US) >phone companies offer it as more than trials. One limitation is that >the technology works over copper wire, so it has to be offered at >your local telco wire center. Of course, your local telco has to >have something useful to do with the bits once the user sends >them to the telco, and has to have some useful bits to send the user. >This means they've got to haggle about standards for 5 more years >(or just do the right thing and deploy IP, with some respectable >bandwidth to the outside world) (or deploy ATM to get a layer 2 >connection to something outside.) That was the intent of at least one sectio of the recently enacted Telecom Reform Act, but now the Baby Bells are trying to block local access provisions in the SC which would allow, for example, ISP to offer ISDN/ADSL/HDSL via their own CO equipment (bypassing the telco switches). > >Don't know if the telcos have a clue about pricing, either. >It's obviously got to be more than cost, but they'll probably >thrash around a lot the way they did with IP.... > ># Thanks; Bill ># Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com ># You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp ># (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From azur at netcom.com Wed Jan 22 06:40:27 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 06:40:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: ADSL (Was: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701221440.GAA24691@toad.com> >At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: >> Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? > >They're not widely available yet; I don't know if any of the (US) >phone companies offer it as more than trials. One limitation is that >the technology works over copper wire, so it has to be offered at >your local telco wire center. Of course, your local telco has to >have something useful to do with the bits once the user sends >them to the telco, and has to have some useful bits to send the user. >This means they've got to haggle about standards for 5 more years >(or just do the right thing and deploy IP, with some respectable >bandwidth to the outside world) (or deploy ATM to get a layer 2 >connection to something outside.) That was the intent of at least one sectio of the recently enacted Telecom Reform Act, but now the Baby Bells are trying to block local access provisions in the SC which would allow, for example, ISP to offer ISDN/ADSL/HDSL via their own CO equipment (bypassing the telco switches). > >Don't know if the telcos have a clue about pricing, either. >It's obviously got to be more than cost, but they'll probably >thrash around a lot the way they did with IP.... > ># Thanks; Bill ># Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com ># You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp ># (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca Wed Jan 22 07:14:01 1997 From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:14:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: ADSL (Was: GSM technology Message-ID: <9700228539.AA853956802@smtplink.alis.ca> Bill Stewart wrote re: ADSL lines> They're not widely available yet; I don't know if any of the (US) phone companies offer it as more than trials. One limitation is that the technology works over copper wire, so it has to be offered at your local telco wire center. A previous poster mentioned that because of the copper wire restriction, that they may deploy first in older centers. This would appear to be the case, since a Canadian telco (Sasktel) is offering ADSL in Saskatoon for 60$/month with unlimited internet access. Saskatoon falls into this category - in my opinion. I was only is SK briefly over New Years, but perhaps Toto can fill in details. James From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jan 22 07:17:13 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:17:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: EZP_ikn Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970122151051.006d4334@pop.pipeline.com> 01-21-97: "Method and apparatus for end-to-end encryption of a data packet in a computer network (Assignee -- Digital Equipment Corporation)" Inventor(s): Hawe, William R., Lampson, Butler W., Gupta, Amar "Mykotronx Upgrades US Army Satellite Comms" Mykotronx will develop and manufacture the refurbished Batson encryption subsystem, called the RBatson. Also known as KIG-34, the system will provide critical command and control protection for the US Defense Satellite Communication System (DSCS), including encryption, authentication, and anti-jamming capabilities. ----- EZP_ikn From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 22 07:48:44 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:48:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. Message-ID: <199701221548.HAA25171@toad.com> At 01:50 PM 1/21/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: >Mission: > >Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think >this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? The Web >was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice >between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of >speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. > > >Requirements: > >A scheme which makes blocking of individual IP addresses >impractical. > > ... >2c) Some crypto hack I can't quite work out (hence the post to >cypher punks). I can phrase the challenge more compactly though. >We have two sets of opposed groups A and M. The A group wish to >establish a continued conversation with groups B and C. M is >willing to permit communication with group B but not C. Whenever >M discovers that a member of group B is willing to act on behalf >of group C, M transfers that member to the C group. > >The problem is to keep A's channels of communication open despite >the efforts of M for very large group sizes. > ... > >Comments? If people are willing to work on this I can provide >some facilities and act as a media contact. > I believe that I heard a suggestion here once involving accepting Vulis's posts, all of them, but only distributing them to Vulis. I have also heard, on a web-based bulliten board (please excuse the spelling), about setting up a proxy for the CDA supporters routing all of thier requests to a VAX loaded with only "clean" stuff, either by engineering it for them, or routing all of thier communications to an existing "clean" site. The idea here is, if the government doesn't know what sites to block, i.e. thier in office checks of said site checked out but everyone gets a different look, they can't block them. To begin blocking proxies, they would have to get spies in the population to tell them where the "trash" is, or pay a bounty for every such site, which they would then have to figure out how to verify. This would require spies on our part as well. Ones to say that so-and-so citizen has been informing to the government so that the operators could put that citizen on the government list, the list of people to give the filtered "wholesome" feed to. Such an effort would require a great amount of effort and would probably be best suited to the EFF or other existing freedom protection organization. The setup would be similair to a "pirate broadcast" in the views of the government and would thus be best operated from safe shores. The spy ring would be simple. A e-mail address or other semi-secure drop-off point would be maintained for snitches. This address would be well advertised on the board, a SINGLE system. When a tattler is fingered by a fellow tattler, the government side tattler is baited with highly inflammatory, but mostly worthless, articles about the government. If the site is blocked, the informer is blocked. There are several kinks to work out. The single site would be easier to maintain, having "disposible" repeater sites which the government can see to block. Thus the main site would never be seen unshielded, though if it was, it wouldn't mean anything. From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com Wed Jan 22 07:50:20 1997 From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl') Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:50:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701221607.LAA15068@unix.asb.com> In today's (22 Jan 97) Long Island, NY Newsday Viewpoints, p. A31: "Let Feds Overheard Cellular-Phone Talk" by David Kahn (an editor at Newsday and author of "The Codebreakers") He intones the usual horseman: "...such criminals as terrorists, drug- runners, kidnappers and child-pornographers are increasingly using encryption to conceal their plans and activities, the FBI says." He also mis-states opponenents of GAK positions, claimingthe criticism is that "key escrow [at least he doesn't call it key recovery] won't work all the time", ignoring anti-GAK mentions of COINTELPRO, J.Edgar Stalin^H^H^H^H^H^HHoover, etc. etc. And the usual nonsense about "every day that criminal messages can be heard is a gain" w/out noting that anyone smart enough to use crypto now will not use it if GAK is fully implemented. Newsday is part of the LA Times Syndicate, so member papers may also have the same viewpoint appearing in their pages within the next couple of days. Their website is http://www.newsday.com ... I don't know if the viewpoint is on-line there. Rob ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jan 22 07:55:49 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:55:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: EZP_ikn Message-ID: <199701221555.HAA25232@toad.com> 01-21-97: "Method and apparatus for end-to-end encryption of a data packet in a computer network (Assignee -- Digital Equipment Corporation)" Inventor(s): Hawe, William R., Lampson, Butler W., Gupta, Amar "Mykotronx Upgrades US Army Satellite Comms" Mykotronx will develop and manufacture the refurbished Batson encryption subsystem, called the RBatson. Also known as KIG-34, the system will provide critical command and control protection for the US Defense Satellite Communication System (DSCS), including encryption, authentication, and anti-jamming capabilities. ----- EZP_ikn From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca Wed Jan 22 07:55:52 1997 From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 07:55:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: ADSL (Was: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701221555.HAA25239@toad.com> Bill Stewart wrote re: ADSL lines> They're not widely available yet; I don't know if any of the (US) phone companies offer it as more than trials. One limitation is that the technology works over copper wire, so it has to be offered at your local telco wire center. A previous poster mentioned that because of the copper wire restriction, that they may deploy first in older centers. This would appear to be the case, since a Canadian telco (Sasktel) is offering ADSL in Saskatoon for 60$/month with unlimited internet access. Saskatoon falls into this category - in my opinion. I was only is SK briefly over New Years, but perhaps Toto can fill in details. James From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com Wed Jan 22 08:27:25 1997 From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl') Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:27:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701221627.IAA25505@toad.com> In today's (22 Jan 97) Long Island, NY Newsday Viewpoints, p. A31: "Let Feds Overheard Cellular-Phone Talk" by David Kahn (an editor at Newsday and author of "The Codebreakers") He intones the usual horseman: "...such criminals as terrorists, drug- runners, kidnappers and child-pornographers are increasingly using encryption to conceal their plans and activities, the FBI says." He also mis-states opponenents of GAK positions, claimingthe criticism is that "key escrow [at least he doesn't call it key recovery] won't work all the time", ignoring anti-GAK mentions of COINTELPRO, J.Edgar Stalin^H^H^H^H^H^HHoover, etc. etc. And the usual nonsense about "every day that criminal messages can be heard is a gain" w/out noting that anyone smart enough to use crypto now will not use it if GAK is fully implemented. Newsday is part of the LA Times Syndicate, so member papers may also have the same viewpoint appearing in their pages within the next couple of days. Their website is http://www.newsday.com ... I don't know if the viewpoint is on-line there. Rob ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 22 08:27:37 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:27:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. Message-ID: <199701221627.IAA25513@toad.com> At 01:50 PM 1/21/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: >Mission: > >Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think >this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? The Web >was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice >between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of >speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. > > >Requirements: > >A scheme which makes blocking of individual IP addresses >impractical. > > ... >2c) Some crypto hack I can't quite work out (hence the post to >cypher punks). I can phrase the challenge more compactly though. >We have two sets of opposed groups A and M. The A group wish to >establish a continued conversation with groups B and C. M is >willing to permit communication with group B but not C. Whenever >M discovers that a member of group B is willing to act on behalf >of group C, M transfers that member to the C group. > >The problem is to keep A's channels of communication open despite >the efforts of M for very large group sizes. > ... > >Comments? If people are willing to work on this I can provide >some facilities and act as a media contact. > I believe that I heard a suggestion here once involving accepting Vulis's posts, all of them, but only distributing them to Vulis. I have also heard, on a web-based bulliten board (please excuse the spelling), about setting up a proxy for the CDA supporters routing all of thier requests to a VAX loaded with only "clean" stuff, either by engineering it for them, or routing all of thier communications to an existing "clean" site. The idea here is, if the government doesn't know what sites to block, i.e. thier in office checks of said site checked out but everyone gets a different look, they can't block them. To begin blocking proxies, they would have to get spies in the population to tell them where the "trash" is, or pay a bounty for every such site, which they would then have to figure out how to verify. This would require spies on our part as well. Ones to say that so-and-so citizen has been informing to the government so that the operators could put that citizen on the government list, the list of people to give the filtered "wholesome" feed to. Such an effort would require a great amount of effort and would probably be best suited to the EFF or other existing freedom protection organization. The setup would be similair to a "pirate broadcast" in the views of the government and would thus be best operated from safe shores. The spy ring would be simple. A e-mail address or other semi-secure drop-off point would be maintained for snitches. This address would be well advertised on the board, a SINGLE system. When a tattler is fingered by a fellow tattler, the government side tattler is baited with highly inflammatory, but mostly worthless, articles about the government. If the site is blocked, the informer is blocked. There are several kinks to work out. The single site would be easier to maintain, having "disposible" repeater sites which the government can see to block. Thus the main site would never be seen unshielded, though if it was, it wouldn't mean anything. From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jan 22 08:33:15 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:33:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970122162811.006c47b0@pop.pipeline.com> Yep, thanks for the pointer, Rob. Kahn's online at: http://www.newsday.com/mainnews/rnmi0522.htm Anybody unable to access, send us a note: KAH_nak From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 22 08:38:38 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:38:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Donna Rice, etc. In-Reply-To: <199701221212.EAA23251@toad.com> Message-ID: At 1:50 am -0500 1/22/97, Bill Stewart wrote: >>Yes, it's the very same Bimbo who scuttled Gary Hart's campaign, >I think you have to give Gary all the credit for that; >the "Hey, I'm not doing anything wrong and you could follow me >around 24 hours a day and not find anything" bit convinced me that >Hart was a major flake A pal of mine from Mizzou was the photographer who took the Donna/Gary lap-sit photo. He got the Pulitzer prize. Whole episode says more about American "journalism" than anything else, and *I'm* a congenital Republican. ObGeodesicMarkets: It was a joke about Donna Rice that got me thinking about the speed of information propagation in the capital markets. ("What did Donna Rice say when the reporters caught her leaving Gary Hart's house? She said she was taking a poll. ) The joke appeared on the Morgan Stanley equity trading desk no more than 15 minutes after the story hit the Reuter's newswire. In that time, the joke was thought up, somewhere in the world, and disseminated all over, ending up in the midwestern hinterlands of Chicago, by way of London. Since trading desks talk to each other with direct lines, the network formed by them is a geodesic one, even though people are the "switches". Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Wed Jan 22 08:39:57 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:39:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: EZP_ikn In-Reply-To: <199701221555.HAA25232@toad.com> Message-ID: <32E642D0.5A82@vail.tivoli.com> John Young wrote: > > 01-21-97: > > "Method and apparatus ... > > Inventor(s): Hawe, William R., Lampson, Butler W., Gupta, Amar I thought Lampson worked for Microsoft? -- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jan 22 08:55:50 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:55:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701221655.IAA25895@toad.com> Yep, thanks for the pointer, Rob. Kahn's online at: http://www.newsday.com/mainnews/rnmi0522.htm Anybody unable to access, send us a note: KAH_nak From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Wed Jan 22 08:55:55 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:55:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: EZP_ikn Message-ID: <199701221655.IAA25905@toad.com> John Young wrote: > > 01-21-97: > > "Method and apparatus ... > > Inventor(s): Hawe, William R., Lampson, Butler W., Gupta, Amar I thought Lampson worked for Microsoft? -- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 22 08:56:52 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 08:56:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Donna Rice, etc. Message-ID: <199701221656.IAA25918@toad.com> At 1:50 am -0500 1/22/97, Bill Stewart wrote: >>Yes, it's the very same Bimbo who scuttled Gary Hart's campaign, >I think you have to give Gary all the credit for that; >the "Hey, I'm not doing anything wrong and you could follow me >around 24 hours a day and not find anything" bit convinced me that >Hart was a major flake A pal of mine from Mizzou was the photographer who took the Donna/Gary lap-sit photo. He got the Pulitzer prize. Whole episode says more about American "journalism" than anything else, and *I'm* a congenital Republican. ObGeodesicMarkets: It was a joke about Donna Rice that got me thinking about the speed of information propagation in the capital markets. ("What did Donna Rice say when the reporters caught her leaving Gary Hart's house? She said she was taking a poll. ) The joke appeared on the Morgan Stanley equity trading desk no more than 15 minutes after the story hit the Reuter's newswire. In that time, the joke was thought up, somewhere in the world, and disseminated all over, ending up in the midwestern hinterlands of Chicago, by way of London. Since trading desks talk to each other with direct lines, the network formed by them is a geodesic one, even though people are the "switches". Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From tank at xs4all.nl Wed Jan 22 09:23:57 1997 From: tank at xs4all.nl (tank) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 09:23:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: wired news: Germany Gets Radikal About Extremists on Web Message-ID: <199701221716.SAA20795@xs1.xs4all.nl> T O P S T O R I E S Germany Gets Radikal About Extremists on Web Tuesday - Are the German government's tactics for barring extremist material on the Internet realistic? Germany Gets Radikal About Extremists on Web by Rebecca Vesely 5:03 pm PST 21 Jan 97 - The German government, never shy about expressing its disdain for left- and right-wing radicals inside its borders, has taken to combing the Internet for signs of extremist activity. But Germany's effort to stop the distribution of terrorist manuals and Nazi propaganda is like pointing a fire hose at a beehive - instead of quashing the bees, it only scatters them, and makes them more insistent. Last week, German authorities filed charges against a member of the communist Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), Angela Marquardt, for linking to the banned left-wing magazine Radikal from her homepage, causing Net activists to anticipate another incident like that last September, when several German ISPs temporarily blocked Radikal's server, XS4All. In response, the magazine was mirrored on more than 50 Web sites around the world. "The decision to prosecute for linking to Radikal will probably bring yet another escalation of events, where this censored magazine will become all the more popular on the Net," said Felipe Rodriquez, managing director of XS4All, which is based in the Netherlands. "Censoring the Internet is usually very counterproductive, and an insurance that many people will mirror the information and start distributing it." XS4All, which describes itself as "networking for the masses," hosts some 4,600 homepages, and was recently in the news for posting several homepages for media banned in Serbia, such as Radio B92, that continue to offer via the Web live RealAudio feeds and frequent updates on the continued nationwide protests against the Serbian government. Banned in Germany 12 years ago, and published underground for the past decade, Radikal advocates the overthrow of the German government. German officials say the magazine's publishers provide terrorist information in their pages, including how to sabotage train lines. But the publishers argue that they have the right to publish material contrary to the German government. "We fundamentally reject the notion that the state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force," the publishers wrote in an article titled "Who We Are" in 1995. "The existing social conditions can only be changed if left-radical groups and associations build up their abilities and structures so as to be able to counter some of these effects even today. This, of course, includes militant and armed intervention, but these would be empty gestures if there wasn't also some sort of linkage or means of conveying their message." While publishers continue to produce the magazine in print form outside of Germany, sympathizers have been posting it to a homepage on XS4All. "As an act of solidarity with them and with Radikal we decided to put it on the Internet and, of course, to frustrate this censorship attempt of the German authorities," the sympathizers wrote in an email to Wired News. They added that while they had no contact with the publishers of Radikal, they are currently being investigated by Germany's public prosecutor general and have no plans to "go on holiday in Germany." Although Radikal is not banned in the Netherlands, the German government says that linking to the magazine from inside Germany is "aiding a felony," spokesman Ruediger Reiff told Reuters. In December, Chancellor Helmut Kohl's Cabinet approved a bill banning the electronic distribution of forms of hate speech, terrorism, and indecent material. The new German law places responsibility on the loosely defined "suppliers," and in response, CompuServe considered moving its administrative operations to a neighboring country. PDS member Marquardt says her prosecution has less to do with Radikal, than an attempt to quiet German citizens who, like herself, are outspoken critics of the government. "This is hardly about bomb-building instructions or highly detailed descriptions of train lines and their weaknesses," Marquardt, who could not be reached for comment, wrote in a statement posted on her Web site. "The all-too-stubborn guardians of the state will quickly learn: The Net interprets censorship as a malfunction and circumvents it." In the meantime, XS4All has not received any official communication from the German Justice Department, nor from the Dutch Justice Department. "Our policy is that as a provider we are not in the position to judge whether this magazine is illegal in the Netherlands, therefore we do not interfere with the liberty of speech of our user," XS4All's Rodriquez said. Copyright =A9 1993-97 Wired Ventures, Inc. and affiliated companies= From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 22 09:52:34 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 09:52:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Seismic Crypto Message-ID: <199701221752.JAA26468@toad.com> At 10:39 PM 1/21/97 -0500, John Young wrote: >In a NYT report today on a "mysterious" blast in the >Australian outback in 1993, there's mention of "seismic >weapons" and research on them by Nicholas Tesla >in the 1930s. > >Would any of our weapons connoisseurs have more >info on what these are and how they were supposed to >work? Electrical, chemical, nuclear? ... Pick up a copy of the Johnson Smith Catalog, lots of fun to read and they sell t-shirts with greys on them. The catalog sells several "contriversial" books and tapes, including psycic healing techniques, astral projection, the infamous alien autopsy tape, and several books about and works by Tesla, including one specifically about the device that you are talking about. On another thread, pick up the Cheek3 Scanner modification guide while your at it, I hear that it is a good resource. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 22 10:11:22 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:11:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Seismic Crypto Message-ID: <199701221811.KAA26718@toad.com> At 10:39 PM 1/21/97 -0500, John Young wrote: >In a NYT report today on a "mysterious" blast in the >Australian outback in 1993, there's mention of "seismic >weapons" and research on them by Nicholas Tesla >in the 1930s. > >Would any of our weapons connoisseurs have more >info on what these are and how they were supposed to >work? Electrical, chemical, nuclear? ... Pick up a copy of the Johnson Smith Catalog, lots of fun to read and they sell t-shirts with greys on them. The catalog sells several "contriversial" books and tapes, including psycic healing techniques, astral projection, the infamous alien autopsy tape, and several books about and works by Tesla, including one specifically about the device that you are talking about. On another thread, pick up the Cheek3 Scanner modification guide while your at it, I hear that it is a good resource. From tank at xs4all.nl Wed Jan 22 10:11:24 1997 From: tank at xs4all.nl (tank) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:11:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: wired news: Germany Gets Radikal About Extremists on Web Message-ID: <199701221811.KAA26724@toad.com> T O P S T O R I E S Germany Gets Radikal About Extremists on Web Tuesday - Are the German government's tactics for barring extremist material on the Internet realistic? Germany Gets Radikal About Extremists on Web by Rebecca Vesely 5:03 pm PST 21 Jan 97 - The German government, never shy about expressing its disdain for left- and right-wing radicals inside its borders, has taken to combing the Internet for signs of extremist activity. But Germany's effort to stop the distribution of terrorist manuals and Nazi propaganda is like pointing a fire hose at a beehive - instead of quashing the bees, it only scatters them, and makes them more insistent. Last week, German authorities filed charges against a member of the communist Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), Angela Marquardt, for linking to the banned left-wing magazine Radikal from her homepage, causing Net activists to anticipate another incident like that last September, when several German ISPs temporarily blocked Radikal's server, XS4All. In response, the magazine was mirrored on more than 50 Web sites around the world. "The decision to prosecute for linking to Radikal will probably bring yet another escalation of events, where this censored magazine will become all the more popular on the Net," said Felipe Rodriquez, managing director of XS4All, which is based in the Netherlands. "Censoring the Internet is usually very counterproductive, and an insurance that many people will mirror the information and start distributing it." XS4All, which describes itself as "networking for the masses," hosts some 4,600 homepages, and was recently in the news for posting several homepages for media banned in Serbia, such as Radio B92, that continue to offer via the Web live RealAudio feeds and frequent updates on the continued nationwide protests against the Serbian government. Banned in Germany 12 years ago, and published underground for the past decade, Radikal advocates the overthrow of the German government. German officials say the magazine's publishers provide terrorist information in their pages, including how to sabotage train lines. But the publishers argue that they have the right to publish material contrary to the German government. "We fundamentally reject the notion that the state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force," the publishers wrote in an article titled "Who We Are" in 1995. "The existing social conditions can only be changed if left-radical groups and associations build up their abilities and structures so as to be able to counter some of these effects even today. This, of course, includes militant and armed intervention, but these would be empty gestures if there wasn't also some sort of linkage or means of conveying their message." While publishers continue to produce the magazine in print form outside of Germany, sympathizers have been posting it to a homepage on XS4All. "As an act of solidarity with them and with Radikal we decided to put it on the Internet and, of course, to frustrate this censorship attempt of the German authorities," the sympathizers wrote in an email to Wired News. They added that while they had no contact with the publishers of Radikal, they are currently being investigated by Germany's public prosecutor general and have no plans to "go on holiday in Germany." Although Radikal is not banned in the Netherlands, the German government says that linking to the magazine from inside Germany is "aiding a felony," spokesman Ruediger Reiff told Reuters. In December, Chancellor Helmut Kohl's Cabinet approved a bill banning the electronic distribution of forms of hate speech, terrorism, and indecent material. The new German law places responsibility on the loosely defined "suppliers," and in response, CompuServe considered moving its administrative operations to a neighboring country. PDS member Marquardt says her prosecution has less to do with Radikal, than an attempt to quiet German citizens who, like herself, are outspoken critics of the government. "This is hardly about bomb-building instructions or highly detailed descriptions of train lines and their weaknesses," Marquardt, who could not be reached for comment, wrote in a statement posted on her Web site. "The all-too-stubborn guardians of the state will quickly learn: The Net interprets censorship as a malfunction and circumvents it." In the meantime, XS4All has not received any official communication from the German Justice Department, nor from the Dutch Justice Department. "Our policy is that as a provider we are not in the position to judge whether this magazine is illegal in the Netherlands, therefore we do not interfere with the liberty of speech of our user," XS4All's Rodriquez said. Copyright =A9 1993-97 Wired Ventures, Inc. and affiliated companies= From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU Wed Jan 22 10:33:12 1997 From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. Allen Smith) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:33:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI Gets 500 Mil to Tap Your Communications Message-ID: <01IEII3EZEGW9AMSD7@mbcl.rutgers.edu> From: IN%"rwright at adnetsol.com" "Ross Wright" 22-JAN-1997 02:52:34.76 >at [8]. Unlike the earlier draft, this essay lays out its assumptions >and straightforwardly projects needed capacity growth. The result is >a capacity figure of fewer than 60,000 intercepts, less that 4% of >the original request. This level of capability would allow the FBI >simultaneously to monitor more than 500 phone lines in an area with >the population of Manhatta still an enormous increase on historical >numbers of intercepts. [...] >[8] Something that the CDT didn't point out was that basing wiretap "requirements" on past growth makes two assumptions, both of them invalid: A. Past wiretaps (& other probes, such as pen registers & tap-and-trace) were all entirely justified; the growth in their use does not reflect either use of them in situations they are not required for or use of them in situations in which government has essentially failed and more resources poured into the alleged "problems" (e.g., drug trafficing, money laundering, and pornography) will do less than no good whatsoever. B. The number of lines will go up at the same rate as the estimated growth in wiretaps. In regards to this latter one, if they go up at a greater rate, then the FBI will request expanded capacity; if they go up at a lower rate, they will assuredly not request a decrease, and will thus ultimately have the capablility to wiretap _all_ lines. >Fuck the FBI. With a backhoe. -Allen From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 22 10:36:48 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 10:36:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Aussie Ecash at Advance Bank Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Ian Grigg MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:42:59 +0100 From: Ian Grigg To: Multiple recipients of Subject: Aussie Ecash at Advance Bank From: Edward Breese x1364 To: ecash-merchant Subject: ecash - latest news Date: Tue, 21 Jan 97 17:44:00 EST Message-Id: <32E47395 at central.advance.com.au> Encoding: 41 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Sender: ecash-merchant-request at whitetail.advance.com.au Resent-Message-Id: Resent-From: ecash-merchant at whitetail.advance.com.au X-Unsub: To leave, send text 'LEAVE' to Dear ecash enthusiast, A short note to let you know that the ecash System Integrators kit was posted on the Internet last week. You can find it at: www.advance.com.au/advance/ecash/sysint.htm We are currently testing the ecash system internally here at Advance Bank. We hope to make the merchant software available for free download in the next 2-3 weeks - you will then be able to start building and testing your ecash enabled web sites. There will also be supporting documentation, such as: - the ecash merchant information kit - how to build an ecash shop - ecash usage guidelines etc Thank you again for your interest. We'll let you know as soon as the software is available for download. Advance Bank Subscription Information ======================== To subscribe to the ecash mailing list by e-mail: Send an email message to ecash-merchant-request at advance.com.au and in the BODY of the message type: SUBSCRIBE If you'd like to remove yourself from the ecash mailing list: Send an email message to ecash-merchant-request at advance.com.au and in the body of the message type: UNSUBSCRIBE --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU Wed Jan 22 11:12:34 1997 From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. Allen Smith) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:12:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI Gets 500 Mil to Tap Your Communications Message-ID: <199701221912.LAA27317@toad.com> From: IN%"rwright at adnetsol.com" "Ross Wright" 22-JAN-1997 02:52:34.76 >at [8]. Unlike the earlier draft, this essay lays out its assumptions >and straightforwardly projects needed capacity growth. The result is >a capacity figure of fewer than 60,000 intercepts, less that 4% of >the original request. This level of capability would allow the FBI >simultaneously to monitor more than 500 phone lines in an area with >the population of Manhatta still an enormous increase on historical >numbers of intercepts. [...] >[8] Something that the CDT didn't point out was that basing wiretap "requirements" on past growth makes two assumptions, both of them invalid: A. Past wiretaps (& other probes, such as pen registers & tap-and-trace) were all entirely justified; the growth in their use does not reflect either use of them in situations they are not required for or use of them in situations in which government has essentially failed and more resources poured into the alleged "problems" (e.g., drug trafficing, money laundering, and pornography) will do less than no good whatsoever. B. The number of lines will go up at the same rate as the estimated growth in wiretaps. In regards to this latter one, if they go up at a greater rate, then the FBI will request expanded capacity; if they go up at a lower rate, they will assuredly not request a decrease, and will thus ultimately have the capablility to wiretap _all_ lines. >Fuck the FBI. With a backhoe. -Allen From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 22 11:27:23 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:27:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Aussie Ecash at Advance Bank Message-ID: <199701221927.LAA27547@toad.com> --- begin forwarded text Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Ian Grigg MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:42:59 +0100 From: Ian Grigg To: Multiple recipients of Subject: Aussie Ecash at Advance Bank From: Edward Breese x1364 To: ecash-merchant Subject: ecash - latest news Date: Tue, 21 Jan 97 17:44:00 EST Message-Id: <32E47395 at central.advance.com.au> Encoding: 41 TEXT X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 Sender: ecash-merchant-request at whitetail.advance.com.au Resent-Message-Id: Resent-From: ecash-merchant at whitetail.advance.com.au X-Unsub: To leave, send text 'LEAVE' to Dear ecash enthusiast, A short note to let you know that the ecash System Integrators kit was posted on the Internet last week. You can find it at: www.advance.com.au/advance/ecash/sysint.htm We are currently testing the ecash system internally here at Advance Bank. We hope to make the merchant software available for free download in the next 2-3 weeks - you will then be able to start building and testing your ecash enabled web sites. There will also be supporting documentation, such as: - the ecash merchant information kit - how to build an ecash shop - ecash usage guidelines etc Thank you again for your interest. We'll let you know as soon as the software is available for download. Advance Bank Subscription Information ======================== To subscribe to the ecash mailing list by e-mail: Send an email message to ecash-merchant-request at advance.com.au and in the BODY of the message type: SUBSCRIBE If you'd like to remove yourself from the ecash mailing list: Send an email message to ecash-merchant-request at advance.com.au and in the body of the message type: UNSUBSCRIBE --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://offshore.com.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Jan 22 11:57:37 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 11:57:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. In-Reply-To: <199701212027.MAA11310@toad.com> Message-ID: <0mtb33200YUd0E_bM0@andrew.cmu.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" writes: > Mission: > > Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? The Web > was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. > > > Requirements: > > A scheme which makes blocking of individual IP addresses > impractical. > Considerations: > [i.e. areas needing brainstorming] > > 1) Copyright. Clearly copyright holders such as CNN etc would > need to be involved. Although proxies have long been a part of > the Web and the scheme does not threaten their interests it would > be as well to get them on board at an early stage. I believe that the new copyright regs explicitly allow web surfing. Copyright should not be an issue, I think. IANAL. > 2) How can one prevent the proxies themselves being blocked? Some > ideas that come to mind: > > 2a) Only issue new sites gradually so that blocking requires > continuous updates. > > 2b) Use DHCP to change network addresses regularly. > > 2c) Some crypto hack I can't quite work out (hence the post to > cypher punks). I can phrase the challenge more compactly though. > We have two sets of opposed groups A and M. The A group wish to > establish a continued conversation with groups B and C. M is > willing to permit communication with group B but not C. Whenever > M discovers that a member of group B is willing to act on behalf > of group C, M transfers that member to the C group. > > The problem is to keep A's channels of communication open despite > the efforts of M for very large group sizes. > > I'm not sure if this is a pure crypto challenge or a game theory > problem. Secure connections from proxy to client would eliminate driftnet scanning. That's probably about all the crypto. One idea would to put /cgi-bin/redirect in all the distributions of apache, apache-SSL, etc. That way, anyone who cared at all about privacy or was clueless would have an anonymizer on their web server. People who really cared could run web spiders that looked for sites with the redirect, and have cgi-bins that returned a randomized list of 10 or so. They could periodically post the list to semi-relavent newsgroups. The idea here is to reduce the chance of a denial of service attack against the anonymizer pool. The points of attack that I can think of are: 1) Filter out out anonymized connections. Crypto helps solves this one. Of course, then the evil empire filters out crypto, but that's bad for business. 2) Make the list of anonymizers dissappear This is a bit easier for the bad guys. Stego could help solve the problem, especially if combined with crypto. (i.e stego the list, encrypted with a few key underground folks public keys, into a pic of the great wall of china or something. 3) Make it illegal to use anonymizers and enforec randomly. FUD. I dunno how to solve this one. Put anphetamines in the water supply? > Comments? If people are willing to work on this I can provide > some facilities and act as a media contact. Distribution wins. (BTW, look at www.anonymizer.com) Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMuZwuMkz/YzIV3P5AQEb5gL/aOgddVJ91jtZUPrDcsnqdhOFpKLx1IAH UMZi+HkdB+ZUsRhLxCSy0enpqxikwyFVOMINSr3uLRtYSIcuPK2JFdSACI79yISk 7oZWxwTO5TDMYtbBRAAZv/d9VyCT/EVE =OIEP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From snow at smoke.suba.com Wed Jan 22 12:01:53 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:01:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls In-Reply-To: <199701212016.MAA11119@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701222018.OAA01933@smoke.suba.com> Mr. Hallam-baker said: > Adam Back wrote in article <5bp18k$1cc at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > > GSM encrypts only the links to the station - the traffic goes in the > > clear through the station. Plus A5 (crypto algorithm used in GSM) is > > weak, 40 bits of effective key space. > > > > It could be worse to have poor crypto, than no crypto, > > I disagree for two reasons, first there is a big difference between having > poor locks and no locks. Most locks can be picked by an expert, they are > effective against many theifs however. > > Second if everyone in the world was using 40 bit email encryption it > would prevent most of the "promiscuous" interception of communications. Third (as Mr. Vulis observed) the jump from using poor crypto to using good crypto is a lot shorter than not using crypto to using good crypto. Once people get it in there heads that crypto is good to use, then it is easier to convince them to use "unbreakable" crypto than to convince non-crypto-users. From Tunny at inference.com Wed Jan 22 12:23:29 1997 From: Tunny at inference.com (James A. Tunnicliffe) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:23:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl' writes: > In today's (22 Jan 97) Long Island, NY Newsday Viewpoints, p. A31: > "Let Feds Overheard Cellular-Phone Talk" > by David Kahn (an editor at Newsday and author of "The Codebreakers") > He intones the usual horseman: "...such criminals as terrorists, drug- > runners, kidnappers and child-pornographers are increasingly using > encryption to conceal their plans and activities, the FBI says." Lions and tigers and bears, oh MY! > He also mis-states opponenents of GAK positions, claimingthe > criticism is that "key escrow [at least he doesn't call it key > recovery] won't work all the time", ignoring anti-GAK mentions of > COINTELPRO, J.Edgar Stalin^H^H^H^H^H^HHoover, etc. etc. Actually, I thought he summed up the anti-GAK positions reasonably well, though he didn't elaborate on them. The "it may not work all the time" statement was actually an admission of the pro-GAK side. > And the usual nonsense about "every day that criminal messages can be > heard is a gain" w/out noting that anyone smart enough to use crypto > now will not use it if GAK is fully implemented. I found the logic questionable, but more disturbing was the fundamental position that "loss of privacy [...] is a price that must be paid to gain security". Benjamin Franklin's statement about security and freedom comes strongly to mind when I hear nonsense like this. He then cites the (in "our" view, useless and intrusive) hassles that airline passengers must endure in the name of "security" as justification for more of the same! Talk about a slippery slope! > Newsday is part of the LA Times Syndicate, so member papers may also > have the same viewpoint appearing in their pages within the next > couple of days. > Their website is http://www.newsday.com ... I don't know if the > viewpoint is on-line there. It is, at http://www.newsday.com/mainnews/rnmi0522.htm Pretty disappointing stuff, but then Mr. Kahn IS affiliated with the NSA these days, isn't he? Tunny ====================================================================== James A. Tunnicliffe | WWWeb: http://www.inference.com/~tunny Inference Corporation | PGP Fingerprint: CA 23 E2 F3 AC 2D 0C 77 tunny at Inference.com | 36 07 D9 33 3D 32 53 9C ====================================================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.0 Business Edition Comment: which I won in the PGP raffle at Cypherpunks 12/96... iQEVAgUBMuZ1UvAmQsmyRPddAQFO/gf+Ikw8GScPo/+lr00lKvTnF7dZdEYhE8GC bt7wu96a/4mE81261EwxqA8voI/y5T3RsUfZLeYsGX+wkuPyqK1QImO3A7O8PNnb AvFitSaNsrMqyKTa7mI63TrvoBDCqtN3vYdDeSl6ZPHJmhHO5MF6xVoA56yeF5xf h0ooejTgeYMOGMhf2faRCKU31AdFB+pjozxMo83X2ZrCzga8wiHeqlEEKWQnu1cJ 3jc+TVZnEI95idbQqeHvxh/BBRdprrPxBfncCb8wnXuLHxPmrsWGqfvMDpS06qhl ZWEFChYLDGwsMokvcY+ZOZ6x4jlwssFGDXpflcdjFnPBp3yJKjU7fA== =/siB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de Wed Jan 22 12:25:18 1997 From: hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de (hjk) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:25:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes In-Reply-To: <32E45AA6.330A@gte.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > hjk wrote: .... > > I wonder who is so brainless, not to understand what's going on. > > Do you really think the subscribers are pure Idiots? > > Well, Heinz. You live in a country full of people, ordinary people, > variously called the hoi polloi, the sheeple, the unwashed masses, > and other interesting names. > ... > Now whatever you think of your fellow citizens, or even those of the > USA (to name an example), I'm sure is OK on whatever basis you apply > your judgement. But I guarantee you that the people on the cypherpunks > list are no more or less intelligent than the people who vegetate in > front of their TV sets every day, right there where you live, in all > probability. If you believe that your fellow citizens vote intelligently, > then I respond that cypherpunks vote intelligently. What do you think? > Well, I thought cypherpunks claim to be elite. Heinz-Juergen Keller hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de From cme at cybercash.com Wed Jan 22 12:27:59 1997 From: cme at cybercash.com (Carl Ellison) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:27:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970122152635.00a76270@cybercash.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- It might also be that David's year long sabatical at NSA's crypto museum which recently ended put him in touch with people who believe in GAK. I found it interesting that he noted the argument that each additional day of government access is a good thing. This is the kind of belief we know that NSA holds -- a.k.a. "not on my watch" -- but I haven't seen it publicly admitted before. - Carl -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMuZ35lQXJENzYr45AQEcfwQAqMftG0DXn1nr6faA6IHeAtqSXYanwnZb DiwqppU4nJqPtIvtFw8eOVVwyYCzIv046dFtwR2mk8HeL1v8I3R2sWm7waknFjlm TM84+vLamlVnBNPUAXRYOrFiEhPQm/iitR4GVrcga9mHJ+vrI38XQGzi0lxdg310 pWjq5Fxahag= =xhF7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Carl M. Ellison cme at acm.org http://www.clark.net/pub/cme | | PGP 2.6.2: 61 E2 DE 7F CB 9D 79 84 E9 C8 04 8B A6 32 21 A2 | +-Officer, officer, arrest that man. He's whistling a dirty song.--+ From snow at smoke.suba.com Wed Jan 22 12:36:59 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 12:36:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701211455.GAA06825@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701222053.OAA02022@smoke.suba.com> Sprach The Thorn: > Jane Jefferson wrote: > Jane is showing signs of independent thought. Tsk tsk. > > fail, countries would instantly be absorbed by other countries, many > > relationships based on love and trust would be destroyed. > > And during that time, the deadliest person alive - the toughest and > > the meanest, and the most effective in the face of all the chaos, would > > not be the person who was capable of preserving their privacy. Rather, > > it would be the one who was capable of surviving in it's complete absence. > BTW, the suicide rate would not go ballistic, since the suicide rate No, but I bet the murder rate would. From snow at smoke.suba.com Wed Jan 22 13:25:03 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:25:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701222125.NAA28810@toad.com> Sprach The Thorn: > Jane Jefferson wrote: > Jane is showing signs of independent thought. Tsk tsk. > > fail, countries would instantly be absorbed by other countries, many > > relationships based on love and trust would be destroyed. > > And during that time, the deadliest person alive - the toughest and > > the meanest, and the most effective in the face of all the chaos, would > > not be the person who was capable of preserving their privacy. Rather, > > it would be the one who was capable of surviving in it's complete absence. > BTW, the suicide rate would not go ballistic, since the suicide rate No, but I bet the murder rate would. From hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de Wed Jan 22 13:25:16 1997 From: hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de (hjk) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:25:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes Message-ID: <199701222125.NAA28826@toad.com> On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > hjk wrote: .... > > I wonder who is so brainless, not to understand what's going on. > > Do you really think the subscribers are pure Idiots? > > Well, Heinz. You live in a country full of people, ordinary people, > variously called the hoi polloi, the sheeple, the unwashed masses, > and other interesting names. > ... > Now whatever you think of your fellow citizens, or even those of the > USA (to name an example), I'm sure is OK on whatever basis you apply > your judgement. But I guarantee you that the people on the cypherpunks > list are no more or less intelligent than the people who vegetate in > front of their TV sets every day, right there where you live, in all > probability. If you believe that your fellow citizens vote intelligently, > then I respond that cypherpunks vote intelligently. What do you think? > Well, I thought cypherpunks claim to be elite. Heinz-Juergen Keller hjk at ddorf.rhein-ruhr.de From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Jan 22 13:29:46 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:29:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. Message-ID: <199701222129.NAA28965@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" writes: > Mission: > > Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? The Web > was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. > > > Requirements: > > A scheme which makes blocking of individual IP addresses > impractical. > Considerations: > [i.e. areas needing brainstorming] > > 1) Copyright. Clearly copyright holders such as CNN etc would > need to be involved. Although proxies have long been a part of > the Web and the scheme does not threaten their interests it would > be as well to get them on board at an early stage. I believe that the new copyright regs explicitly allow web surfing. Copyright should not be an issue, I think. IANAL. > 2) How can one prevent the proxies themselves being blocked? Some > ideas that come to mind: > > 2a) Only issue new sites gradually so that blocking requires > continuous updates. > > 2b) Use DHCP to change network addresses regularly. > > 2c) Some crypto hack I can't quite work out (hence the post to > cypher punks). I can phrase the challenge more compactly though. > We have two sets of opposed groups A and M. The A group wish to > establish a continued conversation with groups B and C. M is > willing to permit communication with group B but not C. Whenever > M discovers that a member of group B is willing to act on behalf > of group C, M transfers that member to the C group. > > The problem is to keep A's channels of communication open despite > the efforts of M for very large group sizes. > > I'm not sure if this is a pure crypto challenge or a game theory > problem. Secure connections from proxy to client would eliminate driftnet scanning. That's probably about all the crypto. One idea would to put /cgi-bin/redirect in all the distributions of apache, apache-SSL, etc. That way, anyone who cared at all about privacy or was clueless would have an anonymizer on their web server. People who really cared could run web spiders that looked for sites with the redirect, and have cgi-bins that returned a randomized list of 10 or so. They could periodically post the list to semi-relavent newsgroups. The idea here is to reduce the chance of a denial of service attack against the anonymizer pool. The points of attack that I can think of are: 1) Filter out out anonymized connections. Crypto helps solves this one. Of course, then the evil empire filters out crypto, but that's bad for business. 2) Make the list of anonymizers dissappear This is a bit easier for the bad guys. Stego could help solve the problem, especially if combined with crypto. (i.e stego the list, encrypted with a few key underground folks public keys, into a pic of the great wall of china or something. 3) Make it illegal to use anonymizers and enforec randomly. FUD. I dunno how to solve this one. Put anphetamines in the water supply? > Comments? If people are willing to work on this I can provide > some facilities and act as a media contact. Distribution wins. (BTW, look at www.anonymizer.com) Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMuZwuMkz/YzIV3P5AQEb5gL/aOgddVJ91jtZUPrDcsnqdhOFpKLx1IAH UMZi+HkdB+ZUsRhLxCSy0enpqxikwyFVOMINSr3uLRtYSIcuPK2JFdSACI79yISk 7oZWxwTO5TDMYtbBRAAZv/d9VyCT/EVE =OIEP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Wed Jan 22 13:43:33 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 13:43:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Manila says ID system not prelude to martial law (fwd) Message-ID: <199701222143.QAA21639@wauug.erols.com> Reuters sez: Message-ID: MANILA, Jan 15 (Reuter) - Philippine President Fidel Ramos on Wednesday dismissed as baseless fears that his order creating a national identification system was a prelude to martial law. ``That is a wild opinion without any basis in fact,'' Ramos told his weekly news conference after Cardinal Jaime Sin, the outspoken Archbishop of Manila, accused him of being authoritarian. {We're talking, therefore it's no threat..} {Sin said it's immoral} {Opposition said could be used to monitor political activities, that it was reminiscent of Marcos.} Officials have said a computerised ID system whereby cards issued to citizens by state pension funds would carry reference numbers assigned to them for life would make it easier for people to transact business with the government and minimise fraud. ``That's all there is to it ... (its) very simple,'' Ramos said. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From Banisar at epic.org Wed Jan 22 15:00:28 1997 From: Banisar at epic.org (Dave Banisar) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 15:00:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Decision in Karn Case Message-ID: We just received this today. This is in part good news that the appeals court did not just affirm the lower court decision but on the other hand, it doesn't give much guidance to the court. A html version is up at: http://www.epic.org/crypto/export_controls/karn_decision_1_97.html Dave ----------------------------------------------------------- UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT No. 96-5121 Philip R. Karn, Jr. v. U.S. Department of State On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Before: Williams, Ginsburg, and Rogers, Circuit Judges January 21, 1997 JUDGMENT In light of the recent Executive Order transferring regulatory authority of non-military cryptographic computer source code to the Commerce Department, and the Commerce Department's promulgation of a new regulation under the authority of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. secs. 1701 et seq., we remand this case to the district court to consider the reviewability of and, if appropriate, the merits of appellant's claim under the Administrative Procedure Act. Because "basic tenets of judicial restraint and separation of powers call upon [the court] first to consider alternative grounds for resolution" when the court is asked to answer a question involving the Constitution of the United States, Lamprecht v. FCC, 958 F.2d 382, 389-90 (D.C. Cir. 1992), we do not reach the constitutional issues raised by this appeal. The clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C. Cir. Rule 41(a)(2). This instruction to the Clerk is without prejudice to the right of any party at any time to move for expedited issuance of the mandate for a good cause shown. Per Curiam FOR THE COURT: /s/ Mark J. Langer, Clerk ========================================================================= David Banisar (Banisar at epic.org) * 202-544-9240 (tel) Electronic Privacy Information Center * 202-547-5482 (fax) 666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, Suite 301 * HTTP://www.epic.org Washington, DC 20003 PGP Key: http://www.epic.org/staff/banisar/key.html ========================================================================= From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 22 16:02:37 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:02:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701220355.TAA17584@toad.com> Message-ID: <13Hy1D105w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Nurdane Oksas writes: > > On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > > > snow writes: > > > > > > > > > > > I say we make people fly naked and ship their stuff via U > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>shudder<< > > > > > > > > > > No!. A clear case of the cure being worse than the dise > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why. it might be fun - those long flight can be so boring wit > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This one I really don't understand. Cypherpunks lobbied heavil > > > > > > > > the Final Solution to Spamming and flaming, now along comes the > > > > > > > > solution to the airport security problem, and nobody's gonna go > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Guess those old, out-of-shape guys don't want anybody laughing > > > > > > > > Besides, they can put all the clothes in the same plane's bagga > > > > > > > > compartment. And planes have those little blankets and pillows > > > > > > > > so what's the problem? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cold temps... > > > > > > > > > > > > What can naked people do to keep warm??? > > > > > > > > > > steal blankets from nearby passenger.. > > > > > > > > I once saw a movie where they had a heroin (or cocaine?) processing lab > > > > and everybody was supposed to work naked so it would be hard to steal > > > > some of the product. Of course in the movie all the employees were good > > > > looking women (Oksas would have been the big star!). > > > > > > Thank you for the complement; You've only seen me with clothes :) > > > > I can tell. > > > > > Would you like to share my blanket? > > > > Sure! A true gentleman (like me) is always ready, willing, and able to sha > > a security blanket with a lady. > > I am very embarassed... > > > > "Something nekkid's in the air!" > > > i think i am in trouble ;) We better start encrypting stuff before we both get in trouble with Dr.MLV :-) This reminds me of a story of one Sovok biology professor in Illinois. His wife got a boyfriend. In addition to having real-life sex, they also exchanged sexually explicit e-mail on AOL which she thought she erased. One day something went wrong with her computer and she asked the husband to fix it. He looked at the hard disk with Norton Utilities and saw 6 months worth the erased e-mail, saying things like "I can still taste your whatever on my lips". Of course all the traffic was in Russian and it would have served as a "Navajo talk" encryption if it weren't for the fact that all 3 were Sovoks. The professor kicked the wife out, but her boyfriend is married, so she's all alone now. This proves that the masses of normal heterosexuals should be educated and encouraged to use encryption, not just some homosexual "elite". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Wed Jan 22 16:26:12 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:26:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Manila says ID system not prelude to martial law (fwd) Message-ID: <199701230026.QAA01800@toad.com> Reuters sez: Message-ID: MANILA, Jan 15 (Reuter) - Philippine President Fidel Ramos on Wednesday dismissed as baseless fears that his order creating a national identification system was a prelude to martial law. ``That is a wild opinion without any basis in fact,'' Ramos told his weekly news conference after Cardinal Jaime Sin, the outspoken Archbishop of Manila, accused him of being authoritarian. {We're talking, therefore it's no threat..} {Sin said it's immoral} {Opposition said could be used to monitor political activities, that it was reminiscent of Marcos.} Officials have said a computerised ID system whereby cards issued to citizens by state pension funds would carry reference numbers assigned to them for life would make it easier for people to transact business with the government and minimise fraud. ``That's all there is to it ... (its) very simple,'' Ramos said. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From snow at smoke.suba.com Wed Jan 22 16:26:13 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:26:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Newt's phone calls Message-ID: <199701230026.QAA01806@toad.com> Mr. Hallam-baker said: > Adam Back wrote in article <5bp18k$1cc at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > > GSM encrypts only the links to the station - the traffic goes in the > > clear through the station. Plus A5 (crypto algorithm used in GSM) is > > weak, 40 bits of effective key space. > > > > It could be worse to have poor crypto, than no crypto, > > I disagree for two reasons, first there is a big difference between having > poor locks and no locks. Most locks can be picked by an expert, they are > effective against many theifs however. > > Second if everyone in the world was using 40 bit email encryption it > would prevent most of the "promiscuous" interception of communications. Third (as Mr. Vulis observed) the jump from using poor crypto to using good crypto is a lot shorter than not using crypto to using good crypto. Once people get it in there heads that crypto is good to use, then it is easier to convince them to use "unbreakable" crypto than to convince non-crypto-users. From Tunny at inference.com Wed Jan 22 16:26:18 1997 From: Tunny at inference.com (James A. Tunnicliffe) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:26:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701230026.QAA01807@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl' writes: > In today's (22 Jan 97) Long Island, NY Newsday Viewpoints, p. A31: > "Let Feds Overheard Cellular-Phone Talk" > by David Kahn (an editor at Newsday and author of "The Codebreakers") > He intones the usual horseman: "...such criminals as terrorists, drug- > runners, kidnappers and child-pornographers are increasingly using > encryption to conceal their plans and activities, the FBI says." Lions and tigers and bears, oh MY! > He also mis-states opponenents of GAK positions, claimingthe > criticism is that "key escrow [at least he doesn't call it key > recovery] won't work all the time", ignoring anti-GAK mentions of > COINTELPRO, J.Edgar Stalin^H^H^H^H^H^HHoover, etc. etc. Actually, I thought he summed up the anti-GAK positions reasonably well, though he didn't elaborate on them. The "it may not work all the time" statement was actually an admission of the pro-GAK side. > And the usual nonsense about "every day that criminal messages can be > heard is a gain" w/out noting that anyone smart enough to use crypto > now will not use it if GAK is fully implemented. I found the logic questionable, but more disturbing was the fundamental position that "loss of privacy [...] is a price that must be paid to gain security". Benjamin Franklin's statement about security and freedom comes strongly to mind when I hear nonsense like this. He then cites the (in "our" view, useless and intrusive) hassles that airline passengers must endure in the name of "security" as justification for more of the same! Talk about a slippery slope! > Newsday is part of the LA Times Syndicate, so member papers may also > have the same viewpoint appearing in their pages within the next > couple of days. > Their website is http://www.newsday.com ... I don't know if the > viewpoint is on-line there. It is, at http://www.newsday.com/mainnews/rnmi0522.htm Pretty disappointing stuff, but then Mr. Kahn IS affiliated with the NSA these days, isn't he? Tunny ====================================================================== James A. Tunnicliffe | WWWeb: http://www.inference.com/~tunny Inference Corporation | PGP Fingerprint: CA 23 E2 F3 AC 2D 0C 77 tunny at Inference.com | 36 07 D9 33 3D 32 53 9C ====================================================================== -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.0 Business Edition Comment: which I won in the PGP raffle at Cypherpunks 12/96... iQEVAgUBMuZ1UvAmQsmyRPddAQFO/gf+Ikw8GScPo/+lr00lKvTnF7dZdEYhE8GC bt7wu96a/4mE81261EwxqA8voI/y5T3RsUfZLeYsGX+wkuPyqK1QImO3A7O8PNnb AvFitSaNsrMqyKTa7mI63TrvoBDCqtN3vYdDeSl6ZPHJmhHO5MF6xVoA56yeF5xf h0ooejTgeYMOGMhf2faRCKU31AdFB+pjozxMo83X2ZrCzga8wiHeqlEEKWQnu1cJ 3jc+TVZnEI95idbQqeHvxh/BBRdprrPxBfncCb8wnXuLHxPmrsWGqfvMDpS06qhl ZWEFChYLDGwsMokvcY+ZOZ6x4jlwssFGDXpflcdjFnPBp3yJKjU7fA== =/siB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cme at cybercash.com Wed Jan 22 16:27:57 1997 From: cme at cybercash.com (Carl Ellison) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:27:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701230027.QAA01813@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- It might also be that David's year long sabatical at NSA's crypto museum which recently ended put him in touch with people who believe in GAK. I found it interesting that he noted the argument that each additional day of government access is a good thing. This is the kind of belief we know that NSA holds -- a.k.a. "not on my watch" -- but I haven't seen it publicly admitted before. - Carl -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMuZ35lQXJENzYr45AQEcfwQAqMftG0DXn1nr6faA6IHeAtqSXYanwnZb DiwqppU4nJqPtIvtFw8eOVVwyYCzIv046dFtwR2mk8HeL1v8I3R2sWm7waknFjlm TM84+vLamlVnBNPUAXRYOrFiEhPQm/iitR4GVrcga9mHJ+vrI38XQGzi0lxdg310 pWjq5Fxahag= =xhF7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Carl M. Ellison cme at acm.org http://www.clark.net/pub/cme | | PGP 2.6.2: 61 E2 DE 7F CB 9D 79 84 E9 C8 04 8B A6 32 21 A2 | +-Officer, officer, arrest that man. He's whistling a dirty song.--+ From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 22 16:31:06 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:31:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <13Hy1D105w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <199701230025.SAA05664@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > On Sun, 19 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > On Sat, 18 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Would you like to share my blanket? > > > Sure! A true gentleman (like me) is always ready, willing, and able > > I am very embarassed... > > i think i am in trouble ;) > > We better start encrypting stuff before we both get in trouble with Dr.MLV :-) you mean, your mai lreading computer is physically secured? > This reminds me of a story of one Sovok biology professor in Illinois. > His wife got a boyfriend. In addition to having real-life sex, they also > exchanged sexually explicit e-mail on AOL which she thought she erased. > One day something went wrong with her computer and she asked the husband > to fix it. He looked at the hard disk with Norton Utilities and saw 6 > months worth the erased e-mail, saying things like "I can still taste > your whatever on my lips". Of course all the traffic was in Russian and > it would have served as a "Navajo talk" encryption if it weren't for > the fact that all 3 were Sovoks. Purebred? Just curious. > The professor kicked the wife out, but > her boyfriend is married, so she's all alone now. > > This proves that the masses of normal heterosexuals should be educated > and encouraged to use encryption, not just some homosexual "elite". The problem is that one of the partners is often too stupid to use PGP. That is very annoying. Not that any of the contents of my hard disk are that sensitive, but under linux I run my wipedisk program two times every night. just another cron job. But think about this: suppose there is a couple, bob at household.com, and alice at household.com. Suppose that Rev. Mallory does not like bob. Mallory forges a lot of emails like "I can still taste your sperm on my lips", that appear to originate from Cindy at phonesex.org. Then, promptly, Mallory sends an anonymous alert to alice at household.com, warning her about naughty email activities of bob. Alice gets mad at him and divorces him. How would bob protect himself against such developments? - Igor. From Banisar at epic.org Wed Jan 22 16:56:11 1997 From: Banisar at epic.org (Dave Banisar) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 16:56:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Decision in Karn Case Message-ID: <199701230056.QAA02134@toad.com> We just received this today. This is in part good news that the appeals court did not just affirm the lower court decision but on the other hand, it doesn't give much guidance to the court. A html version is up at: http://www.epic.org/crypto/export_controls/karn_decision_1_97.html Dave ----------------------------------------------------------- UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT No. 96-5121 Philip R. Karn, Jr. v. U.S. Department of State On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia Before: Williams, Ginsburg, and Rogers, Circuit Judges January 21, 1997 JUDGMENT In light of the recent Executive Order transferring regulatory authority of non-military cryptographic computer source code to the Commerce Department, and the Commerce Department's promulgation of a new regulation under the authority of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. secs. 1701 et seq., we remand this case to the district court to consider the reviewability of and, if appropriate, the merits of appellant's claim under the Administrative Procedure Act. Because "basic tenets of judicial restraint and separation of powers call upon [the court] first to consider alternative grounds for resolution" when the court is asked to answer a question involving the Constitution of the United States, Lamprecht v. FCC, 958 F.2d 382, 389-90 (D.C. Cir. 1992), we do not reach the constitutional issues raised by this appeal. The clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after disposition of any timely petition for rehearing. See D.C. Cir. Rule 41(a)(2). This instruction to the Clerk is without prejudice to the right of any party at any time to move for expedited issuance of the mandate for a good cause shown. Per Curiam FOR THE COURT: /s/ Mark J. Langer, Clerk ========================================================================= David Banisar (Banisar at epic.org) * 202-544-9240 (tel) Electronic Privacy Information Center * 202-547-5482 (fax) 666 Pennsylvania Ave, SE, Suite 301 * HTTP://www.epic.org Washington, DC 20003 PGP Key: http://www.epic.org/staff/banisar/key.html ========================================================================= From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 22 17:01:16 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:01:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fascist cocksuckers: 0, Freedom of speech: 1 In-Reply-To: <199701221210.EAA23235@toad.com> Message-ID: Otto Matic writes: > >> John Young wrote: > >> > Governments in China, Burma and > >> > Singapore have already tried to discipline this on-line activity with > >> > minimal success. > >> > >> Do you have any pointers to information in regard to this, or are you > >> just being a goddamn tease? > > > >For example, the fascist cocksuckers Sandfart and Geekmore have been > >totally impotent in their failed attempts to suppress free speech. > > > >Gilmore's as inept as the governments of China, Burma and Singapore combined > > > > FUCK CENSORSHIP. FUCK EFF (EFFEMINATE FASCISTS FOUNDATION). > > > >--- > > > > Seems as if you've been censored! Bummer, dude! Yes. I'm sure Sandy Sandfart is having a good time censoring his betters. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 22 17:01:20 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:01:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. In-Reply-To: <199701221225.EAA23456@toad.com> Message-ID: Otto Matic writes: > >From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Tue Jan 21 16:57:46 1997 > > >"Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" writes: > > > >> Mission: > >> > >> Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > >> this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? The Web > >> was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > >> between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > >> speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. > > > >Phil, when I saw the subject, I thought this was another article > >condemning Gilmore, Sandfort, and their disgraceful censorship. > > What's up with this one getting censored? You didn't say cocksucker or fuck > anything? Alles Kriticismus auf der Listfuehrer Gilmore und Obercensor Sandfart ist stricklich verbotten. Heil Kocksucker Gilmore! --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 22 17:25:12 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:25:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Armenians want to know... In-Reply-To: <7E1ABE2475@fsaua.aua.am> Message-ID: <3VLy1D111w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Ray Arachalian sure gets around... >From AARARATY at aua.am Wed Jan 22 07:01:23 1997 >Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) > via UUCP; Wed, 22 Jan 97 07:30:15 EST > for AARARATY at aua.am >Received: from fsaua.aua.am (fsaua.aua.am [10.1.0.3]) by ararat.aua.am (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id PAA08515 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 15:24:30 +0400 >Received: from AMI/SpoolDir by fsaua.aua.am (Mercury 1.21); > 22 Jan 97 15:08:11 +0400 >Received: from SpoolDir by AMI (Mercury 1.30); 22 Jan 97 15:07:39 +0400 >From: "Ara Araratyan" >Organization: American University of Armenia >To: cismap at dm.com >Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 15:07:36 +0400 >Subject: Request For Information >Priority: normal >X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail v3.22 >Message-Id: <7E1ABE2475 at fsaua.aua.am> > >Dear Sir, > >If it is not hard for you, please, send me more information about >your organization. > >Sincerely, >Ara Araratyan From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Wed Jan 22 17:33:32 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:33:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701230140.TAA08628@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 03:16:00 -0800 > From: Toto > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > Jim Choate wrote: > > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > > particular view on them. > > And Germany was Hitler and the Nazi Party's own country. And your point is? Are you equating a specific individual or organization with Hitler or the National Socialist? > Do you really want Clinton and GingWretch having a say in how we run > our No, and I have a vote to express that sentiment with and a 'press' (ssz.com) by which I may express my views irrelevant of how that vote may resolve itself. If the people in those counties want to give away their freedom that is their business (and right), not mine, yours, or this countries unless there is evidence they are trying to take their views and impose them here. Do you have said evidence? In reference to Hitler, had he stayed in his own country WWII and the ensuing half century of conflict would most likely not have occured. I say, let them filter themselves into economic collapse, intellectual nihilism, and political suicide. Suicide, assissted or otherwise, is a right any and all individuals have whether acting as individuals or as groups. Remember Masada! Never forget, a tree can exist without a forest but a forest can not exist without trees. It is a one way street however much some people may want to convince us otherwise. > It may be 'their' country ('their' being the government), but it is > 'their' world ('their' being the people). A goverment is people. This reminds me of the argument of the sanctity of law that so many people have. It is only ink on paper that people agree to go along with until they get their fill. Consider, history is full of examples of this process and with California and Massachusettes move on legalizing medical marijuana we may be seeing the first move of a return to states being much more adament on what they can and can't do (per the 9th and 10th). > There was a reason that the > Western powers didn't return East Germans who broke the laws of their > country by climbing over the wall and running for freedom. > Making information available does not 'force' a view on anyone. If those people agree to support a system that limits or controls what information they get to see that is their choice. It didn't work in Russia and it won't work in Singapore or China any better. If the US were to continue to press forward on oppressive legislation and the people don't do anything actively to fight it the same thing will happen here, economic collapse which forces a political collapse. However, we won't get there because the more the government employees and officials 'crack down' the more resistance they will get. You can fool most of the people some of the time, some of the people most of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time. The key to democratic success is not compromise but rather the unwillingness to compromise. > > Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share > > data in a easily digestible format. > > No. The internet was conceived so that the DOD could monitor the > communications > of physicists and researchers who thought it was awfully nice of the > government > to provide this wonderful method of sharing data and information. The Web does not equal the Internet, straw man argument. The original goal of the Internet was to allow computers to be connected in a nuclear conflict and the period afterward when communications would be most critical. How people may have bastardized it since then does not change the original reasons (unless you accept revisionist history as a valid endeavour, I don't). One of the biggest problems this country has right now is the inability of people like yourself to differentiate the difference between the ideals of the country and the people who impliment it. The problem is not the government or the ideals it was founded on but rather the way we impliment it. Our government is people, who put their pants on the same way you or I do (assuming you wear pants that is). They are not inherently some mineon of Hell, they are people who in general either don't give a damn and it's just a job or else they really believe what they are doing. Our government is NOT some ideal or non-real entity, despite how many citizens may rail about it in that manner. It just don't make it so. Accept and deal with your schizophrenic tendencies and help solve this national problem we face. Let's try to solve it now so that our grandchildren won't have to fight this fight again. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Wed Jan 22 18:12:01 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:12:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701230212.SAA03079@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 03:16:00 -0800 > From: Toto > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > Jim Choate wrote: > > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > > particular view on them. > > And Germany was Hitler and the Nazi Party's own country. And your point is? Are you equating a specific individual or organization with Hitler or the National Socialist? > Do you really want Clinton and GingWretch having a say in how we run > our No, and I have a vote to express that sentiment with and a 'press' (ssz.com) by which I may express my views irrelevant of how that vote may resolve itself. If the people in those counties want to give away their freedom that is their business (and right), not mine, yours, or this countries unless there is evidence they are trying to take their views and impose them here. Do you have said evidence? In reference to Hitler, had he stayed in his own country WWII and the ensuing half century of conflict would most likely not have occured. I say, let them filter themselves into economic collapse, intellectual nihilism, and political suicide. Suicide, assissted or otherwise, is a right any and all individuals have whether acting as individuals or as groups. Remember Masada! Never forget, a tree can exist without a forest but a forest can not exist without trees. It is a one way street however much some people may want to convince us otherwise. > It may be 'their' country ('their' being the government), but it is > 'their' world ('their' being the people). A goverment is people. This reminds me of the argument of the sanctity of law that so many people have. It is only ink on paper that people agree to go along with until they get their fill. Consider, history is full of examples of this process and with California and Massachusettes move on legalizing medical marijuana we may be seeing the first move of a return to states being much more adament on what they can and can't do (per the 9th and 10th). > There was a reason that the > Western powers didn't return East Germans who broke the laws of their > country by climbing over the wall and running for freedom. > Making information available does not 'force' a view on anyone. If those people agree to support a system that limits or controls what information they get to see that is their choice. It didn't work in Russia and it won't work in Singapore or China any better. If the US were to continue to press forward on oppressive legislation and the people don't do anything actively to fight it the same thing will happen here, economic collapse which forces a political collapse. However, we won't get there because the more the government employees and officials 'crack down' the more resistance they will get. You can fool most of the people some of the time, some of the people most of the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time. The key to democratic success is not compromise but rather the unwillingness to compromise. > > Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share > > data in a easily digestible format. > > No. The internet was conceived so that the DOD could monitor the > communications > of physicists and researchers who thought it was awfully nice of the > government > to provide this wonderful method of sharing data and information. The Web does not equal the Internet, straw man argument. The original goal of the Internet was to allow computers to be connected in a nuclear conflict and the period afterward when communications would be most critical. How people may have bastardized it since then does not change the original reasons (unless you accept revisionist history as a valid endeavour, I don't). One of the biggest problems this country has right now is the inability of people like yourself to differentiate the difference between the ideals of the country and the people who impliment it. The problem is not the government or the ideals it was founded on but rather the way we impliment it. Our government is people, who put their pants on the same way you or I do (assuming you wear pants that is). They are not inherently some mineon of Hell, they are people who in general either don't give a damn and it's just a job or else they really believe what they are doing. Our government is NOT some ideal or non-real entity, despite how many citizens may rail about it in that manner. It just don't make it so. Accept and deal with your schizophrenic tendencies and help solve this national problem we face. Let's try to solve it now so that our grandchildren won't have to fight this fight again. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Wed Jan 22 18:19:02 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:19:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Digital signatures Message-ID: <199701230219.TAA01249@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timmy C[unt] May was born when his mother was on the toilet. \\\|||/// ======= | O : O | Timmy C[unt] May \`_^_'/ _|^|_ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 22 18:30:11 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:30:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fuck Sandy Sandfart Message-ID: <0mPy1D118w165w@bwalk.dm.com> This is a test. This is only a cocksucking test. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 22 18:35:12 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 18:35:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fascist censorship Message-ID: <82oy1D117w165w@bwalk.dm.com> I notice that both my highly crypto-relevant, flame-free article and Igor Chudov's response to it were rejected by the fascist moderator Sandfart and showed up immediately on the cypherpunks-flames address. Apparently Sandfart automatically rejects any submissions with my name in them. Or he's already dead from AIDS and has been replaced by a 'bot. I also notice that John Gilmore's employees from Cygnus Support are flaming me on sci.crypt and accusing me of homophobia. Please help expose Cygnus Support as a homosexual fraud. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jan 22 19:16:36 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 19:16:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK In-Reply-To: <199701230027.QAA01813@toad.com> Message-ID: It is indeed a shame, and Carl's response was (of course) excellent. The last chapter of the revised edition of the Codebreakers is reasonably pro-government in the way it lays out the issue of key escrow, so perhaps we shouldn't be surprised. (I'm told that David's sojourn at the NSA museum was unexciting; they wouldn't tell him much.) :) -Declan On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Carl Ellison wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > It might also be that David's year long sabatical at NSA's crypto museum > which recently ended put him in touch with people who believe in GAK. > > I found it interesting that he noted the argument that each additional > day of government access is a good thing. This is the kind of belief > we know that NSA holds -- a.k.a. "not on my watch" -- but I haven't seen > it publicly admitted before. > > - Carl > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: 2.6.2 > > iQCVAwUBMuZ35lQXJENzYr45AQEcfwQAqMftG0DXn1nr6faA6IHeAtqSXYanwnZb > DiwqppU4nJqPtIvtFw8eOVVwyYCzIv046dFtwR2mk8HeL1v8I3R2sWm7waknFjlm > TM84+vLamlVnBNPUAXRYOrFiEhPQm/iitR4GVrcga9mHJ+vrI38XQGzi0lxdg310 > pWjq5Fxahag= > =xhF7 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > +------------------------------------------------------------------+ > |Carl M. Ellison cme at acm.org http://www.clark.net/pub/cme | > | PGP 2.6.2: 61 E2 DE 7F CB 9D 79 84 E9 C8 04 8B A6 32 21 A2 | > +-Officer, officer, arrest that man. He's whistling a dirty song.--+ > > > From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jan 22 19:40:37 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 19:40:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701230340.TAA04038@toad.com> It is indeed a shame, and Carl's response was (of course) excellent. The last chapter of the revised edition of the Codebreakers is reasonably pro-government in the way it lays out the issue of key escrow, so perhaps we shouldn't be surprised. (I'm told that David's sojourn at the NSA museum was unexciting; they wouldn't tell him much.) :) -Declan On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Carl Ellison wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > It might also be that David's year long sabatical at NSA's crypto museum > which recently ended put him in touch with people who believe in GAK. > > I found it interesting that he noted the argument that each additional > day of government access is a good thing. This is the kind of belief > we know that NSA holds -- a.k.a. "not on my watch" -- but I haven't seen > it publicly admitted before. > > - Carl > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: 2.6.2 > > iQCVAwUBMuZ35lQXJENzYr45AQEcfwQAqMftG0DXn1nr6faA6IHeAtqSXYanwnZb > DiwqppU4nJqPtIvtFw8eOVVwyYCzIv046dFtwR2mk8HeL1v8I3R2sWm7waknFjlm > TM84+vLamlVnBNPUAXRYOrFiEhPQm/iitR4GVrcga9mHJ+vrI38XQGzi0lxdg310 > pWjq5Fxahag= > =xhF7 > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > +------------------------------------------------------------------+ > |Carl M. Ellison cme at acm.org http://www.clark.net/pub/cme | > | PGP 2.6.2: 61 E2 DE 7F CB 9D 79 84 E9 C8 04 8B A6 32 21 A2 | > +-Officer, officer, arrest that man. He's whistling a dirty song.--+ > > > From markm at voicenet.com Wed Jan 22 20:04:17 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 20:04:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701221210.EAA23236@toad.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > particular view on them. I don't want China or Singapore to have a say in how the web is run which is exactly why I would support any effort to make their filtering systems useless. What I put on my web page is my business and I can change the location of the URL as many times as I want and try to make it as difficult as possible to filter it. These countries have no say in whether or not I can do this. If they want to censor their Internet feed, that's their problem and I'm under no obligation to make it easy for them. > Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share > data in a easily digestible format. The web and technology in general have > no more ethics or morality intrinsicly in them than a 5/8" open end > wrench. Blocking and filtering are an expression of human choice and the > implimentation thereof. If it's forced upon the people, it's not a choice. Ultimately, the people can abolish the government if it becomes tyrannical, but not without a lot of lives being lost. I'd much rather try to make sure that people in these countries have free access to information than watch people getting crushed by tanks. > You don't like it, don't live there and don't try to > call there. You or I have no more right to be on a Chinese or Singapore > Internet than they have in coming into yours or my home without an > invitation. These countries want the benefits of being connected to the Internet without the burdens of the citizens having free access to information. It just doesn't work that way. They can pull the plug if they want. If they don't, then they have no right to complain about how people are smuggling subversive information into their respective countries. If the information was "uninvited", then nobody would be downloading it or accessing it anyway. Countries that want to censor their internet connections have the choice of either facing extreme economic difficulties as a result of not being connected to the Internet, or giving their people access to information that the government doesn't want these people to access. Either way, it will force these countries to change in some way. I think most of them will eventually settle for the latter choice. Allowing these countries to censor their connections will result in violence that could otherwise be avoided. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMubkGSzIPc7jvyFpAQGAjAf8D5rdpWYSde9wAcMYvwIqVBQ1+O1692AN x8BOCzv8SYAA+4fA/zHZ4uEetxCikPP7ZF1Nr/K8Tmq5iK7Ed78jvHNj+FXZUB4q oRKolBTmmgkivO1NAKiNtV/NbSFlW+IV88VGZBPx7dwKjJ4JnpR/1HmwtScuQE14 O32NoQTO+6ujmALROdLTr3cGZo6iLl9pC4ZyFZtgTNSzQswT53usXnYkJ8bKlWC6 oj6XY18Jopyx0d2WAmN5pFX2goTnfQSH/Bw6XzDxDGdZNyIY5VxSPynd3018Slgs KH61gRRQ7ilPF4SyKiu+eH0Bvr6NbKonj60NFX0LzbYBDc1OWMYT2Q== =u+Ou -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From cme at cybercash.com Wed Jan 22 20:17:16 1997 From: cme at cybercash.com (Carl Ellison) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 20:17:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: P.S. David Kahn's editorial today Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970122231547.00bc82f0@cybercash.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I just sent the following P.S. to newsday.com ---------------------- There is another reason to have cellular phones which encrypt only the over-the-air portion of a call, besides the fact that we can leave normal wiretap access procedures in place and not surrender civilian crypto keys to the government. If I have a cellular phone which encrypts over the air (between the phone and the base station) and I call you, while you have a normal wired phone, our call is protected by cryptography from interception off the air. If I use an AT&T Clipper-style cellular phone, as David suggested, and I call you on a normal wired phone, we can't encrypt the conversation and it is vulnerable to interception. The protection works *only* if both parties have encrypting phones while interoperate. - Carl -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMubl6lQXJENzYr45AQEYagQAmVL47KGCHUyee8246VjGqr7+uubTBhHA s/TtgFiMW7a9W5jbni5ov+kjTDeGpRULfrbyEwYR2fd1E1laNeu+EAQkE56KuU9g iiB0S7TBd290MSHJZ6wQUWsDVgCzOi9gHbCQwY+GMQMXKfphuC4kDavwdSxjAXAM MeZsitFRM1w= =TzsP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Carl M. Ellison cme at acm.org http://www.clark.net/pub/cme | | PGP 2.6.2: 61 E2 DE 7F CB 9D 79 84 E9 C8 04 8B A6 32 21 A2 | +-Officer, officer, arrest that man. He's whistling a dirty song.--+ From markm at voicenet.com Wed Jan 22 20:26:11 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 20:26:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701230426.UAA04426@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > particular view on them. I don't want China or Singapore to have a say in how the web is run which is exactly why I would support any effort to make their filtering systems useless. What I put on my web page is my business and I can change the location of the URL as many times as I want and try to make it as difficult as possible to filter it. These countries have no say in whether or not I can do this. If they want to censor their Internet feed, that's their problem and I'm under no obligation to make it easy for them. > Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share > data in a easily digestible format. The web and technology in general have > no more ethics or morality intrinsicly in them than a 5/8" open end > wrench. Blocking and filtering are an expression of human choice and the > implimentation thereof. If it's forced upon the people, it's not a choice. Ultimately, the people can abolish the government if it becomes tyrannical, but not without a lot of lives being lost. I'd much rather try to make sure that people in these countries have free access to information than watch people getting crushed by tanks. > You don't like it, don't live there and don't try to > call there. You or I have no more right to be on a Chinese or Singapore > Internet than they have in coming into yours or my home without an > invitation. These countries want the benefits of being connected to the Internet without the burdens of the citizens having free access to information. It just doesn't work that way. They can pull the plug if they want. If they don't, then they have no right to complain about how people are smuggling subversive information into their respective countries. If the information was "uninvited", then nobody would be downloading it or accessing it anyway. Countries that want to censor their internet connections have the choice of either facing extreme economic difficulties as a result of not being connected to the Internet, or giving their people access to information that the government doesn't want these people to access. Either way, it will force these countries to change in some way. I think most of them will eventually settle for the latter choice. Allowing these countries to censor their connections will result in violence that could otherwise be avoided. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMubkGSzIPc7jvyFpAQGAjAf8D5rdpWYSde9wAcMYvwIqVBQ1+O1692AN x8BOCzv8SYAA+4fA/zHZ4uEetxCikPP7ZF1Nr/K8Tmq5iK7Ed78jvHNj+FXZUB4q oRKolBTmmgkivO1NAKiNtV/NbSFlW+IV88VGZBPx7dwKjJ4JnpR/1HmwtScuQE14 O32NoQTO+6ujmALROdLTr3cGZo6iLl9pC4ZyFZtgTNSzQswT53usXnYkJ8bKlWC6 oj6XY18Jopyx0d2WAmN5pFX2goTnfQSH/Bw6XzDxDGdZNyIY5VxSPynd3018Slgs KH61gRRQ7ilPF4SyKiu+eH0Bvr6NbKonj60NFX0LzbYBDc1OWMYT2Q== =u+Ou -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From vin at shore.net Wed Jan 22 20:49:04 1997 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 20:49:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? Message-ID: <199701230448.XAA28286@relay1.shore.net> Lucky Green who is usually answering questions, wrote: >>>I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. >>>Any advice would be appreciated. >Parallel on Win95. Hi Lucky, RSA has got their Win95 version of SecurPC. That's 128-bit RC4 encryption; maybe 10X the speed of DES. You could encrypt your zip data from Explorer either on demand, or automatically upon exiting WIN95. (It auto-decrypts on startup.) SecurPC doesn't yet have transparent (fully background) crypto, but given the market pressures, it obviously won't be long in coming. SecurPC does have a number of other unusual features that might offset the lack of transparency. My favorite: At least until the next version of ERA;-) RSA's SecurPC permits you to ship data over the US borders encrypted with 128-bit RC4 in a self-extracting file which can be opened by anyone, anywhere -- with the same OS as the sender, and the right (one-time?) password -- even if they don't have a copy of SecurPC. The key, passed out of band, is certainly not up to PKC standards... but for occasional connections, if you duck the dictionary attack, it looks pretty damn sturdy. One-way symmetric-- kinda neat! (Anyone know how it really works? I got a copy of the v1 user's manual from SDTI, where I do a lot of contract work -- but it doesn't really explain the split of functions. I'll have to ask.) Suerte, _Vin From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Wed Jan 22 20:58:29 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 20:58:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701230505.XAA08921@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 23:08:41 -0500 (EST) > From: "Mark M." > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > > particular view on them. > > I don't want China or Singapore to have a say in how the web is run which is There is no 'the web'. I run a Internet site which is connected 24 hours a day at my expence which contains a web site. If you think that is 'your' web then drag your ass to Austin, TX. and start paying the $600 of bills each month for 'your' web. Quit thinking that what you have and want is what everyone else has or wants. Grow up. The goal is to keep THEM from bothering YOU, not the otherway around, they will take care of that using the same tools and techniques you do. > exactly why I would support any effort to make their filtering systems useless. > What I put on my web page is my business and I can change the location of the And you don't have a right to tell them what to do with their computers or their citizens. > URL as many times as I want and try to make it as difficult as possible to > filter it. These countries have no say in whether or not I can do this. If And you should have no say in what they do with their resources. > they want to censor their Internet feed, that's their problem and I'm under no > obligation to make it easy for them. And their under no obligation to let you run around and force your views on them anymore than you would accept that sort of behaviour from them. Wake up, what goes around, comes around. > If it's forced upon the people, it's not a choice. Which people? Who is doing the forcing? If Singapore citizens are content to let Singapore officials filter their newsfeeds or whatever that is Singapores business, not yours. It acts as a concrete real-world object model on how NOT to do it here, nothing else. Whether you like it or not both people and governments have a fundamental right to make mistakes. It comes with the territory. Loose this fantasy you have that there is one way to run the world, there isn't. People are entirely too diverse for any single view to rule for any length of appreciable time irrespective of how much force might be used to promulgate it. > Ultimately, the people can > abolish the government if it becomes tyrannical, but not without a lot of lives > being lost. I'd much rather try to make sure that people in these countries > have free access to information than watch people getting crushed by tanks. Who made you responsible for them? If you are responsible for them then you are responsible for me? Not in your wildest wet dream junior. You simply aren't that important in the scheme of things. You can't have one without the other. The tree of liberty has to be watered with blood. Your position is that as long as it isn't your blood then it is ok. Other people have the same right. Personaly, I don't like the idea of other people deciding that it is time to spill my blood to water their tree. The point of the exercise, left up to the student to resolve, is to avoid this entire scenario, not shift the blame to some other entity. > > You don't like it, don't live there and don't try to > > call there. You or I have no more right to be on a Chinese or Singapore > > Internet than they have in coming into yours or my home without an > > invitation. > > These countries want the benefits of being connected to the Internet without > the burdens of the citizens having free access to information. It just doesn't > work that way. It works whatever way the people doing it want it to run. Let me say it again, GOVERNMENTS ARE PEOPLE MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT PEOPLE, INCLUDING THEMSELVES, WHICH THEY BELIEVE ARE IN THEIR BEST INTEREST. IF IT DOESN'T FIT WITH YOUR PARTICULAR IMAGE OF WHAT 'BEST INTEREST' IS, TOUGH SHIT. > They can pull the plug if they want. If they don't, then they > have no right to complain about how people are smuggling subversive information > into their respective countries. Then we have no right to complain about Columbian drug cartels, Russian contraband nuclear weapons, sarin nerve gas promulaged by Japanese religious zealots, etc. Let me say this again, A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF ALL LIVING BEINGS IS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES THE BEST WAY THEY SEE FIT AGAINST A PERCEIVED THREAT TO THEIR CONTINUED EXISTANCE. IT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IN THE SHORT TERM IF THAT THREAT IS REAL OR NOT. > If the information was "uninvited", then > nobody would be downloading it or accessing it anyway. This is silly and completely misleading. > Countries that want to censor their internet connections have the choice of > either facing extreme economic difficulties as a result of not being connected > to the Internet, or giving their people access to information that the > government doesn't want these people to access. Either way, it will force > these countries to change in some way. I think most of them will eventually > settle for the latter choice. Allowing these countries to censor their > connections will result in violence that could otherwise be avoided. Really? Where is your object model? Seems like we get in a situation where we are using violence against people with the reason being we are protecting them against violence. Now THAT sounds like some sort of neo-Nazi bullshit. You should apply for work at the DEA, you would pass their psych screens with flying colors. I have three quotes you might do well to ponder while you plan your next over-throw... "Study nature, not books" Louis Agassiz "The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity." Yeats "You are What you do When it counts" The Masao Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From lucifer at dhp.com Wed Jan 22 21:01:11 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:01:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Decision in Karn Case In-Reply-To: <199701230056.QAA02134@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701230501.AAA23419@dhp.com> > http://www.epic.org/crypto/export_controls/karn_decision_1_97.html > [...] > In light of the recent Executive Order transferring > regulatory authority of non-military cryptographic computer > source code to the Commerce Department, and the Commerce > Department's promulgation of a new regulation under the authority > of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. secs. > 1701 et seq., we remand this case to the district court to > consider the reviewability of and, if appropriate, the merits of > appellant's claim under the Administrative Procedure Act. And when that review finally reaches the appeals court, the administration can move the regulations to the state department. The uniqueness of the anti-crypto regulations is that it is a law against intellectuals and academics. These people will not be willing to break the law and then challenge its constitutionality in the courts, or engage in any kind of civil disobedience demonstration. The author of premail, for example, is doing a weird kind of civil *obedience* demonstration to protect the laws. As long as that continues the government can get away with playing their shell game. By the way, what exactly happend to D.J. Bernstein's and the EFF's threat to seek an injunction from Judge Patel if the new regulations were not put on hold subject to constitutional review by January 2? No updates at www.eff.org. Did EFF strike another deal with the government? From afc at furnituredirect.com Wed Jan 22 21:05:55 1997 From: afc at furnituredirect.com (afc at furnituredirect.com) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:05:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Furniture Catalog Message-ID: <199701230513.VAA02923@server.ardennet.com> http://www.furnituredirect.com - Advanced Furnishing Concepts We are the Internets largest furniture retailer. With thousands of items to choose from, you're sure to find just what your looking for in a short time. Our on-line catalogs are designed to be very simple to browse. No complicated menus, frames or other complexities, just a simple format to get you right to where you want to go. Secure Ordering for your protection, or call us at 1-800-407-8273 to order. REGISTER FOR MONTHLY CONTEST ! WIN $100 ! Reply Remove if you wish. From cme at cybercash.com Wed Jan 22 21:10:47 1997 From: cme at cybercash.com (Carl Ellison) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:10:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: P.S. David Kahn's editorial today Message-ID: <199701230510.VAA04818@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I just sent the following P.S. to newsday.com ---------------------- There is another reason to have cellular phones which encrypt only the over-the-air portion of a call, besides the fact that we can leave normal wiretap access procedures in place and not surrender civilian crypto keys to the government. If I have a cellular phone which encrypts over the air (between the phone and the base station) and I call you, while you have a normal wired phone, our call is protected by cryptography from interception off the air. If I use an AT&T Clipper-style cellular phone, as David suggested, and I call you on a normal wired phone, we can't encrypt the conversation and it is vulnerable to interception. The protection works *only* if both parties have encrypting phones while interoperate. - Carl -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMubl6lQXJENzYr45AQEYagQAmVL47KGCHUyee8246VjGqr7+uubTBhHA s/TtgFiMW7a9W5jbni5ov+kjTDeGpRULfrbyEwYR2fd1E1laNeu+EAQkE56KuU9g iiB0S7TBd290MSHJZ6wQUWsDVgCzOi9gHbCQwY+GMQMXKfphuC4kDavwdSxjAXAM MeZsitFRM1w= =TzsP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Carl M. Ellison cme at acm.org http://www.clark.net/pub/cme | | PGP 2.6.2: 61 E2 DE 7F CB 9D 79 84 E9 C8 04 8B A6 32 21 A2 | +-Officer, officer, arrest that man. He's whistling a dirty song.--+ From vin at shore.net Wed Jan 22 21:10:50 1997 From: vin at shore.net (Vin McLellan) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:10:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? Message-ID: <199701230510.VAA04819@toad.com> Lucky Green who is usually answering questions, wrote: >>>I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. >>>Any advice would be appreciated. >Parallel on Win95. Hi Lucky, RSA has got their Win95 version of SecurPC. That's 128-bit RC4 encryption; maybe 10X the speed of DES. You could encrypt your zip data from Explorer either on demand, or automatically upon exiting WIN95. (It auto-decrypts on startup.) SecurPC doesn't yet have transparent (fully background) crypto, but given the market pressures, it obviously won't be long in coming. SecurPC does have a number of other unusual features that might offset the lack of transparency. My favorite: At least until the next version of ERA;-) RSA's SecurPC permits you to ship data over the US borders encrypted with 128-bit RC4 in a self-extracting file which can be opened by anyone, anywhere -- with the same OS as the sender, and the right (one-time?) password -- even if they don't have a copy of SecurPC. The key, passed out of band, is certainly not up to PKC standards... but for occasional connections, if you duck the dictionary attack, it looks pretty damn sturdy. One-way symmetric-- kinda neat! (Anyone know how it really works? I got a copy of the v1 user's manual from SDTI, where I do a lot of contract work -- but it doesn't really explain the split of functions. I'll have to ask.) Suerte, _Vin From lucifer at dhp.com Wed Jan 22 21:10:51 1997 From: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:10:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Decision in Karn Case Message-ID: <199701230510.VAA04820@toad.com> > http://www.epic.org/crypto/export_controls/karn_decision_1_97.html > [...] > In light of the recent Executive Order transferring > regulatory authority of non-military cryptographic computer > source code to the Commerce Department, and the Commerce > Department's promulgation of a new regulation under the authority > of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. secs. > 1701 et seq., we remand this case to the district court to > consider the reviewability of and, if appropriate, the merits of > appellant's claim under the Administrative Procedure Act. And when that review finally reaches the appeals court, the administration can move the regulations to the state department. The uniqueness of the anti-crypto regulations is that it is a law against intellectuals and academics. These people will not be willing to break the law and then challenge its constitutionality in the courts, or engage in any kind of civil disobedience demonstration. The author of premail, for example, is doing a weird kind of civil *obedience* demonstration to protect the laws. As long as that continues the government can get away with playing their shell game. By the way, what exactly happend to D.J. Bernstein's and the EFF's threat to seek an injunction from Judge Patel if the new regulations were not put on hold subject to constitutional review by January 2? No updates at www.eff.org. Did EFF strike another deal with the government? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 22 21:32:46 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:32:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: ADSL (Was: GSM technology In-Reply-To: <9700228539.AA853956802@smtplink.alis.ca> Message-ID: <32E70D8F.4CF8@sk.sympatico.ca> Toto wrote: > > jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca wrote: > > A previous poster mentioned that because of the copper wire restriction, that > > they may deploy first in older centers. This would appear to be the case, since > > a Canadian telco (Sasktel) is offering ADSL in Saskatoon for 60$/month with > > unlimited internet access. Saskatoon falls into this category - in my opinion. > > > > I was only is SK briefly over New Years, but perhaps Toto can fill in details. > > James, > SaskTel has, for the most part, always had a monopoly on the telephone > business in Saskatchewan, and used this to keep the phone rates fairly > high. On the other hand, they also used much of the money to position > themselves to keep their monopoly by investing heavily in the newest > technologies. > As a result, they have a lot of fiber-optic, etc., even in the > boondocks, but they also soaked those people $ 6.00 hour for > InterNet access, until Sympatico came in with a competitive rate > of less than $ 1.00/hour, and then they stopped clipping the > sucker/citizens. > SaskTel left the 'upgrading' of the larger centers to last, and > as a result, their 'old' technology seems to be ironically beneficial > to them in being able to offer ADSL in Saskatoon, Regina, and a couple > of other centers. > > Toto From wcampbel at peganet.com Wed Jan 22 21:42:23 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:42:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerce Sec. Hearings and Encryption Message-ID: <199701230533.AAA13403@mercury.peganet.com> I have been watching the confirmation hearings for William Daley, and I was amazed at the number of references in the questioning to encryption. I have been watching confirmation hearings for a long time and have never noticed this much attention being placed on such a (formerly?) obscure topic. It appears that encryption is definitely a big blip on the governmental radar screen now, although whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is definitely a debatable question. It's interesting to me that all this interest is coming up in a confirmation hearing for a *commerce* secretary. Maybe the commercial aspects of encryption can have a positive impact on the current restrictions; privacy rights certainly haven't had any impact. =Bill= From ott0matic at hotmail.com Wed Jan 22 21:50:43 1997 From: ott0matic at hotmail.com (Otto Matic) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:50:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. Message-ID: <19970123045730.8356.qmail@hotmail.com> >From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Wed Jan 22 18:19:14 1997 >Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM writes: > >> >From cypherpunks-errors at toad.com Tue Jan 21 16:57:46 1997 > >Alles Kriticismus auf der Listfuehrer Gilmore und Obercensor Sandfart >ist stricklich verbotten. Heil Kocksucker Gilmore! Otto Says: Kalifornia UberAlles! otto =-=-=-=-=- Otto Matic "Fuckin' A, Miller!" Bud, Repo Man --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:14:39 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:14:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: greed and the internet Message-ID: <199701230614.XAA06525@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- greed and the internet our network provider (MCI) has been gradually burying our T1 trunk and the effective feed has been reduced to 1200 baud from 1.56 Megabaud; that, and add 20 seconds to 5+ minutes of packet hold, and it is now worthless. they claim they will have increased capacity, but there are no pressing big money commercial interests on this feeder --so when? Problem is not just here --everywhere; the greedy commercial bastards have oversold their network space intentionally as they are bucking for per packet and timed usage charges which are currently prohibited by the FCC and the state PUCs. The FCC is the key since other than the local network, which is burdened with the costs of the trunk, everything is regulated by the FCC which is trying to totally eliminate the state PUCs in the 105th Congress, Newt's mouth not withstanding. The FCC agreed to review the matter, capitulating to big greed interests, which will make the Internet a rich man's toy. $19.95/month plus access charges will increase to thousands of dollars per month; slow networks make toast of the free hours and overtime kills. Without the creative input of the multitude, there will be no content, so why have a net other than for commercial purposes? suites the misinformation cabal just fine. Well, the FCC granted a reprieve --for the moment. but will come up again, and again, until it passes. The Internet will no no longer be the peoples net, and the commercial greedies are establishing a faster, more secure network with controlled access points; leaving the common man's access in the mud, still paying the exorbitant rates on a pay before play basis. That, and it gives control of information to the government --which, as we all know. is 'heavenly white' -above sin. Universities are being bought off with the 'Internet II' proposal which provides super trunks of over 600 Megabaud capacity, a 400 times improvement. All of this feeds into five stategically placed super-hubs where Uncle's shadow government can monitor everything. The Internet was supposed to be our freedom: freedom of information and government in the sunshine, but government is proving it is still bigger, faster, and badder by using draconian rules of illegal regulatory agencies. agencies which are usurping rights limited to the legislative branch. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMubOW704kQrCC2kFAQE0gQQAxrkUhyX5wl+dZ/i6ajMJXAD7f+gpvc6Z CBik+g62RqWrMbOblfLRubhEIWUfK2FQxIBRJ+0cQezCH4IfM1CxbytJ4Cx3BBBs GwHGuhTfLnGVnuCAugguRdNUrd/tXaN47pAVqmg330XvLlTJqha8ODPsi2b+7qst 2z8qbOW0cqo= =M9c5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:14:48 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:14:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: justice for cryptography, US style Message-ID: <199701230614.XAA06539@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Looks to me like Carl needs to understand justice, U.S. federal court style. In the first place: "ignorance is no excuse under the law" -then: ask yourself why the U.S. continues the drug war when it is obvious to the perverted, ignorant, and bought-off Congress- person that it will never be won. the answer is simple: it's MONEY. First, the government makes a fortune by importing drugs, which they can use for unaccountable programs which are illegal under law. The money is controlled by the CIA, administration, and the power brokers in the deal which basically states it all; and, secondly, there is money in imprisonment. Oh? so then ask yourself why the federal prisons have tripled in size the last 10 years with the dope wars. coincidental? now, what does that have to do with crypto? very simple: as the US heads closer and closer to the UN Constitution under Bubba's guidance with Hillary's hands on his balls, crypto can bypass political thought control. That will not be acceptable to those who rule: in the US, or anywhere else. "Intimidation is just another form of communication." (attila) and they have intimidated federal judges, and they are intimidating federal judges, and they will continue to intimdate federal judges. and, they will continue to feed the media what they want known. so, what does that have to do with it? a) the federal government is disenfranchising felons with certain types of convictions, including drugs, and all offenses against the federal government --cryptography is an offense against the federal government since it falls under ITAR. do you know what disenfranchisement really means: well, start with fact you have lost your civil rights --ALL of them. the man never needs a warrant to take you, anywhere. anyplace, including your home without knocking --he has automatic probable cause. all federal convictions of the type described carry a tail --extended probation. in other words, a sadistic, sadonic, and automatically suspicious federal civil servant OWNS you. He can visit your employer; he can tell you exactly how to run your business if you are self-employed; he can tell you if you can move; he can tell you who you will see or talk with; and if tells you to polish his apple, get on your knees and smile while you labour. b) no vote --that is the principle meaning of franchise which is defined as "suffrage." you are history on that score unless you manage to convince Bubba to grant you a federal pardon. c) the federal govenment, through one of their federal money giveaways is forcing the criminal records onto the drivers' license. So far, no state has a check box on the sealed photo ID, but they will, including a coded offense block. d) now, the big credit bureaus, TRW, Equifax, etc. have added the collection of data for traffic convictions; so far they have not added either misdemeanor and felony >>arrests<< and convictions to the _available_ information, but they will. Did you know that you can have a 3 or 4 page rap sheet for a single arrest/offense/conviction by the time they rewrite charges, which is common in, you guessed it: dope cases, and propably will be in crypto cases as the Federales discover more evidence (planted, decoded, whatever?). e) You know, I'm beginning to like Mississippi's statutory rape laws better all the time. The age is 18, as high it goes in all 50 states --but it only applies if the minor female is over 12 and can prove she is a virgin... yeah, right, where the only virgin over eight can run faster than her brothers... e) prisons are big business; and, government has undertaken a program of privatization of the prison system --in other words, the big government oriented contractors, like SAIC chaired by Bobby Inman, are planning to make a profit housing government misjustice. do they like to make money? does this sound like slave labour to you? sounds like government 'letting' of business. P.J. O'Rourke has the definitive result of that: "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators" well, I'm too old for the civil disobedience game or deliberately begging the law; I do not wish to head for the 3 hots ad a cot of federal hospitality wearing more years than I can carry. but you'd better believe and if you wish to even try to beat the government back, don't think you have any rights in America. Just remember Judge Roy Bean is sitting in his large $1,500-2,000 comforatable chair about a meter above you, smiling down on you as you sit in the hard, cold, flimsy chair of the dock, after our esteemed judge got drunk last night with his cronies. After all, Judge Roy, who's only human, suffers from an inferiority complex, and needs a power rush. And after this poor excuse for a human lays 3 fives running wild (15) and 6 tail on you, try smiling at the judge; then say: "thank you your honor, but you're just another fuckin' drunk." == ====== ORIGINAL MESSAGE ====== In <32C27B88.558 at sk.sympatico.ca>, on 12/26/96 at 05:20 AM, Carl Johnson said: ::jim bell wrote: ::> ::> However, if being "on the Internet" is automatically presumed to be ::> an export, why can't we program using remote-control editors which ::> might, someday, be available on the Internet? :: If I wanted to export an unexportable program, I would put it on my :: machine as 'happyface.zip', and then make sure that everybody :: spread the word that it was available under that title. I don't :: believe there is a prosecutor alive that can convince a jury of :: twelve mostly non-technically oriented people that someone should :: be put in prison for not knowing the content of every single :: non-text file on their machine. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMubSx704kQrCC2kFAQHaZwP+LZe99M0ntnj0za+TSAG6TtMr55MH7VBG y0PLMkKLQGb7Gi5mt72BBZ8XNoVLlBHqxsdpWdI0u812aVj78+L0hQojeuyzyUph 4hJo3N7U5ITscNeks8IbClzl8UNkoKaW5UH0bQlL6EaU7AvmmB15g6nQ4C59rBos l2AQiOZZtwU= =QJSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:15:05 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:15:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Just another government fuckover: New crypto regulations In-Reply-To: <9m4qZD23w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <199701230614.XAA06559@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <9m4qZD23w165w at bwalk.dm.com>, on 12/30/96 at 08:07 AM, dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) said: ::"Attila T. Hun" writes: ::> books are and have been protected prior to the US Constitution. ::"Protected" in what sense? Copyright in a fairly recent invention. free speech, which is what we are talking about. supposedly absolute freedom of speech in America was in the Articles of Confederation and was a major point of the Declaration of Independence. free speach was an "intention" of the Magna Carta. ::> the US Government has not been a legal government for years; it ::>is a private club which can be bought, and its services sold to the ::>highest bidder. It is a collection of whores who are part of a cabal ::>of the very rich and powerful; it is totally unaccountable to the ::>public it represents. Waco, Ruby Ridge, and the bombing of their own ::>federal building in Oklahoma City in order to scare Joe Couch Potato ::>into giving up personal freedoms for security are perfect examples of ::>a government drunk on it owns powers. Just like Oswald, they have a ::>perfect patsy with the defendants in OKC. ::Like I said the other day, the similarities with the USSR under the ::last few years of Brezhnev's life are striking. just a little bit too close, is it not? The Kremlin then, and the Kremlin of Yeltsin also suffer the same malady: the personal expression of power. Gorbi will be remembered in history as not a great statesmen as he was initially hailed in the West, but as the 'great concessionaire,' giving Russia's "imperial" power away. Russia never had a communist government, it was a dictatorship somewhat tempered by the power of the apparati (which under Stalin was a joke); it just so happened they practiced the art of the commune in collective farming --except they stole the bulk of the communes' production. Any concept of the commune ownership was fantasy. but the bottom line with Brezhnev was the "drunk with power" of each of the petty fiefdoms. Old Joe and Beria is a perfect example, except Joe took care of his problem promptly to prove the rule that 'thou shall not covet thy boss...'. compare today in Russia: Lebed is a prime example. Even under Brezhnev he would have walked the one way tunnel. Fact is, it appears Lebed has been closer to the mark than the rest of the pompous fools; but that certainly has not helped if one considers Lebed would need to assume absolute power in order to clear the errant course of the Russian ship of state --absolute power corrupts absolutely. the US has two or three power factors depending on your point of view. The visible US government with a totally corrupt and depiscable asshole at the helm --a sublimely and malignantly corrupt man installed as a puppet gone drunk on his cocaine power pack; he thinks he has shaken his masters and his battle is to control the CIA and the rest of the hidden spook show. Even his loyal puppy, John Deutsch, was unable to control the CIA, let alone the rest of the apparati. The lame duck cabinet is more impotent than the last, who almost to a man jumped as rats from a sinking ship. His thrust for power is masked in rhetoric of "for the good of the country" or "to protect the country from the evils of private speech which might be criminal or subversive" that we may all be free. Is it coincidence free speech is the cornerstone of democracy? So who does control the real apparati? check behind the silent curtains of the dark drawing rooms; check behind the facade of US Department of State postings since WWII, and compare names with events and the social register and the rolls of Harvard, Yale, and Princeton; check the bunkers at Fort Meade and other places; check the shadows and the denials; particularly check the denials. don't wast your time with the myriad of 'culprits' starting with the Bilderbergers, the CFR, the TLA, the Bavarian Illuminati, etc. they are just drinking clubs of the power hungry united only by a common greed. greed and absolute power as America careens into history and disenfranchisement. is there then still a third force? speculation? fact! avengers? too little, too late? hunted to the status of endangered species or even to extinction? sacrificial lambs or goats for the alter of the temples of the doomed? or saviours? ::> books are an intellectual 'solution' to the problem. the real ::>problem is the hardware. in order to negate governments and their ::>virtually stated intentions of blocking our inalienable freedoms, ::>particularly freedom of speach, we must be able to distribute ::>universal crypto worldwide, and be able to improve it as the shadow ::>governments of the various spook shows improve their ability to ::>break our code. ::Yes, but the impotent "cypher punks" can't write or distribute code. ::They can only flame and rant and pull plugs. Ah, dimitri, my quasi-friend, my quasi-enemy, that is the question, is it not? Can cypherpunks write code? Some like to argue, and still can and do write code. Others only pontificate; and others lurk for the false rush of the ephemeral or fantastical power. dimitri, you've never been a lurker in your life; then why do you participate in cypherpunks if they are, to a [wo]man, nothing but wankers? (I guess that works for the gentle sex, too. no? ). Ah, dimitri, you're secret is out. you are here to harangue! ::> if you do not have the balls to do it, you are not for freedom. ::If you are a "cypher punk", you are not for freedom. No, no, no, dimitri. Cypherpunks are absolute in their demands for freedom. Most are making the choice to demand freedom while they play in the band and the Titanic sinks. Shall their last song be "God Bless America" or "Nearer my Lord to Thee" --it's all the same is it not? They, and the rest of the complacent Americans, will go down with the ship (as will the fighters without support). Talk is cheap, dimitri. Let's see a little action. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMubRA704kQrCC2kFAQEfKAQAxf1bR0+nyqDzvLLBms7+h6dqNaitk2KB 8xGPwVeW6KqOy667AnNnbjpxh+sYQBaWIeIPASr4jx2Z3y3J2uMkmOpysSN5k8CM QK1D5JbIj1x0EteFHciLijlBHbqX7Hc+mg378LElsvC9StU8ZC0+aOLyt5qHnM+k Achoxz4J7xE= =GmbG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:15:13 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:15:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: YEEHAW! Tobacco argument heats up in AZ Message-ID: <199701230615.XAA06580@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- summary: AZ AG filed for an injunction in the public interest to stop the sale of tobacco in AZ. tobacco company response claimed he was infringing on legislative rights... full story is below. pure warmed-over buffalo chips --the tobacco interests. ...create a conflict between the judiciary and the legislative branches since the judiciary can ban the sale of something the legislative branch has decided to regulate and collect taxes from ... ? where did this boy learn his logic, let alone his law (of course, who ever said any lawyer used logic any more than statistics are used to defend lies?) big tobacco will spend at least $200 million, maybe even $1 billion in advertising and diversions to avoid this one --this is not a tort issue with delayable appeals --this is injunctive relief which could stop the sale of tobacco in a single hearing. bravo! and, I'll bet AZ never passed legislation which states the death merchants have a mandated "right" to sell tobacco products, even though the legislature did elect to pass a law to "regulate" the sale of tobacco. a mandated right implies endorsement, and places the endorser in the product liability chain. A fine line maybe for the tobacco companies to hang their hats on, but a Grand Canyon worth of the state if there has no "right" to sell granted --granting a "right to sell" would be tantamount to endorsing the sale of tobacco products. this may be the perfect shot. let's see how long before the ACLU jumps in! and, on which side will they jump?!? Is 'smoking' a libertarian privilege cranted unconditionally to the people despite the side effects, and collatgeral damage, even if you do not smoke? This case should draw enough amicus curiae to require an entirely new complex of libraries just to hold the pleadings, and an army of law clerks with a massively parallel database to catalogue and service the briefs. I can see the fine hand of the Association of Attorney Generals driving this one. Arizona is constituted just mean enough to take this kind of action. Let's see how long it is before the Feds try to step in on the possible Constitutional grounds of regulating trade between the states, or claiming "jurisdiction" under rule 10 FRCP where the combatants are of differing 'citizenship' AND the amount is more than $10,000 (the injunctive relief has no monetary value in and of itself) can be moved by any party to the Federal court having jurisdiction (that was how I prevented AT&T from moving from NV to NY or NJ where they could stall forever and indulge in the usual payoffs). --as an aside, I wonder if we could ban tobacco sales in Utah by referendum? if the population is 70% LDS, the rural more likely to follow the word of wisdom active members might be enough to tip the vote on a referendum. hmmm. that would send a message even McCaffey and Reno would have a problem with --there is no medical defense for tobacco. As for the loss of revenue argument, the excise taxes the state collects from the sale of tobacco certainly does not cover the increased health costs and the collateral economic and social costs associated with tobacco related health problems. the state might have a net loss position initially, but over the long run, the reduced health costs will more than cover the loss of tobacco excise tax. meanwhile, back to prohibition: rolling your own from back yard weeds is a lot harder than making bathtub gin! == "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators" --P.J. O'Rourke. == "hunt lawyers, not big game! lawyers are more numerous, you can not become attached to them, and they taste just like chicken." --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMubQI704kQrCC2kFAQFeFgP+MUBbpn9yNDi2NmSZd2D5qlUvYIyobPd7 ppVxG2Wne5cywM9NWRYGCUA4g2QxlYRA7+sAxbxKa0kLpjhW38IAe8ea/0NnkH+P exTvtUTD35sAU6bl5ypGsFF/1Nuzy7+UWIKdm7LROPjiNMp+C/TEQQrHR5jF1x5A EoWkoBzrwTs= =1+2g -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- :: 06:30 PM ET 01/14/97 :: Tobacco industry seeks dismissal of Arizona case :: :: PHOENIX, Arizona (Reuter) - The tobacco industry filed :: motions on Tuesday in a bid to dismiss the Arizona Attorney :: General's law suit which seeks to ban the sale of tobacco in the :: state. :: Lawyers for two of the defendants, Brown & Williamson :: Tobacco Corp. and Philip Morris Cos Inc. (MO.N), said in a :: statement the proposed ban would eliminate tax revenue from the :: sale of tobacco which is used to fund healthcare and education :: programs statewide. :: "We have filed motions asking the court ... whether these :: claims should be permitted to proceed,'' said William Maledon a :: lawyer at Osborn Maledon which represents Philip Morris Inc. :: "We believe it is clear that the Attorney General has no :: authority to initiate at least six of the 11 claims he has :: brought,'' he said. :: The tobacco industry on Tuesday filed eight motions to :: dismiss the suit in Maricopa County Superior Court in Arizona. :: The Arizona lawsuit against the tobacco industry was filed :: in August and amended by the state's attorney general in :: November. :: The suit seeks to ban the sale of tobacco products statewide :: and recover increased healthcare insurance premiums the state :: alleges to have paid for ``tobacco-related illnesses'' by state :: employees and their dependents. :: The suit also seeks ``corrective'' advertising and funding :: of programs to help people give up smoking as well as :: unspecified damages for alleged consumer fraud, restraint of :: trade and civil racketeering. :: Paul Eckstein, an attorney with Brown & Bain which :: represents Brown & Williamson, said Arizona would suffer should :: the attorney general win the suit. :: "If the Attorney General prevails on this public nuisance :: argument, the tobacco tax revenue source would be eliminated :: without legislative input,'' he said. :: "This raises the question of which state programs would be :: eliminated for lack of funding,'' he added. :: The lawyers said Arizona collected $650.5 million in tobacco :: excise taxes from 1980 through 1993 and that the state will :: collect another $167.5 million in fiscal 1996. :: "The Arizona Legislature has not chosen to ban the sale or :: use of tobacco, but rather regulate and profit from it,'' :: Eckstein said. ``This lawsuit would create a direct and :: irreconcilable conflict between the judicial and legislative :: branches of government.'' From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:15:23 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:15:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: JUSTICE: foolish confrontations therewith Message-ID: <199701230615.XAA06590@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Looks to me like Carl needs to understand justice, U.S. federal court style. In the first place: "ignorance is no excuse under the law" -then: ask yourself why the U.S. continues the drug war when it is obvious to the perverted, ignorant, and bought-off Congress- person that it will never be won. the answer is simple: it's MONEY. First, the government makes a fortune by importing drugs, which they can use for unaccountable programs which are illegal under law. The money is controlled by the CIA, administration, and the power brokers in the deal which basically states it all; and, secondly, there is money in imprisonment. Oh? so then ask yourself why the federal prisons have tripled in size the last 10 years with the dope wars. coincidental? now, what does that have to do with crypto? very simple: as the US heads closer and closer to the UN Constitution under Bubba's guidance with Hillary's hands on his balls, crypto can bypass political thought control. That will not be acceptable to those who rule: in the US, or anywhere else. "Intimidation is just another form of communication." (attila) and they have intimidated federal judges, and they are intimidating federal judges, and they will continue to intimdate federal judges. and, they will continue to feed the media what they want known. so, what does that have to do with it? a) the federal government is disenfranchising felons with certain types of convictions, including drugs, and all offenses against the federal government --cryptography is an offense against the federal government since it falls under ITAR. do you know what disenfranchisement really means: well, start with fact you have lost your civil rights --ALL of them. the man never needs a warrant to take you, anywhere. anyplace, including your home without knocking --he has automatic probable cause. all federal convictions of the type described carry a tail --extended probation. in other words, a sadistic, sadonic, and automatically suspicious federal civil servant OWNS you. He can visit your employer; he can tell you exactly how to run your business if you are self-employed; he can tell you if you can move; he can tell you who you will see or talk with; and if tells you to polish his apple, get on your knees and smile while you labour. b) no vote --that is the principle meaning of franchise which is defined as "suffrage." you are history on that score unless you manage to convince Bubba to grant you a federal pardon. c) the federal govenment, through one of their federal money giveaways is forcing the criminal records onto the drivers' license. So far, no state has a check box on the sealed photo ID, but they will, including a coded offense block. d) now, the big credit bureaus, TRW, Equifax, etc. have added the collection of data for traffic convictions; so far they have not added either misdemeanor and felony >>arrests<< and convictions to the _available_ information, but they will. Did you know that you can have a 3 or 4 page rap sheet for a single arrest/offense/conviction by the time they rewrite charges, which is common in, you guessed it: dope cases, and propably will be in crypto cases as the Federales discover more evidence (planted, decoded, whatever?). e) You know, I'm beginning to like Mississippi's statutory rape laws better all the time. The age is 18, as high it goes in all 50 states --but it only applies if the minor female is over 12 and can prove she is a virgin... yeah, right, where the only virgin over eight can run faster than her brothers... e) prisons are big business; and, government has undertaken a program of privatization of the prison system --in other words, the big government oriented contractors, like SAIC chaired by Bobby Inman, are planning to make a profit housing government misjustice. do they like to make money? does this sound like slave labour to you? sounds like government 'letting' of business. P.J. O'Rourke has the definitive result of that: "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators" well, I'm too old for the civil disobedience game or deliberately begging the law; I do not wish to head for the 3 hots ad a cot of federal hospitality wearing more years than I can carry. but you'd better believe and if you wish to even try to beat the government back, don't think you have any rights in America. Just remember Judge Roy Bean is sitting in his large $1,500-2,000 comforatable chair about a meter above you, smiling down on you as you sit in the hard, cold, flimsy chair of the dock, after our esteemed judge got drunk last night with his cronies. After all, Judge Roy, who's only human, suffers from an inferiority complex, and needs a power rush. And after this poor excuse for a human lays 3 fives running wild (15) and 6 tail on you, try smiling at the judge; then say: "thank you your honor, but you're just another fuckin' drunk." == ====== ORIGINAL MESSAGE ====== In <32C27B88.558 at sk.sympatico.ca>, on 12/26/96 at 05:20 AM, Carl Johnson said: ::jim bell wrote: ::> ::> However, if being "on the Internet" is automatically presumed to be ::> an export, why can't we program using remote-control editors which ::> might, someday, be available on the Internet? :: If I wanted to export an unexportable program, I would put it on my :: machine as 'happyface.zip', and then make sure that everybody :: spread the word that it was available under that title. I don't :: believe there is a prosecutor alive that can convince a jury of :: twelve mostly non-technically oriented people that someone should :: be put in prison for not knowing the content of every single :: non-text file on their machine. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMucAh704kQrCC2kFAQFVzwQAs1HyC04QqpFa0QG5OiS5FwKvW3rP0xWd RGLSEVgyHkub/ecVlha5XMKQBhprGkyACxfwWs1QzjFGPxWd/0uW670eaf4e8ALK a7sANK1rFLDO001Gyep55qduGX+HzU5KEW8JhiB+iXisle76/Ek5Vntyq9i9iS9s soeyDvea8LI= =AqZU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:15:30 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:15:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: seeds of our own destruction Message-ID: <199701230615.XAA06640@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- the pieces of our own destruction by a universal government of a few are all there, many fully documented as bits and pieces; someone who does not have a well known interest in the conspiracy groups to prevent the press from thundering "conspiracy theory" needs to compile a graphical presentation for the monkeys. good luck trying to deliver the message to joe couch potato. the controlled media networks would never sell you time. It is not so much a conspiracy as it is separate, or even UN, groups, working for their own interests --who has the stick?-- Unfortunately, too many of them have overlapped by their common need for a common army, a common taxation system (obviously not balanced by equity) and the right to non-representative taxation after they destroy freedom of speech/privacy and take away the hardware. worse than middle period Marx utopian liberated socialism! The UN's _printed_ statement of the conclusion of the wealth distribution was a UN tax authority to redistribute the wealth.... What intrigues me the most is that even the very rich can not survive in the cesspool they will create. there will be no distinguished caste, no educated caste, etc. You will see the attitude with just barely educated type administrators who will say: "gifted?" Or, she can fend for herself, and eventually just sending the gifted child off to the vegatable farm. Despite all the utopian talk about social order, politically correct unisex, socialism will never deliver enough exceptional individuals to be able to povide all the pyschologists and social workers they envision. Obviously, the fact the white man is probably less than 15% of the total population and has over 80% of the industrial wealth tells you where it starts. The UN is talking about master agricultual product control warehousing and distribution. If 20% of the population is well fed, does that include the US, Canada, Russia (that's a joke), and the grain producing areas of the world? or will the white man be just part of the rest --hungry? == Tyranny Insurance by Colt Manufacturing Co. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMuby9704kQrCC2kFAQFi2QP/RUQibIsyslYso5y7C84fJk3DN/Dn6jqI F4WI2kG0m4nw+rsS97mBJYKzh8V/I8rJd+OPzTwyreVqwPIa9O1E+e9TY2pF+M89 IP/heC/B9Wb3+ZKsJT1+CpWRmIWI0PAHxGSgWkMnIxyl+QajSeDXZMNJ9IVhfpLA zcBo1zfXRCk= =lbD1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 22 22:17:33 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:17:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E70250.7D91@gte.net> hjk wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > hjk wrote: > > Now whatever you think of your fellow citizens, or even those of the > > USA (to name an example), I'm sure is OK on whatever basis you apply > > your judgement. But I guarantee you that the people on the cypherpunks > > list are no more or less intelligent than the people who vegetate in > > front of their TV sets every day, right there where you live, in all > > probability. If you believe that your fellow citizens vote intelligently, > > then I respond that cypherpunks vote intelligently. What do you think? > Well, I thought cypherpunks claim to be elite. Most of the erstwhile elite types do the ordinary things in a quite ordinary way. Get dressed, eat, collect and send e-mail, and so on. The un-ordinary things (for example) are the thought processes which take place while typing out a post. Those thought processes don't generally intersect directly with the mundane things such as operating the computer, unless the operations themselves are unusual and demand the full attention of the person involved. From proff at suburbia.net Wed Jan 22 22:21:10 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net (proff at suburbia.net) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:21:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation (fwd) Message-ID: <19970123062054.6233.qmail@suburbia.net> >From terry at lambert.org Thu Jan 23 00:20:21 1997 Return-Path: Delivered-To: proff at suburbia.net Received: (qmail 11676 invoked from network); 23 Jan 1997 00:20:09 -0000 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (198.17.250.211) by suburbia.net with SMTP; 23 Jan 1997 00:20:09 -0000 Received: (from terry at localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id RAA22488; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:04:17 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199701230004.RAA22488 at phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation To: proff at suburbia.net Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:04:17 -0700 (MST) Cc: nate at mt.sri.com, terry at lambert.org, chuckr at glue.umd.edu, hackers at freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <19970122141820.16633.qmail at suburbia.net> from "proff at suburbia.net" at Jan 23, 97 01:18:20 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Length: 6273 > > Terry Lambert writes: > > > > > A weighted democracy would be one open-ended growth solution, as > > > > > long as parametric changes could be made within the system. I have > > > > > suggested this before. A trivial napkin drawing version: > > > > > > I have doubts about such a system. How are the weights chosen? By core team fiat. It is they who will be giving up power, it is they who have the power to enforce initial disbursement. After that, it *should* be metastable. If it isn't, it can be reigned in. > - Should all weights be votable - dynamically adjusted according > to votes * current weights? This one: yes. > - Which is more stable? w1+w2+w3+w4=1 or w1*w2*w3*w4*w5=1? +, if we are talking probabilities applied to strange attractors. > - How a new weights created? Constitutionally, there must be a method for doing this within the system. Mostly, the weight values are the time rate accumulation vs. the spend rate on voting issues. If you are actively positive, you affect change; the stronger you feel about something, the more likely you are to code it (which every direction the strength of your feeling goes. The catch is that positive votes are inherently more valuable than negative votes, since to obstruct progress requires a number of votes equal to the outstanding proposals, but to move forward a proposal only requires a number of votes equal to the proposal. Blind obstructionism (and blind advocacy) are uneconomical. That's the point of having more than one vote to potentially spend on an issue, with potentially more issues than you can vote on all of them. You will have to pick you battles carefully if you want to avoid being lost in the noise. > - How does one prevent factional deal making? It won't, really, if there are places for deals to be made, and there are accurate vote tallys published (promoting last minute bid frenzies, auction-like behaviour). > - Should weights decline over time in the same manner as > an infinitely trainable adaptive neural network? There is a limit on the amount of weight you can throw around in a given time because of the high water mark on the number of tokens it's possible to build up on account. Again, you have to pick your battles or you will be lost in the noise. > What about retrospectivity? On the one hand you entrench a > pre-democratic feudal power structure and end up like Mandela's > South Africa; a constitutionally reformed non-racially discriminatory > capitalist society in which the blacks have all the votes, but > the whites have all the capital. On the other (FreeBSD) hand the > whites did all the work. In the abstract, if you are willing to do the work, you are more likely to throw three votes than one for a given topic. If you are just being obstructioninst, you will likely throw only one vote so that you can keep being obstructionist later. For reciprocity, it's possible to charge off percentages in the win/lose case to bias the power concentration: if your side wins, it costs you one less token then you voted, etc.. Again, initial bylaws are established through constitution provision: "we have the power that is being shared, therefore, these are the weights". > Certainly a very interesting social engineering experiment; there > is room here for long excursions into probability theory, game > theory, cryptographic voting protocols (extending to protocols > not traditionally seen as voting protocols such as Rabin's m/n > secret sharing scheme), all excellent paper fodder. Heh. I was thinking more in terms of its value as a cascade trigger to increasingly complex social organisms in the Internet implementation space. Representational democracies (republics, really) came about because of rate limits on communication. The US could not elect a president by popular vote because there were no methods of verification, and communication rates were limited by travel time. Therefore, the US has an Electoral College. But a side effect of this structure is a bias for bipartite seperation of interests, instead of seperation into as many interest groups as it takes to do the job of mapping the interest space. This bias is not removed because the bipartite interests have (and must continue to have) the power concentration. This leads to continued "wasted vote syndrome", where people vote for the lesser of two evils instead of voting their conscience... an effect of mass psychology. Similar pressures prevent the polling times from being changed to opening at 8am EST and closing at 8am EST to prevent early returns from earlier time zones influencing the outcome of elections before people in later time zones have even voted. For example, Ross Perot got almost 20% of the vote in the 1992 election, but 0% of the electors. He would still have lost, given the actual values. There is actually a case in US history where the winner of the electoral vote lost the popular vote... the president was not chosen by the people, but by the electors. > It would definitely attract a lot of welcome attention to FreeBSD. It would be worth one or more articles in WIRED, actually, as well as more scholarly sociology journals. Maybe even "Wall Street Journal" would run "Multinational Democratic State Declares Independence in Cyberspace" or a similar silly headline. > When viewed strictly as an experiment this idea has a lot > of merit. If it actually pans out, then well and good, if not, > then it could be used as some kind of Sawick poll. Yep. The reason I went weighted, by the way, was the volunteer nature of the project. In theory, number of vote tokens spent should be proportional to willingness to actually volunteer. As you point out, there could be feedback here as well: for instance, if a proposal passes, if it is completed, the tokens spent on the vote could be refunded to those who voted for it. If it dies on the vine, the tokens could be refunded to those who voted against it. Being right would give you more license to participate, and being wrong would not, etc.. Again, a matter for the initial bylaws. Regards, Terry Lambert terry at lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 22 22:23:55 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:23:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701230025.SAA05664@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32E703E4.4E9C@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > But think about this: suppose there is a couple, bob at household.com, > and alice at household.com. Suppose that Rev. Mallory does not like bob. > Mallory forges a lot of emails like "I can still taste your sperm > on my lips", that appear to originate from Cindy at phonesex.org. > Then, promptly, Mallory sends an anonymous alert to alice at household.com, > warning her about naughty email activities of bob. Alice gets mad at him > and divorces him. > How would bob protect himself against such developments? Frame-ups are as old as time. The ones that work the best are those that are the most believable. O.J., for example. Unless Alice is unusually flaky or paranoid, she'll consider her options against the time she has invested in Bob. From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:26:12 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:26:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: greed and the internet Message-ID: <199701230626.WAA06484@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- greed and the internet our network provider (MCI) has been gradually burying our T1 trunk and the effective feed has been reduced to 1200 baud from 1.56 Megabaud; that, and add 20 seconds to 5+ minutes of packet hold, and it is now worthless. they claim they will have increased capacity, but there are no pressing big money commercial interests on this feeder --so when? Problem is not just here --everywhere; the greedy commercial bastards have oversold their network space intentionally as they are bucking for per packet and timed usage charges which are currently prohibited by the FCC and the state PUCs. The FCC is the key since other than the local network, which is burdened with the costs of the trunk, everything is regulated by the FCC which is trying to totally eliminate the state PUCs in the 105th Congress, Newt's mouth not withstanding. The FCC agreed to review the matter, capitulating to big greed interests, which will make the Internet a rich man's toy. $19.95/month plus access charges will increase to thousands of dollars per month; slow networks make toast of the free hours and overtime kills. Without the creative input of the multitude, there will be no content, so why have a net other than for commercial purposes? suites the misinformation cabal just fine. Well, the FCC granted a reprieve --for the moment. but will come up again, and again, until it passes. The Internet will no no longer be the peoples net, and the commercial greedies are establishing a faster, more secure network with controlled access points; leaving the common man's access in the mud, still paying the exorbitant rates on a pay before play basis. That, and it gives control of information to the government --which, as we all know. is 'heavenly white' -above sin. Universities are being bought off with the 'Internet II' proposal which provides super trunks of over 600 Megabaud capacity, a 400 times improvement. All of this feeds into five stategically placed super-hubs where Uncle's shadow government can monitor everything. The Internet was supposed to be our freedom: freedom of information and government in the sunshine, but government is proving it is still bigger, faster, and badder by using draconian rules of illegal regulatory agencies. agencies which are usurping rights limited to the legislative branch. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMubOW704kQrCC2kFAQE0gQQAxrkUhyX5wl+dZ/i6ajMJXAD7f+gpvc6Z CBik+g62RqWrMbOblfLRubhEIWUfK2FQxIBRJ+0cQezCH4IfM1CxbytJ4Cx3BBBs GwHGuhTfLnGVnuCAugguRdNUrd/tXaN47pAVqmg330XvLlTJqha8ODPsi2b+7qst 2z8qbOW0cqo= =M9c5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From wcampbel at peganet.com Wed Jan 22 22:26:39 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:26:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerce Sec. Hearings and Encryption Message-ID: <199701230626.WAA06492@toad.com> I have been watching the confirmation hearings for William Daley, and I was amazed at the number of references in the questioning to encryption. I have been watching confirmation hearings for a long time and have never noticed this much attention being placed on such a (formerly?) obscure topic. It appears that encryption is definitely a big blip on the governmental radar screen now, although whether this is a good thing or a bad thing is definitely a debatable question. It's interesting to me that all this interest is coming up in a confirmation hearing for a *commerce* secretary. Maybe the commercial aspects of encryption can have a positive impact on the current restrictions; privacy rights certainly haven't had any impact. =Bill= From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:26:46 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:26:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: justice for cryptography, US style Message-ID: <199701230626.WAA06507@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Looks to me like Carl needs to understand justice, U.S. federal court style. In the first place: "ignorance is no excuse under the law" -then: ask yourself why the U.S. continues the drug war when it is obvious to the perverted, ignorant, and bought-off Congress- person that it will never be won. the answer is simple: it's MONEY. First, the government makes a fortune by importing drugs, which they can use for unaccountable programs which are illegal under law. The money is controlled by the CIA, administration, and the power brokers in the deal which basically states it all; and, secondly, there is money in imprisonment. Oh? so then ask yourself why the federal prisons have tripled in size the last 10 years with the dope wars. coincidental? now, what does that have to do with crypto? very simple: as the US heads closer and closer to the UN Constitution under Bubba's guidance with Hillary's hands on his balls, crypto can bypass political thought control. That will not be acceptable to those who rule: in the US, or anywhere else. "Intimidation is just another form of communication." (attila) and they have intimidated federal judges, and they are intimidating federal judges, and they will continue to intimdate federal judges. and, they will continue to feed the media what they want known. so, what does that have to do with it? a) the federal government is disenfranchising felons with certain types of convictions, including drugs, and all offenses against the federal government --cryptography is an offense against the federal government since it falls under ITAR. do you know what disenfranchisement really means: well, start with fact you have lost your civil rights --ALL of them. the man never needs a warrant to take you, anywhere. anyplace, including your home without knocking --he has automatic probable cause. all federal convictions of the type described carry a tail --extended probation. in other words, a sadistic, sadonic, and automatically suspicious federal civil servant OWNS you. He can visit your employer; he can tell you exactly how to run your business if you are self-employed; he can tell you if you can move; he can tell you who you will see or talk with; and if tells you to polish his apple, get on your knees and smile while you labour. b) no vote --that is the principle meaning of franchise which is defined as "suffrage." you are history on that score unless you manage to convince Bubba to grant you a federal pardon. c) the federal govenment, through one of their federal money giveaways is forcing the criminal records onto the drivers' license. So far, no state has a check box on the sealed photo ID, but they will, including a coded offense block. d) now, the big credit bureaus, TRW, Equifax, etc. have added the collection of data for traffic convictions; so far they have not added either misdemeanor and felony >>arrests<< and convictions to the _available_ information, but they will. Did you know that you can have a 3 or 4 page rap sheet for a single arrest/offense/conviction by the time they rewrite charges, which is common in, you guessed it: dope cases, and propably will be in crypto cases as the Federales discover more evidence (planted, decoded, whatever?). e) You know, I'm beginning to like Mississippi's statutory rape laws better all the time. The age is 18, as high it goes in all 50 states --but it only applies if the minor female is over 12 and can prove she is a virgin... yeah, right, where the only virgin over eight can run faster than her brothers... e) prisons are big business; and, government has undertaken a program of privatization of the prison system --in other words, the big government oriented contractors, like SAIC chaired by Bobby Inman, are planning to make a profit housing government misjustice. do they like to make money? does this sound like slave labour to you? sounds like government 'letting' of business. P.J. O'Rourke has the definitive result of that: "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators" well, I'm too old for the civil disobedience game or deliberately begging the law; I do not wish to head for the 3 hots ad a cot of federal hospitality wearing more years than I can carry. but you'd better believe and if you wish to even try to beat the government back, don't think you have any rights in America. Just remember Judge Roy Bean is sitting in his large $1,500-2,000 comforatable chair about a meter above you, smiling down on you as you sit in the hard, cold, flimsy chair of the dock, after our esteemed judge got drunk last night with his cronies. After all, Judge Roy, who's only human, suffers from an inferiority complex, and needs a power rush. And after this poor excuse for a human lays 3 fives running wild (15) and 6 tail on you, try smiling at the judge; then say: "thank you your honor, but you're just another fuckin' drunk." == ====== ORIGINAL MESSAGE ====== In <32C27B88.558 at sk.sympatico.ca>, on 12/26/96 at 05:20 AM, Carl Johnson said: ::jim bell wrote: ::> ::> However, if being "on the Internet" is automatically presumed to be ::> an export, why can't we program using remote-control editors which ::> might, someday, be available on the Internet? :: If I wanted to export an unexportable program, I would put it on my :: machine as 'happyface.zip', and then make sure that everybody :: spread the word that it was available under that title. I don't :: believe there is a prosecutor alive that can convince a jury of :: twelve mostly non-technically oriented people that someone should :: be put in prison for not knowing the content of every single :: non-text file on their machine. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMubSx704kQrCC2kFAQHaZwP+LZe99M0ntnj0za+TSAG6TtMr55MH7VBG y0PLMkKLQGb7Gi5mt72BBZ8XNoVLlBHqxsdpWdI0u812aVj78+L0hQojeuyzyUph 4hJo3N7U5ITscNeks8IbClzl8UNkoKaW5UH0bQlL6EaU7AvmmB15g6nQ4C59rBos l2AQiOZZtwU= =QJSj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 22 22:35:18 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:35:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: ADSL (Was: GSM technology Message-ID: <199701230635.WAA06617@toad.com> Toto wrote: > > jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca wrote: > > A previous poster mentioned that because of the copper wire restriction, that > > they may deploy first in older centers. This would appear to be the case, since > > a Canadian telco (Sasktel) is offering ADSL in Saskatoon for 60$/month with > > unlimited internet access. Saskatoon falls into this category - in my opinion. > > > > I was only is SK briefly over New Years, but perhaps Toto can fill in details. > > James, > SaskTel has, for the most part, always had a monopoly on the telephone > business in Saskatchewan, and used this to keep the phone rates fairly > high. On the other hand, they also used much of the money to position > themselves to keep their monopoly by investing heavily in the newest > technologies. > As a result, they have a lot of fiber-optic, etc., even in the > boondocks, but they also soaked those people $ 6.00 hour for > InterNet access, until Sympatico came in with a competitive rate > of less than $ 1.00/hour, and then they stopped clipping the > sucker/citizens. > SaskTel left the 'upgrading' of the larger centers to last, and > as a result, their 'old' technology seems to be ironically beneficial > to them in being able to offer ADSL in Saskatoon, Regina, and a couple > of other centers. > > Toto From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 22 22:38:46 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:38:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes In-Reply-To: <32E70250.7D91@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701230633.AAA00525@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > hjk wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > hjk wrote: > > > > Now whatever you think of your fellow citizens, or even those of the > > > USA (to name an example), I'm sure is OK on whatever basis you apply > > > your judgement. But I guarantee you that the people on the cypherpunks > > > list are no more or less intelligent than the people who vegetate in > > > front of their TV sets every day, right there where you live, in all > > > probability. If you believe that your fellow citizens vote intelligently, > > > then I respond that cypherpunks vote intelligently. What do you think? > > > Well, I thought cypherpunks claim to be elite. > > Most of the erstwhile elite types do the ordinary things in a quite > ordinary way. Get dressed, eat, collect and send e-mail, and so on. > > The un-ordinary things (for example) are the thought processes which > take place while typing out a post. Those thought processes don't > generally intersect directly with the mundane things such as operating > the computer, unless the operations themselves are unusual and demand > the full attention of the person involved. > So what? - Igor. From rwright at adnetsol.com Wed Jan 22 22:39:58 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:39:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: crypto-relevant Message-ID: <199701230639.WAA02474@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> >From: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" >To: cypherpunks at toad.com >Subject: Fascist censorship >Sender: owner-cypherpunks-unedited at toad.com >Precedence: bulk >I notice that both my highly crypto-relevant, flame-free article and >Igor Chudov's response to it were rejected by the fascist moderator Yeah, that's kinda weak! I have found a few other posts in the 'Error' list that may not have belonged there. Fascist? I'm not sure that's exactly what we are dealing with here. Hidden agendas, yes. >Sandfart and showed up immediately on the cypherpunks-flames address. > >Apparently Sandfart automatically rejects any submissions with my name >in them. Or he's already dead from AIDS and has been replaced by a 'bot. Now, Dr., that's a little bit insensitive. AIDS is a pretty tragic illness. > >I also notice that John Gilmore's employees from Cygnus Support >are flaming me on sci.crypt and accusing me of homophobia. I'll have to start reading that group, to check up on the agents further. > >Please help expose Cygnus Support as a homosexual fraud. > >--- And I thought this next part was pretty funny. Test test is this thing on? > >From: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" >To: cypherpunks at toad.com >Subject: Fuck Sandy Sandfart >Sender: owner-cypherpunks-unedited at toad.com >Precedence: bulk >This is a test. This is only a cocksucking test. =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 22 22:40:30 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:40:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701230640.WAA06684@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > But think about this: suppose there is a couple, bob at household.com, > and alice at household.com. Suppose that Rev. Mallory does not like bob. > Mallory forges a lot of emails like "I can still taste your sperm > on my lips", that appear to originate from Cindy at phonesex.org. > Then, promptly, Mallory sends an anonymous alert to alice at household.com, > warning her about naughty email activities of bob. Alice gets mad at him > and divorces him. > How would bob protect himself against such developments? Frame-ups are as old as time. The ones that work the best are those that are the most believable. O.J., for example. Unless Alice is unusually flaky or paranoid, she'll consider her options against the time she has invested in Bob. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 22 22:40:36 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:40:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes Message-ID: <199701230640.WAA06696@toad.com> hjk wrote: > On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > hjk wrote: > > Now whatever you think of your fellow citizens, or even those of the > > USA (to name an example), I'm sure is OK on whatever basis you apply > > your judgement. But I guarantee you that the people on the cypherpunks > > list are no more or less intelligent than the people who vegetate in > > front of their TV sets every day, right there where you live, in all > > probability. If you believe that your fellow citizens vote intelligently, > > then I respond that cypherpunks vote intelligently. What do you think? > Well, I thought cypherpunks claim to be elite. Most of the erstwhile elite types do the ordinary things in a quite ordinary way. Get dressed, eat, collect and send e-mail, and so on. The un-ordinary things (for example) are the thought processes which take place while typing out a post. Those thought processes don't generally intersect directly with the mundane things such as operating the computer, unless the operations themselves are unusual and demand the full attention of the person involved. From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:40:41 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:40:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: seeds of our own destruction Message-ID: <199701230640.WAA06709@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- the pieces of our own destruction by a universal government of a few are all there, many fully documented as bits and pieces; someone who does not have a well known interest in the conspiracy groups to prevent the press from thundering "conspiracy theory" needs to compile a graphical presentation for the monkeys. good luck trying to deliver the message to joe couch potato. the controlled media networks would never sell you time. It is not so much a conspiracy as it is separate, or even UN, groups, working for their own interests --who has the stick?-- Unfortunately, too many of them have overlapped by their common need for a common army, a common taxation system (obviously not balanced by equity) and the right to non-representative taxation after they destroy freedom of speech/privacy and take away the hardware. worse than middle period Marx utopian liberated socialism! The UN's _printed_ statement of the conclusion of the wealth distribution was a UN tax authority to redistribute the wealth.... What intrigues me the most is that even the very rich can not survive in the cesspool they will create. there will be no distinguished caste, no educated caste, etc. You will see the attitude with just barely educated type administrators who will say: "gifted?" Or, she can fend for herself, and eventually just sending the gifted child off to the vegatable farm. Despite all the utopian talk about social order, politically correct unisex, socialism will never deliver enough exceptional individuals to be able to povide all the pyschologists and social workers they envision. Obviously, the fact the white man is probably less than 15% of the total population and has over 80% of the industrial wealth tells you where it starts. The UN is talking about master agricultual product control warehousing and distribution. If 20% of the population is well fed, does that include the US, Canada, Russia (that's a joke), and the grain producing areas of the world? or will the white man be just part of the rest --hungry? == Tyranny Insurance by Colt Manufacturing Co. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMuby9704kQrCC2kFAQFi2QP/RUQibIsyslYso5y7C84fJk3DN/Dn6jqI F4WI2kG0m4nw+rsS97mBJYKzh8V/I8rJd+OPzTwyreVqwPIa9O1E+e9TY2pF+M89 IP/heC/B9Wb3+ZKsJT1+CpWRmIWI0PAHxGSgWkMnIxyl+QajSeDXZMNJ9IVhfpLA zcBo1zfXRCk= =lbD1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:40:46 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:40:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: JUSTICE: foolish confrontations therewith Message-ID: <199701230640.WAA06717@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Looks to me like Carl needs to understand justice, U.S. federal court style. In the first place: "ignorance is no excuse under the law" -then: ask yourself why the U.S. continues the drug war when it is obvious to the perverted, ignorant, and bought-off Congress- person that it will never be won. the answer is simple: it's MONEY. First, the government makes a fortune by importing drugs, which they can use for unaccountable programs which are illegal under law. The money is controlled by the CIA, administration, and the power brokers in the deal which basically states it all; and, secondly, there is money in imprisonment. Oh? so then ask yourself why the federal prisons have tripled in size the last 10 years with the dope wars. coincidental? now, what does that have to do with crypto? very simple: as the US heads closer and closer to the UN Constitution under Bubba's guidance with Hillary's hands on his balls, crypto can bypass political thought control. That will not be acceptable to those who rule: in the US, or anywhere else. "Intimidation is just another form of communication." (attila) and they have intimidated federal judges, and they are intimidating federal judges, and they will continue to intimdate federal judges. and, they will continue to feed the media what they want known. so, what does that have to do with it? a) the federal government is disenfranchising felons with certain types of convictions, including drugs, and all offenses against the federal government --cryptography is an offense against the federal government since it falls under ITAR. do you know what disenfranchisement really means: well, start with fact you have lost your civil rights --ALL of them. the man never needs a warrant to take you, anywhere. anyplace, including your home without knocking --he has automatic probable cause. all federal convictions of the type described carry a tail --extended probation. in other words, a sadistic, sadonic, and automatically suspicious federal civil servant OWNS you. He can visit your employer; he can tell you exactly how to run your business if you are self-employed; he can tell you if you can move; he can tell you who you will see or talk with; and if tells you to polish his apple, get on your knees and smile while you labour. b) no vote --that is the principle meaning of franchise which is defined as "suffrage." you are history on that score unless you manage to convince Bubba to grant you a federal pardon. c) the federal govenment, through one of their federal money giveaways is forcing the criminal records onto the drivers' license. So far, no state has a check box on the sealed photo ID, but they will, including a coded offense block. d) now, the big credit bureaus, TRW, Equifax, etc. have added the collection of data for traffic convictions; so far they have not added either misdemeanor and felony >>arrests<< and convictions to the _available_ information, but they will. Did you know that you can have a 3 or 4 page rap sheet for a single arrest/offense/conviction by the time they rewrite charges, which is common in, you guessed it: dope cases, and propably will be in crypto cases as the Federales discover more evidence (planted, decoded, whatever?). e) You know, I'm beginning to like Mississippi's statutory rape laws better all the time. The age is 18, as high it goes in all 50 states --but it only applies if the minor female is over 12 and can prove she is a virgin... yeah, right, where the only virgin over eight can run faster than her brothers... e) prisons are big business; and, government has undertaken a program of privatization of the prison system --in other words, the big government oriented contractors, like SAIC chaired by Bobby Inman, are planning to make a profit housing government misjustice. do they like to make money? does this sound like slave labour to you? sounds like government 'letting' of business. P.J. O'Rourke has the definitive result of that: "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators" well, I'm too old for the civil disobedience game or deliberately begging the law; I do not wish to head for the 3 hots ad a cot of federal hospitality wearing more years than I can carry. but you'd better believe and if you wish to even try to beat the government back, don't think you have any rights in America. Just remember Judge Roy Bean is sitting in his large $1,500-2,000 comforatable chair about a meter above you, smiling down on you as you sit in the hard, cold, flimsy chair of the dock, after our esteemed judge got drunk last night with his cronies. After all, Judge Roy, who's only human, suffers from an inferiority complex, and needs a power rush. And after this poor excuse for a human lays 3 fives running wild (15) and 6 tail on you, try smiling at the judge; then say: "thank you your honor, but you're just another fuckin' drunk." == ====== ORIGINAL MESSAGE ====== In <32C27B88.558 at sk.sympatico.ca>, on 12/26/96 at 05:20 AM, Carl Johnson said: ::jim bell wrote: ::> ::> However, if being "on the Internet" is automatically presumed to be ::> an export, why can't we program using remote-control editors which ::> might, someday, be available on the Internet? :: If I wanted to export an unexportable program, I would put it on my :: machine as 'happyface.zip', and then make sure that everybody :: spread the word that it was available under that title. I don't :: believe there is a prosecutor alive that can convince a jury of :: twelve mostly non-technically oriented people that someone should :: be put in prison for not knowing the content of every single :: non-text file on their machine. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMucAh704kQrCC2kFAQFVzwQAs1HyC04QqpFa0QG5OiS5FwKvW3rP0xWd RGLSEVgyHkub/ecVlha5XMKQBhprGkyACxfwWs1QzjFGPxWd/0uW670eaf4e8ALK a7sANK1rFLDO001Gyep55qduGX+HzU5KEW8JhiB+iXisle76/Ek5Vntyq9i9iS9s soeyDvea8LI= =AqZU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:40:51 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:40:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: YEEHAW! Tobacco argument heats up in AZ Message-ID: <199701230640.WAA06726@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- summary: AZ AG filed for an injunction in the public interest to stop the sale of tobacco in AZ. tobacco company response claimed he was infringing on legislative rights... full story is below. pure warmed-over buffalo chips --the tobacco interests. ...create a conflict between the judiciary and the legislative branches since the judiciary can ban the sale of something the legislative branch has decided to regulate and collect taxes from ... ? where did this boy learn his logic, let alone his law (of course, who ever said any lawyer used logic any more than statistics are used to defend lies?) big tobacco will spend at least $200 million, maybe even $1 billion in advertising and diversions to avoid this one --this is not a tort issue with delayable appeals --this is injunctive relief which could stop the sale of tobacco in a single hearing. bravo! and, I'll bet AZ never passed legislation which states the death merchants have a mandated "right" to sell tobacco products, even though the legislature did elect to pass a law to "regulate" the sale of tobacco. a mandated right implies endorsement, and places the endorser in the product liability chain. A fine line maybe for the tobacco companies to hang their hats on, but a Grand Canyon worth of the state if there has no "right" to sell granted --granting a "right to sell" would be tantamount to endorsing the sale of tobacco products. this may be the perfect shot. let's see how long before the ACLU jumps in! and, on which side will they jump?!? Is 'smoking' a libertarian privilege cranted unconditionally to the people despite the side effects, and collatgeral damage, even if you do not smoke? This case should draw enough amicus curiae to require an entirely new complex of libraries just to hold the pleadings, and an army of law clerks with a massively parallel database to catalogue and service the briefs. I can see the fine hand of the Association of Attorney Generals driving this one. Arizona is constituted just mean enough to take this kind of action. Let's see how long it is before the Feds try to step in on the possible Constitutional grounds of regulating trade between the states, or claiming "jurisdiction" under rule 10 FRCP where the combatants are of differing 'citizenship' AND the amount is more than $10,000 (the injunctive relief has no monetary value in and of itself) can be moved by any party to the Federal court having jurisdiction (that was how I prevented AT&T from moving from NV to NY or NJ where they could stall forever and indulge in the usual payoffs). --as an aside, I wonder if we could ban tobacco sales in Utah by referendum? if the population is 70% LDS, the rural more likely to follow the word of wisdom active members might be enough to tip the vote on a referendum. hmmm. that would send a message even McCaffey and Reno would have a problem with --there is no medical defense for tobacco. As for the loss of revenue argument, the excise taxes the state collects from the sale of tobacco certainly does not cover the increased health costs and the collateral economic and social costs associated with tobacco related health problems. the state might have a net loss position initially, but over the long run, the reduced health costs will more than cover the loss of tobacco excise tax. meanwhile, back to prohibition: rolling your own from back yard weeds is a lot harder than making bathtub gin! == "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators" --P.J. O'Rourke. == "hunt lawyers, not big game! lawyers are more numerous, you can not become attached to them, and they taste just like chicken." --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMubQI704kQrCC2kFAQFeFgP+MUBbpn9yNDi2NmSZd2D5qlUvYIyobPd7 ppVxG2Wne5cywM9NWRYGCUA4g2QxlYRA7+sAxbxKa0kLpjhW38IAe8ea/0NnkH+P exTvtUTD35sAU6bl5ypGsFF/1Nuzy7+UWIKdm7LROPjiNMp+C/TEQQrHR5jF1x5A EoWkoBzrwTs= =1+2g -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- :: 06:30 PM ET 01/14/97 :: Tobacco industry seeks dismissal of Arizona case :: :: PHOENIX, Arizona (Reuter) - The tobacco industry filed :: motions on Tuesday in a bid to dismiss the Arizona Attorney :: General's law suit which seeks to ban the sale of tobacco in the :: state. :: Lawyers for two of the defendants, Brown & Williamson :: Tobacco Corp. and Philip Morris Cos Inc. (MO.N), said in a :: statement the proposed ban would eliminate tax revenue from the :: sale of tobacco which is used to fund healthcare and education :: programs statewide. :: "We have filed motions asking the court ... whether these :: claims should be permitted to proceed,'' said William Maledon a :: lawyer at Osborn Maledon which represents Philip Morris Inc. :: "We believe it is clear that the Attorney General has no :: authority to initiate at least six of the 11 claims he has :: brought,'' he said. :: The tobacco industry on Tuesday filed eight motions to :: dismiss the suit in Maricopa County Superior Court in Arizona. :: The Arizona lawsuit against the tobacco industry was filed :: in August and amended by the state's attorney general in :: November. :: The suit seeks to ban the sale of tobacco products statewide :: and recover increased healthcare insurance premiums the state :: alleges to have paid for ``tobacco-related illnesses'' by state :: employees and their dependents. :: The suit also seeks ``corrective'' advertising and funding :: of programs to help people give up smoking as well as :: unspecified damages for alleged consumer fraud, restraint of :: trade and civil racketeering. :: Paul Eckstein, an attorney with Brown & Bain which :: represents Brown & Williamson, said Arizona would suffer should :: the attorney general win the suit. :: "If the Attorney General prevails on this public nuisance :: argument, the tobacco tax revenue source would be eliminated :: without legislative input,'' he said. :: "This raises the question of which state programs would be :: eliminated for lack of funding,'' he added. :: The lawyers said Arizona collected $650.5 million in tobacco :: excise taxes from 1980 through 1993 and that the state will :: collect another $167.5 million in fiscal 1996. :: "The Arizona Legislature has not chosen to ban the sale or :: use of tobacco, but rather regulate and profit from it,'' :: Eckstein said. ``This lawsuit would create a direct and :: irreconcilable conflict between the judicial and legislative :: branches of government.'' From proff at suburbia.net Wed Jan 22 22:40:54 1997 From: proff at suburbia.net (proff at suburbia.net) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:40:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation (fwd) Message-ID: <199701230640.WAA06727@toad.com> >From terry at lambert.org Thu Jan 23 00:20:21 1997 Return-Path: Delivered-To: proff at suburbia.net Received: (qmail 11676 invoked from network); 23 Jan 1997 00:20:09 -0000 Received: from phaeton.artisoft.com (198.17.250.211) by suburbia.net with SMTP; 23 Jan 1997 00:20:09 -0000 Received: (from terry at localhost) by phaeton.artisoft.com (8.6.11/8.6.9) id RAA22488; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:04:17 -0700 From: Terry Lambert Message-Id: <199701230004.RAA22488 at phaeton.artisoft.com> Subject: Re: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation To: proff at suburbia.net Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 17:04:17 -0700 (MST) Cc: nate at mt.sri.com, terry at lambert.org, chuckr at glue.umd.edu, hackers at freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <19970122141820.16633.qmail at suburbia.net> from "proff at suburbia.net" at Jan 23, 97 01:18:20 am X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] Content-Length: 6273 > > Terry Lambert writes: > > > > > A weighted democracy would be one open-ended growth solution, as > > > > > long as parametric changes could be made within the system. I have > > > > > suggested this before. A trivial napkin drawing version: > > > > > > I have doubts about such a system. How are the weights chosen? By core team fiat. It is they who will be giving up power, it is they who have the power to enforce initial disbursement. After that, it *should* be metastable. If it isn't, it can be reigned in. > - Should all weights be votable - dynamically adjusted according > to votes * current weights? This one: yes. > - Which is more stable? w1+w2+w3+w4=1 or w1*w2*w3*w4*w5=1? +, if we are talking probabilities applied to strange attractors. > - How a new weights created? Constitutionally, there must be a method for doing this within the system. Mostly, the weight values are the time rate accumulation vs. the spend rate on voting issues. If you are actively positive, you affect change; the stronger you feel about something, the more likely you are to code it (which every direction the strength of your feeling goes. The catch is that positive votes are inherently more valuable than negative votes, since to obstruct progress requires a number of votes equal to the outstanding proposals, but to move forward a proposal only requires a number of votes equal to the proposal. Blind obstructionism (and blind advocacy) are uneconomical. That's the point of having more than one vote to potentially spend on an issue, with potentially more issues than you can vote on all of them. You will have to pick you battles carefully if you want to avoid being lost in the noise. > - How does one prevent factional deal making? It won't, really, if there are places for deals to be made, and there are accurate vote tallys published (promoting last minute bid frenzies, auction-like behaviour). > - Should weights decline over time in the same manner as > an infinitely trainable adaptive neural network? There is a limit on the amount of weight you can throw around in a given time because of the high water mark on the number of tokens it's possible to build up on account. Again, you have to pick your battles or you will be lost in the noise. > What about retrospectivity? On the one hand you entrench a > pre-democratic feudal power structure and end up like Mandela's > South Africa; a constitutionally reformed non-racially discriminatory > capitalist society in which the blacks have all the votes, but > the whites have all the capital. On the other (FreeBSD) hand the > whites did all the work. In the abstract, if you are willing to do the work, you are more likely to throw three votes than one for a given topic. If you are just being obstructioninst, you will likely throw only one vote so that you can keep being obstructionist later. For reciprocity, it's possible to charge off percentages in the win/lose case to bias the power concentration: if your side wins, it costs you one less token then you voted, etc.. Again, initial bylaws are established through constitution provision: "we have the power that is being shared, therefore, these are the weights". > Certainly a very interesting social engineering experiment; there > is room here for long excursions into probability theory, game > theory, cryptographic voting protocols (extending to protocols > not traditionally seen as voting protocols such as Rabin's m/n > secret sharing scheme), all excellent paper fodder. Heh. I was thinking more in terms of its value as a cascade trigger to increasingly complex social organisms in the Internet implementation space. Representational democracies (republics, really) came about because of rate limits on communication. The US could not elect a president by popular vote because there were no methods of verification, and communication rates were limited by travel time. Therefore, the US has an Electoral College. But a side effect of this structure is a bias for bipartite seperation of interests, instead of seperation into as many interest groups as it takes to do the job of mapping the interest space. This bias is not removed because the bipartite interests have (and must continue to have) the power concentration. This leads to continued "wasted vote syndrome", where people vote for the lesser of two evils instead of voting their conscience... an effect of mass psychology. Similar pressures prevent the polling times from being changed to opening at 8am EST and closing at 8am EST to prevent early returns from earlier time zones influencing the outcome of elections before people in later time zones have even voted. For example, Ross Perot got almost 20% of the vote in the 1992 election, but 0% of the electors. He would still have lost, given the actual values. There is actually a case in US history where the winner of the electoral vote lost the popular vote... the president was not chosen by the people, but by the electors. > It would definitely attract a lot of welcome attention to FreeBSD. It would be worth one or more articles in WIRED, actually, as well as more scholarly sociology journals. Maybe even "Wall Street Journal" would run "Multinational Democratic State Declares Independence in Cyberspace" or a similar silly headline. > When viewed strictly as an experiment this idea has a lot > of merit. If it actually pans out, then well and good, if not, > then it could be used as some kind of Sawick poll. Yep. The reason I went weighted, by the way, was the volunteer nature of the project. In theory, number of vote tokens spent should be proportional to willingness to actually volunteer. As you point out, there could be feedback here as well: for instance, if a proposal passes, if it is completed, the tokens spent on the vote could be refunded to those who voted for it. If it dies on the vine, the tokens could be refunded to those who voted against it. Being right would give you more license to participate, and being wrong would not, etc.. Again, a matter for the initial bylaws. Regards, Terry Lambert terry at lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. From attila at primenet.com Wed Jan 22 22:46:30 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:46:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: at least we have some friends... Message-ID: <199701230646.XAA07790@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- +New encryption bill on way +By Alex Lash +January 22, 1997, 8:45 p.m. PT +see http://www.news.com/News/Item/0%2C4%2C7236%2C00.html?nd +Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Montana) next week will reintroduce legislation +aimed at wiping out most Commerce Department restrictions on the +export of software encryption, his press secretary said today. +The new version of the so-called Pro-Code bill, which died in the +Senate Commerce Committee last year after a series of high-profile +hearings, will be unchanged and should have the same support it +gained in the 1996 session, Burns's press secretary Matt Raymond said. +"The language was not something that was arrived at lightly," Raymond +said. "We should have time for a more robust and considerate debate" +compared with last year's unsuccessful rush to get the bill passed, +he added. +Burns, a leading figure on the Senate Commerce Committee, is set to +appear via satellite Tuesday at the RSA Data Security Conference in +San Francisco to announce the bill's reintroduction. +Foes of the Clinton administration's current encryption regulations, +which became effective on January 1, are looking for Congress to +legislate more liberal export guildelines. Last year, the Pro-Code +bill won the support of many key members of Congress who remain in +office and want to modify Clinton's encryption plan. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMucJKr04kQrCC2kFAQGcjwP/cjxEQcxixtx1nEg5lC6cBXK85Ff8FIkn 4x176KJokc4RSD1fNWhJkeHUYi1HCrp6nD4VsNP9Ud3c9rC2XNcGtnTEDAwZ0ikS 03kz9fUqptU6GE+Mrjl/FLhcDfSYlTUsFrFKYcTuge2nVJUAz2+kbaFg4qT9njyO 1vro9FplgIw= =ktMy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 22 22:50:59 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:50:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: YEEHAW! Tobacco argument heats up in AZ In-Reply-To: <199701230615.XAA06580@infowest.com> Message-ID: <32E70A37.FC5@gte.net> Attila T. Hun wrote: > summary: AZ AG filed for an injunction in the public interest to stop > the sale of tobacco in AZ. tobacco company response claimed he was > infringing on legislative rights... full story is below. > :: PHOENIX, Arizona (Reuter) - The tobacco industry filed > :: motions on Tuesday in a bid to dismiss the Arizona Attorney > :: General's law suit which seeks to ban the sale of tobacco in the > :: state. Lawyers for two of the defendants, Brown & Williamson > :: Tobacco Corp. and Philip Morris Cos Inc. (MO.N), said in a > :: statement the proposed ban would eliminate tax revenue from the > :: sale of tobacco which is used to fund healthcare and education > :: programs statewide. The Indians in Arizona have some special tax breaks on cigs, as a "sovereign nation" treaty deal or something, yes? Would this ban create any interesting opportunities? From davesbox at smtp.miraclestar.com Wed Jan 22 22:54:52 1997 From: davesbox at smtp.miraclestar.com (davesbox at smtp.miraclestar.com) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:54:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Do You Want to Make Money On-Line? Message-ID: <199701230650.GAA22450@medina.ohio.net> Dear Fellow Neterpreneur, We have seen many scams, and we are sure you have too! People are taking your hard earned money. They want you to pay them to sell THEIR products. Then there are others who offer to give you FREE information on how to work from home, and even though the information they give you is free the opportunity isn't. We have designed a program that has changed all that. We want individuals from all walks of life, rich or poor. Millions to invest or $0 to invest, to be able to take this program and make it succeed. Our information is FREE and our program is FREE..bottom line!! NEVER PAY ANYONE TO START A HOME BUSINESS You don't have to. You should never pay any money for a serious work at home opportunity. We will give you all the info you need to start a serious home business, and we won't charge you! Some companies charge you $100's of dollars to teach what we are going to teach you for FREE. Plus we get you started! After you view this FREE information you will be able to start your own home based business immediately...with NO investment! NO SCAMS NO CHAIN LETTERS NO STARTUP FEES NO HIDDEN FEES NO PRODUCTS TO BUY NO PRODUCTS TO SHIP NO INVESTMENTS NO SENDING DOLLAR BILLS AND PUTTING YOUR NAME ON A LIST NO INTERNET SCREEN PHONES NO STUFFING ENVELOPES ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Just a simple, but serious home based business!!! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Our program is free and it works, but it only works for serious and motivated people. Serious inquiries only!! Only sincere opportunity seekers will be given this invaluable information. To find out how you can join the many others who are reaping the rewards of this explosive home business opportunity, send us an email with your intentions, expectations and your concerns about starting a home based business. Your comments are not sold or shown to anyone, they are used only by us to determine in our opinion if you are right for our opportunity, and if our opportunity is right for you. We spend a great deal of time with all individuals who use our program and we do not charge for our support. Therefore, we want to make sure our time is well spent. After we review your comments and conclude that you are serious about wanting to start a home business we will in turn give you all the information you need to start your own home based business with $0. This business can truly be started without any cash and make you hundreds even thousands of dollars each week. Send Mailto:davesbox at smtp.miraclestar.com with "serious home business" in the subject line of your email and be sure to send us your expectations and concerns about starting a home based business. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Thank you for your interest. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 22 23:12:45 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 23:12:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keywords scanning/speech recognition In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E70F3F.4F9B@gte.net> Amanda Walker wrote: > John Kelsey wrote: > This may or may not be relevant, but I was a math major during an NSA college- > recruitment drive in the early 1980s. As part of the "come work for the NSA" > packet they were giving out, they had a sample issue of the NSA internal > linguistics journal. One of the articles concerned a system called DYPTRACK, > which tracked the pitch of a digitized voice signal to an impressive degree of > accuracy. This would imply that the NSA, at least, had invested considerable > resources into digital speech analysis as early as the late 1960s or early > 1970s (since by 1980 DYPTRACK was un-sensitive enough to be described in > college recruitment material). I have a CD today (used to be an LP in the late 1970's) of Enrico Caruso arias, digitally processed thru something called Stockham/ Soundstream digital process, circa mid-late 1970's. They took a number of samples of a modern (1970's) tenor's singing (someone whose voice had similar characteristics to Caruso's) and had the computer run it against the original Caruso recordings in an attempt to subtract out extraneous noise, resonances, and so on. The process helped somewhat, making the voice seem closer intead of somewhere a couple of rooms over, but the essential quality of the mechanically-recorded sound was still there, i.e., very dull and not at all life-like. They were supposed to release a lot more of this stuff, and they did some, but major interest was never there, and I haven't heard any more about further research in the intervening years, although I'll bet it's gone way beyond where it was. From harka at nycmetro.com Wed Jan 22 23:19:32 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 23:19:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: encrypted WinTalk/e-mails Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, does anybody know about an encrypting snoop-proof version of WinTalk (or a similar ytalk-style program)? If so, please copy replies to my private e-mail, for I am currently not subscribed to the CP list... Thanks in advance for your help... Harka PS: Here is also a collection of free (anonymous?) e-mail account services for those, who are interested...(sorry about the html-tags).

  • NetForward
  • HoTMaiL
  • Trale
  • WWDG Free Email
  • MailMasher
  • StarMail Over 100 domains to choose from!!
  • iName Over 100 domains to choose from!!
  • Geocities
  • Juno
  • Net at ddress
  • Bigfoot
  • MailHost
  • POBox
  • POBoxes
  • PEmail
  • La Jolla Shores
  • From.Net /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMuRqMTltEBIEF0MBAQEKygf+KQEkQE/yH10cgly1aIJExAX+p2kPmcPb f/ro2ulaYrs4gklKff60HE0AD39SBmTGnCI4dUzOLy0UfgTyifQ/W8H+1b1GU0Bb UnFhvWCCc8KPOY6Kf4ZpdtdRsyJjqAKjyYthKAEIKmG/m/ZHI2uJ0+F1GYhtjyhO IE5RrCImncjLW3uaXxnktzy4+jDeoQEXCVRm6muIZj/TPgTvzabkMzK5Udy0Nm1n vjevvcAiA65PWnbAT+v+GNFPZq4bW//bEnzDYYXBD++QrC7bSGXe73iS2HbrVu3Y gQg7pseOdbS5bkudhw/pqcTl5zvcdvGoQfnXZpbp4VviSwWs045vjg== =jw27 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 22 23:27:10 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 23:27:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes In-Reply-To: <199701230633.AAA00525@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32E712A6.6596@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > hjk wrote: > > > On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Most of the erstwhile elite types do the ordinary things in a quite > > ordinary way. Get dressed, eat, collect and send e-mail, and so on. > > The un-ordinary things (for example) are the thought processes which > > take place while typing out a post. Those thought processes don't > > generally intersect directly with the mundane things such as operating > > the computer, unless the operations themselves are unusual and demand > > the full attention of the person involved. > So what? The so what is that hjk believed that since cypherpunks were "elite", it followed that they would notice certain administrative messages more than non-elite people, and also remember those messages better. I had no contention with the remember-better part, assuming that was stated somewhere, but my argument is that greater intelligence does not necessarily lead to paying better attention to mundane everyday things like administrative messages and notices. The specific example was whether most cypherpunks subscribers would take more than momentary notice of the new list arrangements, and whether they would consciously think about whether they should change their status (subscription), and if so, why. My contention is that most would not give it any serious amount of attention. This is no different IMO than whether erstwhile "intelligent" people pay greater attention to road signs while driving than people of average mental power do. From snow at smoke.suba.com Thu Jan 23 00:15:55 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 00:15:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd In-Reply-To: <199701212026.MAA11261@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701230833.CAA03632@smoke.suba.com> > > Couple of things you can do: > > 2. Install a more secure "fingerd" such that it only > > allows "finger `userid at node.domain`" instead of > > "finger `@node.domain`". > > While I've seen #2 in action, I don't know where to go to snarf it. I just > > use #1. > Anyone know where to 'snarf it'? cfingerd can be gotten from: ftp.bitgate.com/pub/cfingerd/pub/cfingerd -or- sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/system/Network/finger There are a couple of other fingerd's in the sunsite directory. Cfinger seemed to be the best last time I was looking for a fingerd. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 23 01:51:57 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 01:51:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701230140.TAA08628@einstein> Message-ID: <32E74461.7431@sk.sympatico.ca> Jim Choate wrote: > > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > > > stop it. > > And Germany was Hitler and the Nazi Party's own country. > And your point is? Are you equating a specific individual or organization > with Hitler or the National Socialist? Sorry, I forgot that people who work well with numbers often aren't as good at working with concepts. I'll write slowly. I'm equating 'any' country where individuals take and keep power over it's citizen by illicit and/or dehumanizing means with Nazism and Fascism. > If the people in those counties want to give away their freedom that > is their business (and right), not mine, yours, or this countries unless > there is evidence they are trying to take their views and impose them here. Right. And if someone 'chooses' to give their money to a thief with a gun, then it is not the business of other people, or the police. I would hate to interfere with someones 'right' to get robbed, raped, or murdered. > In reference to Hitler, had he stayed in his own > country WWII and the ensuing half century of conflict would most likely not > have occured. But according to your viewpoint, countries he had not invaded had no right to 'help' those he conquered. Perhaps Hitler was merely the Dr. Vulis of isolationism. The isolationists' claims that the affairs of other countries were not our affairs changed rather rapidly when it became apparent that they had better either get their heads out of their butts, or learn to speak German. > I say, let them filter themselves into economic collapse, intellectual > nihilism, and political suicide. Suicide, assissted or otherwise, is a right > any and all individuals have whether acting as individuals or as groups. It seems that several million Jews got 'filtered' into 'nihilism' during the Second World War while the isolationists were busy not interfering with the rights of individuals in other nations to commit 'suicide' at the hands of the Nazis. > Never forget, a tree can exist without a forest but a forest can not exist > without trees. It is a one way street however much some people may want to > convince us otherwise. Never forget. A forest can apparently exist without Jewish trees. > If those people agree to support a system that limits or controls what > information they get to see that is their choice. It didn't work in Russia > and it won't work in Singapore or China any better. There are a lot of people lying in graves around the world who might suggest that perhaps they didn't support the system that limited, controlled, and murdered them. They might also argue that it 'did' work in many countries, for many years. > > No. The internet was conceived so that the DOD could monitor the > > communications > > of physicists and researchers who thought it was awfully nice of the > > government > > to provide this wonderful method of sharing data and information. > > The original goal > of the Internet was to allow computers to be connected in a nuclear conflict > and the period afterward when communications would be most critical. I believe you mean the 'stated' original goal of the InterNet. (Similar to the 'stated' goal of crypto regulations.) A series of manuscripts entitled "The True Story of the InterNet" expose the shadowy faces behind the facade of the InterNet, and the plans, during its very inception, for it to become part of the underlying fabric of everyday life, internationally. They were almost considered to be sci-fiction at the time they were written, because the InterNet, at the time was just a smallish, specialized, technical entity at the time. The claims they made for the InterNet being foreordained to become almost exactly what it is now becoming were written off as ludicrous. > One of the biggest problems this country has right now is the inability of > people like yourself to differentiate the difference between the ideals of > the country and the people who impliment it. You seem to have very strong feelings about people who think differently from yourself being a 'big problem'. > The problem is not the > government or the ideals it was founded on but rather the way we impliment > it. The battle cry of every apologist for every corrupt or jackboot regime that has ever existed on earth. Why do I never hear this view from anyone who is being censored, persecuted, or who can hear the jackboots thumping against their own door or their neighbor's door? It always seems to come from someone who is getting their piece of the pie and is worried that it might end. > Our government is people, who put their pants on the same way you or I > do (assuming you wear pants that is). They are not inherently some mineon of > Hell, they are people who in general either don't give a damn and it's just > a job or else they really believe what they are doing. You might try reading something other than 'Life' magazines from the 1950's if you want to get a little better picture of how our government really operates. > Accept and deal with your schizophrenic tendencies and help solve this > national problem we face. Let's try to solve it now so that our > grandchildren won't have to fight this fight again. I'm already working toward solving the problems that I see, in other countries as well as this one. The people behind the Iron Curtain have never seemed to have any problem with me risking my life and liberty making prohibited information available to them. "I can hear the rumbling of the trucks as they come up the street, and soon I will be hearing the thumping of the jackboots storming up the staircase, as I have heard them so many times before. But I suspect that, this time, the sound will be different, that it will have an ethereal quality about it, one which conveys greater personal meaning than it did when I heard it on previous occasions. "This time, they are coming for me." "My only hope, is that I can find the strength of character somewhere inside myself to ask the question which lies at the heart of why there is a 'they' to come for me at all...why, in the end, it has finally come to this for me, as for countless others. "The question is, in retrospect, as simple and basic as it is essential for any who still espouse the concepts of freedom and liberty to ask themselves upon finding themselves marveling at the outrageousness being perpetrated upon their neighbors by 'them'...by 'others'...by 'Friends of the Destroyer.' "The question is...'Why didn't "I" do something?'" A quote from the personal diary of Vice-Admiral B. D'Shauneaux, from the Prologue to Part II of 'The True Story of the InterNet' Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 23 01:53:13 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 01:53:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Manila says ID system not prelude to martial law (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701222143.QAA21639@wauug.erols.com> Message-ID: <32E7496B.7B07@sk.sympatico.ca> David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states didn't write: > Reuters sez: > Message-ID: > > CYBERSPACE, Dec 15 (Reuter) - CypherPunk list owner > John Gilmore, on Wednesday, dismissed as baseless fears that his > forced unsubscribing of Dr. Vulis was a prelude to censorship. > > ``That is a wild opinion without any basis in fact,'' Gilmore > told his weekly news conference after Dr. Vulis, the > outspoken Archbishop of CyberSpace, accused him of being an > authoritarian dictator. > > Officials have said a moderated-list system would make it > easier for people to transact business with the list > and minimise fraud. > ``That's all there is to it ... (its) very simple,'' Gilmore > said. From adam at homeport.org Thu Jan 23 04:35:03 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 04:35:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: P.S. David Kahn's editorial today In-Reply-To: <199701230510.VAA04818@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701231230.HAA05864@homeport.org> Carl Ellison wrote: | I just sent the following P.S. to newsday.com | ---------------------- | | If I use an AT&T Clipper-style cellular phone, as David suggested, and I | call you on a normal wired phone, we can't encrypt the conversation and it | is vulnerable to interception. The protection works *only* if both parties | have encrypting phones while interoperate. Its worth thinking about multiple layers of protection for a datastream. The end to end encryption issue is seperate from the issue of mobile to base encryption (and mobile to base authentication, for that matter.) Compute power is getting cheap enough that doing both seems roughly feasable to me. Multiple protective layers is also nice in an environment where theres policy checking going on, ie, a firewall. SSL only gets plugged through a firewall because it can't be partially unwrapped. I can't proxy in any meaningful sense. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From snow at smoke.suba.com Thu Jan 23 05:30:14 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 05:30:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701220555.VAA18997@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701231347.HAA04161@smoke.suba.com> Thorn: > Alec wrote: > The idea that "sin" and "evil" are abstract and somewhat arbitrary is > merely a human (and therefore faulty) perception. > If God can be perfect by definition (for sake of argument), then "sin" Somewhere in the above three lines, someone is making a hell of an asumption. See also "The Euthphro Question", plato. > A gentleman wrote to Southern Partisan magazine a few years ago and > said "Real freedom is not the license to do whatever you want, but > rather the liberty to do what you ought to do". No, real freedom is being able to decide for yourself what you ought to do--or--who the hell decides what I ought to do? From snow at smoke.suba.com Thu Jan 23 05:32:35 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 05:32:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? In-Reply-To: <199701220555.VAA18973@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701231349.HAA04173@smoke.suba.com> > > I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. Any advice would be appreciated. > For which OS, and SCSI or Parallel version? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 23 05:43:23 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 05:43:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Decision in Karn Case In-Reply-To: <199701230056.QAA02134@toad.com> Message-ID: <32E75F2A.5E79@sk.sympatico.ca> Anonymous wrote: > > In light of the recent Executive Order transferring > > regulatory authority of non-military cryptographic computer > > source code to the Commerce Department, and the Commerce > > Department's promulgation of a new regulation under the authority > > of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. secs. > > 1701 et seq., we remand this case to the district court to > > consider the reviewability of and, if appropriate, the merits of > > appellant's claim under the Administrative Procedure Act. > > And when that review finally reaches the appeals court, > the administration can move the regulations to the state department. Look on the bright side. Maybe they'll move them around so much that they'll lose them. > The uniqueness of the anti-crypto regulations is that it is a law > against intellectuals and academics. These people will not be willing to > break the law and then challenge its constitutionality in the courts, > or engage in any kind of civil disobedience demonstration. That is why the thugs and the brown-shirts always start by attacking scattered individuals and those they can easily brand 'troublemakers.' (Only in rare instances, do they start with Doctors). The intellectuals and academics might, at best, utter a few tut-tut's, and by the time that the rule of force has become the order of the day, there is no longer anyone 'below' them left free to object to the attacks on themselves. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 23 05:43:44 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 05:43:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Just another government fuckover: New crypto regulations In-Reply-To: <199701230614.XAA06559@infowest.com> Message-ID: <32E77595.387D@sk.sympatico.ca> Attila T. Hun wrote: > free speech, which is what we are talking about. supposedly > absolute freedom of speech in America was in the Articles of > Confederation and was a major point of the Declaration of > Independence. free speach was an "intention" of the Magna Carta. > ::> books are an intellectual 'solution' to the problem. the real > ::>problem is the hardware. in order to negate governments and their > ::>virtually stated intentions of blocking our inalienable freedoms, > ::>particularly freedom of speach, we must be able to distribute > ::>universal crypto worldwide, and be able to improve it as the shadow > ::>governments of the various spook shows improve their ability to > ::>break our code. Dear Mr. Hun, I see that your post was expunged from the cypherpunks-politically- correct-outgoing list. I am assuming that it was as a result of linking crypto to free speech. Perhaps you need to fall more into line with the New List Order. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 23 05:43:50 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 05:43:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dale / Re: Your Subscription To The CypherPunks List In-Reply-To: <199701230633.AAA00525@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32E7831E.19B2@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale, This message is to inform you that I have taken over the cypherpunks list and will henceforth act as moderator, thus ensuring that only messages regarding "How To Make Big $$$ Licking Your Own Balls" will be posted to the list. However, out of the goodness of my heart, I will beneficently allow you to receive the expunged posts on another list. Just send an email to: "ifyoudon'tlikeit,thenlumpit--it'sMYlist at toad.com" with a message body saying, "I'm still a Punk, and I don't think the music's too loud, you old fart." Toto "My name isn't Richard, but I'm still a Dick." From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 23 05:44:35 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 05:44:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: greed and the internet In-Reply-To: <199701230614.XAA06525@infowest.com> Message-ID: <32E76F54.6388@sk.sympatico.ca> Attila T. Hun wrote: > greed and the internet > > Problem is not just here --everywhere; the greedy commercial > bastards have oversold their network space intentionally as they > are bucking for per packet and timed usage charges which are > currently prohibited by the FCC and the state PUCs. Say, this couldn't be the old lets-create-a-problem-by-virtue-of- our-own-greed-and-incompetence-and-then-use-it-as-proof-for-need- of-more-legislation-and-create-expenses-that-the-little-guys-can't- handle 'trick', would it? > slow networks make toast of the free hours > and overtime kills. Look on the bright side. At least your old 286 will finally be worth some money when CompuServe and AOL decide to dump those 'fast' machines that are hurting their profit margin. > The Internet will no no longer be the peoples net, and the > commercial greedies are establishing a faster, more secure > network with controlled access points; leaving the common man's > access in the mud, still paying the exorbitant rates on a pay > before play basis. Any good rancher knows that in order to herd the cattle and the sheep, you have to get them moving first. And once they get used to being herded into the 'feedlot', they stop paying attention and fail to notice when the 'feedlot' they get herded into happens to be located conveniently next to a rendering plant. > That, and it gives control of information to > the government --which, as we all know. is 'heavenly white' > -above sin. Must be just a 'coincidence' that they are 'herding' all information toward an entity spawned by the DOD and other government security organizations--the "government 'behind' the government." > Universities are being bought off with the 'Internet II' > proposal which provides super trunks of over 600 Megabaud > capacity, a 400 times improvement. All of this feeds into five > stategically placed super-hubs where Uncle's shadow government can > monitor everything. Of course, the Universities' own communications will no doubt be fully protected with Key Escrow Encryption. > The Internet was supposed to be our freedom: freedom of > information and government in the sunshine, but government is > proving it is still bigger, faster, and badder by using draconian > rules of illegal regulatory agencies. agencies which are usurping > rights limited to the legislative branch. I think that this statement shows a strong need for the academics and intellectuals to discuss this issue, perhaps even write a 'paper' on it, after giving it several years of close study, naturally. I, for one, would be more than willing to help them smuggle the results of their study out of the forced labor camp they find themselves in by the time it is completed. Thanks for a thoughtful and insightful post on these issues. I am sure that they will be seriously considered in a wide Circle of people who are not just composed of smart alecs with blanc minds. Toto From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 23 06:10:32 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:10:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes Message-ID: <199701231410.GAA15291@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > hjk wrote: > > On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > hjk wrote: > > > > Now whatever you think of your fellow citizens, or even those of the > > > USA (to name an example), I'm sure is OK on whatever basis you apply > > > your judgement. But I guarantee you that the people on the cypherpunks > > > list are no more or less intelligent than the people who vegetate in > > > front of their TV sets every day, right there where you live, in all > > > probability. If you believe that your fellow citizens vote intelligently, > > > then I respond that cypherpunks vote intelligently. What do you think? > > > Well, I thought cypherpunks claim to be elite. > > Most of the erstwhile elite types do the ordinary things in a quite > ordinary way. Get dressed, eat, collect and send e-mail, and so on. > > The un-ordinary things (for example) are the thought processes which > take place while typing out a post. Those thought processes don't > generally intersect directly with the mundane things such as operating > the computer, unless the operations themselves are unusual and demand > the full attention of the person involved. > So what? - Igor. From snow at smoke.suba.com Thu Jan 23 06:25:54 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:25:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP drives? Message-ID: <199701231425.GAA15636@toad.com> > > I am looking for a transparent (strong) encryption of ZIP drives. Any advice would be appreciated. > For which OS, and SCSI or Parallel version? From snow at smoke.suba.com Thu Jan 23 06:26:10 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:26:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd Message-ID: <199701231426.GAA15678@toad.com> > > Couple of things you can do: > > 2. Install a more secure "fingerd" such that it only > > allows "finger `userid at node.domain`" instead of > > "finger `@node.domain`". > > While I've seen #2 in action, I don't know where to go to snarf it. I just > > use #1. > Anyone know where to 'snarf it'? cfingerd can be gotten from: ftp.bitgate.com/pub/cfingerd/pub/cfingerd -or- sunsite.unc.edu/pub/Linux/system/Network/finger There are a couple of other fingerd's in the sunsite directory. Cfinger seemed to be the best last time I was looking for a fingerd. From snow at smoke.suba.com Thu Jan 23 06:26:18 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:26:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701231426.GAA15704@toad.com> Thorn: > Alec wrote: > The idea that "sin" and "evil" are abstract and somewhat arbitrary is > merely a human (and therefore faulty) perception. > If God can be perfect by definition (for sake of argument), then "sin" Somewhere in the above three lines, someone is making a hell of an asumption. See also "The Euthphro Question", plato. > A gentleman wrote to Southern Partisan magazine a few years ago and > said "Real freedom is not the license to do whatever you want, but > rather the liberty to do what you ought to do". No, real freedom is being able to decide for yourself what you ought to do--or--who the hell decides what I ought to do? From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 23 06:26:26 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:26:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Keywords scanning/speech recognition Message-ID: <199701231426.GAA15705@toad.com> Amanda Walker wrote: > John Kelsey wrote: > This may or may not be relevant, but I was a math major during an NSA college- > recruitment drive in the early 1980s. As part of the "come work for the NSA" > packet they were giving out, they had a sample issue of the NSA internal > linguistics journal. One of the articles concerned a system called DYPTRACK, > which tracked the pitch of a digitized voice signal to an impressive degree of > accuracy. This would imply that the NSA, at least, had invested considerable > resources into digital speech analysis as early as the late 1960s or early > 1970s (since by 1980 DYPTRACK was un-sensitive enough to be described in > college recruitment material). I have a CD today (used to be an LP in the late 1970's) of Enrico Caruso arias, digitally processed thru something called Stockham/ Soundstream digital process, circa mid-late 1970's. They took a number of samples of a modern (1970's) tenor's singing (someone whose voice had similar characteristics to Caruso's) and had the computer run it against the original Caruso recordings in an attempt to subtract out extraneous noise, resonances, and so on. The process helped somewhat, making the voice seem closer intead of somewhere a couple of rooms over, but the essential quality of the mechanically-recorded sound was still there, i.e., very dull and not at all life-like. They were supposed to release a lot more of this stuff, and they did some, but major interest was never there, and I haven't heard any more about further research in the intervening years, although I'll bet it's gone way beyond where it was. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 23 06:26:28 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:26:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Decision in Karn Case Message-ID: <199701231426.GAA15706@toad.com> Anonymous wrote: > > In light of the recent Executive Order transferring > > regulatory authority of non-military cryptographic computer > > source code to the Commerce Department, and the Commerce > > Department's promulgation of a new regulation under the authority > > of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. secs. > > 1701 et seq., we remand this case to the district court to > > consider the reviewability of and, if appropriate, the merits of > > appellant's claim under the Administrative Procedure Act. > > And when that review finally reaches the appeals court, > the administration can move the regulations to the state department. Look on the bright side. Maybe they'll move them around so much that they'll lose them. > The uniqueness of the anti-crypto regulations is that it is a law > against intellectuals and academics. These people will not be willing to > break the law and then challenge its constitutionality in the courts, > or engage in any kind of civil disobedience demonstration. That is why the thugs and the brown-shirts always start by attacking scattered individuals and those they can easily brand 'troublemakers.' (Only in rare instances, do they start with Doctors). The intellectuals and academics might, at best, utter a few tut-tut's, and by the time that the rule of force has become the order of the day, there is no longer anyone 'below' them left free to object to the attacks on themselves. Toto From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 23 06:26:54 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:26:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: YEEHAW! Tobacco argument heats up in AZ Message-ID: <199701231426.GAA15726@toad.com> Attila T. Hun wrote: > summary: AZ AG filed for an injunction in the public interest to stop > the sale of tobacco in AZ. tobacco company response claimed he was > infringing on legislative rights... full story is below. > :: PHOENIX, Arizona (Reuter) - The tobacco industry filed > :: motions on Tuesday in a bid to dismiss the Arizona Attorney > :: General's law suit which seeks to ban the sale of tobacco in the > :: state. Lawyers for two of the defendants, Brown & Williamson > :: Tobacco Corp. and Philip Morris Cos Inc. (MO.N), said in a > :: statement the proposed ban would eliminate tax revenue from the > :: sale of tobacco which is used to fund healthcare and education > :: programs statewide. The Indians in Arizona have some special tax breaks on cigs, as a "sovereign nation" treaty deal or something, yes? Would this ban create any interesting opportunities? From attila at primenet.com Thu Jan 23 06:27:13 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:27:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: at least we have some friends... Message-ID: <199701231427.GAA15763@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- +New encryption bill on way +By Alex Lash +January 22, 1997, 8:45 p.m. PT +see http://www.news.com/News/Item/0%2C4%2C7236%2C00.html?nd +Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Montana) next week will reintroduce legislation +aimed at wiping out most Commerce Department restrictions on the +export of software encryption, his press secretary said today. +The new version of the so-called Pro-Code bill, which died in the +Senate Commerce Committee last year after a series of high-profile +hearings, will be unchanged and should have the same support it +gained in the 1996 session, Burns's press secretary Matt Raymond said. +"The language was not something that was arrived at lightly," Raymond +said. "We should have time for a more robust and considerate debate" +compared with last year's unsuccessful rush to get the bill passed, +he added. +Burns, a leading figure on the Senate Commerce Committee, is set to +appear via satellite Tuesday at the RSA Data Security Conference in +San Francisco to announce the bill's reintroduction. +Foes of the Clinton administration's current encryption regulations, +which became effective on January 1, are looking for Congress to +legislate more liberal export guildelines. Last year, the Pro-Code +bill won the support of many key members of Congress who remain in +office and want to modify Clinton's encryption plan. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMucJKr04kQrCC2kFAQGcjwP/cjxEQcxixtx1nEg5lC6cBXK85Ff8FIkn 4x176KJokc4RSD1fNWhJkeHUYi1HCrp6nD4VsNP9Ud3c9rC2XNcGtnTEDAwZ0ikS 03kz9fUqptU6GE+Mrjl/FLhcDfSYlTUsFrFKYcTuge2nVJUAz2+kbaFg4qT9njyO 1vro9FplgIw= =ktMy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From harka at nycmetro.com Thu Jan 23 06:27:18 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:27:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: encrypted WinTalk/e-mails Message-ID: <199701231427.GAA15768@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, does anybody know about an encrypting snoop-proof version of WinTalk (or a similar ytalk-style program)? If so, please copy replies to my private e-mail, for I am currently not subscribed to the CP list... Thanks in advance for your help... Harka PS: Here is also a collection of free (anonymous?) e-mail account services for those, who are interested...(sorry about the html-tags).
  • NetForward
  • HoTMaiL
  • Trale
  • WWDG Free Email
  • MailMasher
  • StarMail Over 100 domains to choose from!!
  • iName Over 100 domains to choose from!!
  • Geocities
  • Juno
  • Net at ddress
  • Bigfoot
  • MailHost
  • POBox
  • POBoxes
  • PEmail
  • La Jolla Shores
  • From.Net /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMuRqMTltEBIEF0MBAQEKygf+KQEkQE/yH10cgly1aIJExAX+p2kPmcPb f/ro2ulaYrs4gklKff60HE0AD39SBmTGnCI4dUzOLy0UfgTyifQ/W8H+1b1GU0Bb UnFhvWCCc8KPOY6Kf4ZpdtdRsyJjqAKjyYthKAEIKmG/m/ZHI2uJ0+F1GYhtjyhO IE5RrCImncjLW3uaXxnktzy4+jDeoQEXCVRm6muIZj/TPgTvzabkMzK5Udy0Nm1n vjevvcAiA65PWnbAT+v+GNFPZq4bW//bEnzDYYXBD++QrC7bSGXe73iS2HbrVu3Y gQg7pseOdbS5bkudhw/pqcTl5zvcdvGoQfnXZpbp4VviSwWs045vjg== =jw27 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From tank at xs4all.nl Thu Jan 23 06:27:55 1997 From: tank at xs4all.nl (tank) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:27:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: wired news: Germany Gets Radikal About Extremists on Web Message-ID: <199701231427.GAA15791@toad.com> T O P S T O R I E S Germany Gets Radikal About Extremists on Web Tuesday - Are the German government's tactics for barring extremist material on the Internet realistic? Germany Gets Radikal About Extremists on Web by Rebecca Vesely 5:03 pm PST 21 Jan 97 - The German government, never shy about expressing its disdain for left- and right-wing radicals inside its borders, has taken to combing the Internet for signs of extremist activity. But Germany's effort to stop the distribution of terrorist manuals and Nazi propaganda is like pointing a fire hose at a beehive - instead of quashing the bees, it only scatters them, and makes them more insistent. Last week, German authorities filed charges against a member of the communist Party of Democratic Socialism (PDS), Angela Marquardt, for linking to the banned left-wing magazine Radikal from her homepage, causing Net activists to anticipate another incident like that last September, when several German ISPs temporarily blocked Radikal's server, XS4All. In response, the magazine was mirrored on more than 50 Web sites around the world. "The decision to prosecute for linking to Radikal will probably bring yet another escalation of events, where this censored magazine will become all the more popular on the Net," said Felipe Rodriquez, managing director of XS4All, which is based in the Netherlands. "Censoring the Internet is usually very counterproductive, and an insurance that many people will mirror the information and start distributing it." XS4All, which describes itself as "networking for the masses," hosts some 4,600 homepages, and was recently in the news for posting several homepages for media banned in Serbia, such as Radio B92, that continue to offer via the Web live RealAudio feeds and frequent updates on the continued nationwide protests against the Serbian government. Banned in Germany 12 years ago, and published underground for the past decade, Radikal advocates the overthrow of the German government. German officials say the magazine's publishers provide terrorist information in their pages, including how to sabotage train lines. But the publishers argue that they have the right to publish material contrary to the German government. "We fundamentally reject the notion that the state has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force," the publishers wrote in an article titled "Who We Are" in 1995. "The existing social conditions can only be changed if left-radical groups and associations build up their abilities and structures so as to be able to counter some of these effects even today. This, of course, includes militant and armed intervention, but these would be empty gestures if there wasn't also some sort of linkage or means of conveying their message." While publishers continue to produce the magazine in print form outside of Germany, sympathizers have been posting it to a homepage on XS4All. "As an act of solidarity with them and with Radikal we decided to put it on the Internet and, of course, to frustrate this censorship attempt of the German authorities," the sympathizers wrote in an email to Wired News. They added that while they had no contact with the publishers of Radikal, they are currently being investigated by Germany's public prosecutor general and have no plans to "go on holiday in Germany." Although Radikal is not banned in the Netherlands, the German government says that linking to the magazine from inside Germany is "aiding a felony," spokesman Ruediger Reiff told Reuters. In December, Chancellor Helmut Kohl's Cabinet approved a bill banning the electronic distribution of forms of hate speech, terrorism, and indecent material. The new German law places responsibility on the loosely defined "suppliers," and in response, CompuServe considered moving its administrative operations to a neighboring country. PDS member Marquardt says her prosecution has less to do with Radikal, than an attempt to quiet German citizens who, like herself, are outspoken critics of the government. "This is hardly about bomb-building instructions or highly detailed descriptions of train lines and their weaknesses," Marquardt, who could not be reached for comment, wrote in a statement posted on her Web site. "The all-too-stubborn guardians of the state will quickly learn: The Net interprets censorship as a malfunction and circumvents it." In the meantime, XS4All has not received any official communication from the German Justice Department, nor from the Dutch Justice Department. "Our policy is that as a provider we are not in the position to judge whether this magazine is illegal in the Netherlands, therefore we do not interfere with the liberty of speech of our user," XS4All's Rodriquez said. Copyright =A9 1993-97 Wired Ventures, Inc. and affiliated companies= From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 23 06:27:56 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:27:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701231427.GAA15792@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: > > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > > > stop it. > > And Germany was Hitler and the Nazi Party's own country. > And your point is? Are you equating a specific individual or organization > with Hitler or the National Socialist? Sorry, I forgot that people who work well with numbers often aren't as good at working with concepts. I'll write slowly. I'm equating 'any' country where individuals take and keep power over it's citizen by illicit and/or dehumanizing means with Nazism and Fascism. > If the people in those counties want to give away their freedom that > is their business (and right), not mine, yours, or this countries unless > there is evidence they are trying to take their views and impose them here. Right. And if someone 'chooses' to give their money to a thief with a gun, then it is not the business of other people, or the police. I would hate to interfere with someones 'right' to get robbed, raped, or murdered. > In reference to Hitler, had he stayed in his own > country WWII and the ensuing half century of conflict would most likely not > have occured. But according to your viewpoint, countries he had not invaded had no right to 'help' those he conquered. Perhaps Hitler was merely the Dr. Vulis of isolationism. The isolationists' claims that the affairs of other countries were not our affairs changed rather rapidly when it became apparent that they had better either get their heads out of their butts, or learn to speak German. > I say, let them filter themselves into economic collapse, intellectual > nihilism, and political suicide. Suicide, assissted or otherwise, is a right > any and all individuals have whether acting as individuals or as groups. It seems that several million Jews got 'filtered' into 'nihilism' during the Second World War while the isolationists were busy not interfering with the rights of individuals in other nations to commit 'suicide' at the hands of the Nazis. > Never forget, a tree can exist without a forest but a forest can not exist > without trees. It is a one way street however much some people may want to > convince us otherwise. Never forget. A forest can apparently exist without Jewish trees. > If those people agree to support a system that limits or controls what > information they get to see that is their choice. It didn't work in Russia > and it won't work in Singapore or China any better. There are a lot of people lying in graves around the world who might suggest that perhaps they didn't support the system that limited, controlled, and murdered them. They might also argue that it 'did' work in many countries, for many years. > > No. The internet was conceived so that the DOD could monitor the > > communications > > of physicists and researchers who thought it was awfully nice of the > > government > > to provide this wonderful method of sharing data and information. > > The original goal > of the Internet was to allow computers to be connected in a nuclear conflict > and the period afterward when communications would be most critical. I believe you mean the 'stated' original goal of the InterNet. (Similar to the 'stated' goal of crypto regulations.) A series of manuscripts entitled "The True Story of the InterNet" expose the shadowy faces behind the facade of the InterNet, and the plans, during its very inception, for it to become part of the underlying fabric of everyday life, internationally. They were almost considered to be sci-fiction at the time they were written, because the InterNet, at the time was just a smallish, specialized, technical entity at the time. The claims they made for the InterNet being foreordained to become almost exactly what it is now becoming were written off as ludicrous. > One of the biggest problems this country has right now is the inability of > people like yourself to differentiate the difference between the ideals of > the country and the people who impliment it. You seem to have very strong feelings about people who think differently from yourself being a 'big problem'. > The problem is not the > government or the ideals it was founded on but rather the way we impliment > it. The battle cry of every apologist for every corrupt or jackboot regime that has ever existed on earth. Why do I never hear this view from anyone who is being censored, persecuted, or who can hear the jackboots thumping against their own door or their neighbor's door? It always seems to come from someone who is getting their piece of the pie and is worried that it might end. > Our government is people, who put their pants on the same way you or I > do (assuming you wear pants that is). They are not inherently some mineon of > Hell, they are people who in general either don't give a damn and it's just > a job or else they really believe what they are doing. You might try reading something other than 'Life' magazines from the 1950's if you want to get a little better picture of how our government really operates. > Accept and deal with your schizophrenic tendencies and help solve this > national problem we face. Let's try to solve it now so that our > grandchildren won't have to fight this fight again. I'm already working toward solving the problems that I see, in other countries as well as this one. The people behind the Iron Curtain have never seemed to have any problem with me risking my life and liberty making prohibited information available to them. "I can hear the rumbling of the trucks as they come up the street, and soon I will be hearing the thumping of the jackboots storming up the staircase, as I have heard them so many times before. But I suspect that, this time, the sound will be different, that it will have an ethereal quality about it, one which conveys greater personal meaning than it did when I heard it on previous occasions. "This time, they are coming for me." "My only hope, is that I can find the strength of character somewhere inside myself to ask the question which lies at the heart of why there is a 'they' to come for me at all...why, in the end, it has finally come to this for me, as for countless others. "The question is, in retrospect, as simple and basic as it is essential for any who still espouse the concepts of freedom and liberty to ask themselves upon finding themselves marveling at the outrageousness being perpetrated upon their neighbors by 'them'...by 'others'...by 'Friends of the Destroyer.' "The question is...'Why didn't "I" do something?'" A quote from the personal diary of Vice-Admiral B. D'Shauneaux, from the Prologue to Part II of 'The True Story of the InterNet' Toto From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 23 06:28:06 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:28:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes Message-ID: <199701231428.GAA15793@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > hjk wrote: > > > On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Most of the erstwhile elite types do the ordinary things in a quite > > ordinary way. Get dressed, eat, collect and send e-mail, and so on. > > The un-ordinary things (for example) are the thought processes which > > take place while typing out a post. Those thought processes don't > > generally intersect directly with the mundane things such as operating > > the computer, unless the operations themselves are unusual and demand > > the full attention of the person involved. > So what? The so what is that hjk believed that since cypherpunks were "elite", it followed that they would notice certain administrative messages more than non-elite people, and also remember those messages better. I had no contention with the remember-better part, assuming that was stated somewhere, but my argument is that greater intelligence does not necessarily lead to paying better attention to mundane everyday things like administrative messages and notices. The specific example was whether most cypherpunks subscribers would take more than momentary notice of the new list arrangements, and whether they would consciously think about whether they should change their status (subscription), and if so, why. My contention is that most would not give it any serious amount of attention. This is no different IMO than whether erstwhile "intelligent" people pay greater attention to road signs while driving than people of average mental power do. From adam at homeport.org Thu Jan 23 06:29:49 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 06:29:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: P.S. David Kahn's editorial today Message-ID: <199701231429.GAA15847@toad.com> Carl Ellison wrote: | I just sent the following P.S. to newsday.com | ---------------------- | | If I use an AT&T Clipper-style cellular phone, as David suggested, and I | call you on a normal wired phone, we can't encrypt the conversation and it | is vulnerable to interception. The protection works *only* if both parties | have encrypting phones while interoperate. Its worth thinking about multiple layers of protection for a datastream. The end to end encryption issue is seperate from the issue of mobile to base encryption (and mobile to base authentication, for that matter.) Compute power is getting cheap enough that doing both seems roughly feasable to me. Multiple protective layers is also nice in an environment where theres policy checking going on, ie, a firewall. SSL only gets plugged through a firewall because it can't be partially unwrapped. I can't proxy in any meaningful sense. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 23 07:33:24 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 07:33:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment In-Reply-To: <199701231347.HAA04161@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: <32E78482.5DF6@gte.net> snow wrote: > Thorn: > > Alec wrote: > > The idea that "sin" and "evil" are abstract and somewhat arbitrary is > > merely a human (and therefore faulty) perception. > > If God can be perfect by definition (for sake of argument), then "sin" > Somewhere in the above three lines, someone is making a hell of an > asumption. See also "The Euthphro Question", plato. Humans do OK with simple issues, example: 1 + 1 = 2. Especially true if the issue has no inherent moral/ethical tie-in. Once you get past the simple, however, you start seeing motivation, personal imperative, etc., which leads to hidden agendas and lies. When I speak of God, I'm not surrendering any personal power, or subscribing to your God concept necessarily (e.g. Plato), I'm just defining an object of pure reason that is free of human self-interest, for sake of argument. > > A gentleman wrote to Southern Partisan magazine a few years ago and > > said "Real freedom is not the license to do whatever you want, but > > rather the liberty to do what you ought to do". > No, real freedom is being able to decide for yourself what you ought to > do--or--who the hell decides what I ought to do? My example shows that real freedom goes hand-in-hand with responsibility. A person could interpret my example in a way that "what you ought to do" is defined and controlled by external parties, but that was not my point or the point of the original author. From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 23 08:10:36 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 08:10:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Vulis' social engineering experiment Message-ID: <199701231610.IAA18740@toad.com> snow wrote: > Thorn: > > Alec wrote: > > The idea that "sin" and "evil" are abstract and somewhat arbitrary is > > merely a human (and therefore faulty) perception. > > If God can be perfect by definition (for sake of argument), then "sin" > Somewhere in the above three lines, someone is making a hell of an > asumption. See also "The Euthphro Question", plato. Humans do OK with simple issues, example: 1 + 1 = 2. Especially true if the issue has no inherent moral/ethical tie-in. Once you get past the simple, however, you start seeing motivation, personal imperative, etc., which leads to hidden agendas and lies. When I speak of God, I'm not surrendering any personal power, or subscribing to your God concept necessarily (e.g. Plato), I'm just defining an object of pure reason that is free of human self-interest, for sake of argument. > > A gentleman wrote to Southern Partisan magazine a few years ago and > > said "Real freedom is not the license to do whatever you want, but > > rather the liberty to do what you ought to do". > No, real freedom is being able to decide for yourself what you ought to > do--or--who the hell decides what I ought to do? My example shows that real freedom goes hand-in-hand with responsibility. A person could interpret my example in a way that "what you ought to do" is defined and controlled by external parties, but that was not my point or the point of the original author. From adam at homeport.org Thu Jan 23 08:37:48 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 08:37:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Noise] From The Onion Message-ID: <199701231634.LAA07092@homeport.org> SATAN TO REVISE BAR CODE SYSTEM NEW YORK--Responding to retailers' calls to "streamline the Mark of the Beast," Satan announced plans Monday to make significant changes in the UPC symbol by the end of the millenium. "All men, small and great, rich and poor, slave and free, shall bear the mark of the beast," Satan said. The mark, "666," now hidden in every UPC symbol, may be more effective if taken off products and burned directly onto consumers' foreheads or hands, according to The Father of Lies. Said National Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan: "As foretold in the Book of Revelations, it shall come to pass that no man shall be able to buy or sell without the Mark of the Beast." The new bar code system will be introduced through a series of televised public-service announcements featuring Friends star Matthew Perry and Satan, who will appear as a beast with seven heads and ten horns. http://www.theonion.com/onion3102/index3102.html -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From adam at homeport.org Thu Jan 23 09:12:10 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 09:12:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Noise] From The Onion Message-ID: <199701231712.JAA20354@toad.com> SATAN TO REVISE BAR CODE SYSTEM NEW YORK--Responding to retailers' calls to "streamline the Mark of the Beast," Satan announced plans Monday to make significant changes in the UPC symbol by the end of the millenium. "All men, small and great, rich and poor, slave and free, shall bear the mark of the beast," Satan said. The mark, "666," now hidden in every UPC symbol, may be more effective if taken off products and burned directly onto consumers' foreheads or hands, according to The Father of Lies. Said National Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan: "As foretold in the Book of Revelations, it shall come to pass that no man shall be able to buy or sell without the Mark of the Beast." The new bar code system will be introduced through a series of televised public-service announcements featuring Friends star Matthew Perry and Satan, who will appear as a beast with seven heads and ten horns. http://www.theonion.com/onion3102/index3102.html -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu Thu Jan 23 09:30:21 1997 From: unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu (Internaut) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 09:30:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: greed and the internet Message-ID: <01BC0920.893533E0@s25-pm01.tnstate.campus.mci.net> Will you send some references for Internet II and the government hubs? Thx, Internaut ---------- From: Attila T. Hun[SMTP:attila at primenet.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 1997 08.32 PM To: cypherpunks Subject: greed and the internet -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- greed and the internet our network provider (MCI) has been gradually burying our T1 trunk and the effective feed has been reduced to 1200 baud from 1.56 Megabaud; that, and add 20 seconds to 5+ minutes of packet hold, and it is now worthless. they claim they will have increased capacity, but there are no pressing big money commercial interests on this feeder --so when? Problem is not just here --everywhere; the greedy commercial bastards have oversold their network space intentionally as they are bucking for per packet and timed usage charges which are currently prohibited by the FCC and the state PUCs. The FCC is the key since other than the local network, which is burdened with the costs of the trunk, everything is regulated by the FCC which is trying to totally eliminate the state PUCs in the 105th Congress, Newt's mouth not withstanding. The FCC agreed to review the matter, capitulating to big greed interests, which will make the Internet a rich man's toy. $19.95/month plus access charges will increase to thousands of dollars per month; slow networks make toast of the free hours and overtime kills. Without the creative input of the multitude, there will be no content, so why have a net other than for commercial purposes? suites the misinformation cabal just fine. Well, the FCC granted a reprieve --for the moment. but will come up again, and again, until it passes. The Internet will no no longer be the peoples net, and the commercial greedies are establishing a faster, more secure network with controlled access points; leaving the common man's access in the mud, still paying the exorbitant rates on a pay before play basis. That, and it gives control of information to the government --which, as we all know. is 'heavenly white' -above sin. Universities are being bought off with the 'Internet II' proposal which provides super trunks of over 600 Megabaud capacity, a 400 times improvement. All of this feeds into five stategically placed super-hubs where Uncle's shadow government can monitor everything. The Internet was supposed to be our freedom: freedom of information and government in the sunshine, but government is proving it is still bigger, faster, and badder by using draconian rules of illegal regulatory agencies. agencies which are usurping rights limited to the legislative branch. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMubOW704kQrCC2kFAQE0gQQAxrkUhyX5wl+dZ/i6ajMJXAD7f+gpvc6Z CBik+g62RqWrMbOblfLRubhEIWUfK2FQxIBRJ+0cQezCH4IfM1CxbytJ4Cx3BBBs GwHGuhTfLnGVnuCAugguRdNUrd/tXaN47pAVqmg330XvLlTJqha8ODPsi2b+7qst 2z8qbOW0cqo= =M9c5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu Thu Jan 23 10:01:46 1997 From: unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu (Internaut) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:01:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: greed and the internet Message-ID: <199701231801.KAA21582@toad.com> Will you send some references for Internet II and the government hubs? Thx, Internaut ---------- From: Attila T. Hun[SMTP:attila at primenet.com] Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 1997 08.32 PM To: cypherpunks Subject: greed and the internet -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- greed and the internet our network provider (MCI) has been gradually burying our T1 trunk and the effective feed has been reduced to 1200 baud from 1.56 Megabaud; that, and add 20 seconds to 5+ minutes of packet hold, and it is now worthless. they claim they will have increased capacity, but there are no pressing big money commercial interests on this feeder --so when? Problem is not just here --everywhere; the greedy commercial bastards have oversold their network space intentionally as they are bucking for per packet and timed usage charges which are currently prohibited by the FCC and the state PUCs. The FCC is the key since other than the local network, which is burdened with the costs of the trunk, everything is regulated by the FCC which is trying to totally eliminate the state PUCs in the 105th Congress, Newt's mouth not withstanding. The FCC agreed to review the matter, capitulating to big greed interests, which will make the Internet a rich man's toy. $19.95/month plus access charges will increase to thousands of dollars per month; slow networks make toast of the free hours and overtime kills. Without the creative input of the multitude, there will be no content, so why have a net other than for commercial purposes? suites the misinformation cabal just fine. Well, the FCC granted a reprieve --for the moment. but will come up again, and again, until it passes. The Internet will no no longer be the peoples net, and the commercial greedies are establishing a faster, more secure network with controlled access points; leaving the common man's access in the mud, still paying the exorbitant rates on a pay before play basis. That, and it gives control of information to the government --which, as we all know. is 'heavenly white' -above sin. Universities are being bought off with the 'Internet II' proposal which provides super trunks of over 600 Megabaud capacity, a 400 times improvement. All of this feeds into five stategically placed super-hubs where Uncle's shadow government can monitor everything. The Internet was supposed to be our freedom: freedom of information and government in the sunshine, but government is proving it is still bigger, faster, and badder by using draconian rules of illegal regulatory agencies. agencies which are usurping rights limited to the legislative branch. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMubOW704kQrCC2kFAQE0gQQAxrkUhyX5wl+dZ/i6ajMJXAD7f+gpvc6Z CBik+g62RqWrMbOblfLRubhEIWUfK2FQxIBRJ+0cQezCH4IfM1CxbytJ4Cx3BBBs GwHGuhTfLnGVnuCAugguRdNUrd/tXaN47pAVqmg330XvLlTJqha8ODPsi2b+7qst 2z8qbOW0cqo= =M9c5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From asgaard at cor.sos.sll.se Thu Jan 23 10:12:48 1997 From: asgaard at cor.sos.sll.se (Asgaard) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:12:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701230212.SAA03079@toad.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: >The Web does not equal the Internet, straw man argument. A semantic comment: We here all know that this is right but it's obvious that the language is sliding towards Internet = Web. Most people using tcp/ip email don't think about this as using the Internet. Another list I'm on has recently set up a Hypermail site on the Web, mingling transparently with the list, for those who are overwhelmed by 100 posts a day (it's a proffessional list unrelated to computers per se). When people here about it they say: 'Wow, I didn't know you had access to the list on the Internet too!' It's treated the same on television, in the US as well as here in Sweden, Internet = Web and nothing else. It will be hard for us who have been around for a while, and to fresh computer litterates who know something of what's behind the screen, to relearn the use of the term 'Internet'. But we will eventually have to accept it or become 'dinosaurs', that's the way language evolution works. Asgaard From response at quantcom.com Thu Jan 23 10:16:12 1997 From: response at quantcom.com (CV Communications) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:16:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Add To Your Monthly Income!! Message-ID: <199701231702.MAA00757@slade.cvcom.net> The following message has been brought to you by Quantum Communications. If you would like advertising rates and information, send an email to info at quantcom.com or visit our website http://www.quantcom.com If you prefer NOT to receive promotional messages inthe future, send an email to remove at quantcom.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ADD $250.00 TO YOUR MONTHLY INCOME!!! ADD $250.00 TO YOUR MONTHLY INCOME WITHOUT SELLING AND KNOW YOU'LL WIN BEFORE YOU BEGIN!! Join a program that provides you with ALL THE TOOLS for success at NO COST TO YOU! *A FREE WEBPAGE *A FREE AUTORESPONDER *FREE SNAILMAILERS *FREE MAILING LABELS *FREE DOWNLINE BUILDING *FREE GENEOLOGY REPORTS *NO MEETINGS *NO INVENTORY *NO MAJOR INVESTMENT *NO GROUP VOLUME REQUIREMENTS *NO HASSLES! *NO SURPRISES! YOU WILL BE THE LOSER IF YOU FAIL TO CHECK THIS ONE OUT! IT REALLY IS THE BEST OPPORTUNITY AVAILABLE. IT NOT ONLY PROMISES, BUT ALSO DELIVERS. ON THE NET, EMAIL COST at QUANTCOM.COM FOR FULL DETAILS WITH NO ARM-TWISTING FROM ME. From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jan 23 10:34:56 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 10:34:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? Message-ID: <199701231237.MAA10676@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of days. I am assuming that this means that the list moderation has now started? - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Logic, not magic. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMuexAI9Co1n+aLhhAQGcIAQAkEhaPi0bljU274ZXgkjU3rXFmIrUS4dm OEm0CqTH0eGDYHyftEyGdwI8ibKukC9SVpgG8bzgKHP+O4tjXJN+afcVAHbTxaMy uVqxgsvOexUR0tFKVCQ7MySMwCyDudCSbsDgf8Ox2swISwmIOqaxwLrBF5DqDy9w G6JNq5gUruo= =hIV+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jan 23 11:41:12 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 11:41:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? Message-ID: <199701231941.LAA24236@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of days. I am assuming that this means that the list moderation has now started? - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Logic, not magic. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMuexAI9Co1n+aLhhAQGcIAQAkEhaPi0bljU274ZXgkjU3rXFmIrUS4dm OEm0CqTH0eGDYHyftEyGdwI8ibKukC9SVpgG8bzgKHP+O4tjXJN+afcVAHbTxaMy uVqxgsvOexUR0tFKVCQ7MySMwCyDudCSbsDgf8Ox2swISwmIOqaxwLrBF5DqDy9w G6JNq5gUruo= =hIV+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From asgaard at Cor.sos.sll.se Thu Jan 23 12:04:14 1997 From: asgaard at Cor.sos.sll.se (Asgaard) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 12:04:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701232004.MAA24813@toad.com> On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: >The Web does not equal the Internet, straw man argument. A semantic comment: We here all know that this is right but it's obvious that the language is sliding towards Internet = Web. Most people using tcp/ip email don't think about this as using the Internet. Another list I'm on has recently set up a Hypermail site on the Web, mingling transparently with the list, for those who are overwhelmed by 100 posts a day (it's a proffessional list unrelated to computers per se). When people here about it they say: 'Wow, I didn't know you had access to the list on the Internet too!' It's treated the same on television, in the US as well as here in Sweden, Internet = Web and nothing else. It will be hard for us who have been around for a while, and to fresh computer litterates who know something of what's behind the screen, to relearn the use of the term 'Internet'. But we will eventually have to accept it or become 'dinosaurs', that's the way language evolution works. Asgaard From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 23 12:53:18 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 12:53:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation (fwd) Message-ID: <199701232053.MAA26190@toad.com> At 05:20 PM 1/23/97 +1100, proff at suburbia.net wrote: ... >The catch is that positive votes are inherently more valuable than >negative votes, since to obstruct progress requires a number of votes >equal to the outstanding proposals, but to move forward a proposal only >requires a number of votes equal to the proposal. Blind obstructionism >(and blind advocacy) are uneconomical. That's the point of having >more than one vote to potentially spend on an issue, with potentially >more issues than you can vote on all of them. You will have to pick >you battles carefully if you want to avoid being lost in the noise. > Here you risk the media controlling the vote even better. First they push a tearjerker proposal early in the year to swallow up all of the votes, then they ask for special interest legislation to protect their respective monopolies on grounds of ecology, (one paper means more trees, one TV station means clearer communication, etc.) ... >For reciprocity, it's possible to charge off percentages in the >win/lose case to bias the power concentration: if your side wins, it >costs you one less token then you voted, etc.. Again, initial >bylaws are established through constitution provision: "we have the >power that is being shared, therefore, these are the weights". > ... This prompts people to vote with who they think will win as opposed to how they feel. In this case the media shows numerous charts showing a pending landslide in thier favor. What do you know, everyone voted in favor of the media just to recycle votes. ... >Heh. I was thinking more in terms of its value as a cascade trigger >to increasingly complex social organisms in the Internet implementation >space. Representational democracies (republics, really) came about >because of rate limits on communication. The US could not elect a >president by popular vote because there were no methods of verification, >and communication rates were limited by travel time. Therefore, the >US has an Electoral College. But a side effect of this structure is >a bias for bipartite seperation of interests, instead of seperation >into as many interest groups as it takes to do the job of mapping the >interest space. This bias is not removed because the bipartite >interests have (and must continue to have) the power concentration. >This leads to continued "wasted vote syndrome", where people vote >for the lesser of two evils instead of voting their conscience... an >effect of mass psychology. Similar pressures prevent the polling >times from being changed to opening at 8am EST and closing at 8am EST >to prevent early returns from earlier time zones influencing the >outcome of elections before people in later time zones have even voted. >For example, Ross Perot got almost 20% of the vote in the 1992 >election, but 0% of the electors. He would still have lost, given >the actual values. There is actually a case in US history where the >winner of the electoral vote lost the popular vote... the president >was not chosen by the people, but by the electors. ... Actually, our founding fathers thought that the people were morons, a reasonable assumption since news carried so slowly and most people were more worried about how to survive the winter than how to read. ... >Yep. The reason I went weighted, by the way, was the volunteer >nature of the project. In theory, number of vote tokens spent >should be proportional to willingness to actually volunteer. As >you point out, there could be feedback here as well: for instance, >if a proposal passes, if it is completed, the tokens spent on >the vote could be refunded to those who voted for it. If it dies >on the vine, the tokens could be refunded to those who voted >against it. Being right would give you more license to participate, >and being wrong would not, etc.. Again, a matter for the initial >bylaws. ... Not being right, just agreeing with the concensus. Remember that most of the Germans eventually agreed with Hitler, that did not make them right. By the way, the general populus is still mostly morons. Even with a higher literacy rate. Most of them seem to use it to read the National Enquirer and Hollywood based publications. From drose at azstarnet.com Thu Jan 23 13:07:12 1997 From: drose at azstarnet.com (drose at azstarnet.com) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:07:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? Message-ID: <199701232106.OAA27627@web.azstarnet.com> William H. Geiger III wrote: >I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of >days. Yup. Ditto Tim May. Fair trade? From rcgraves at disposable.com Thu Jan 23 13:12:47 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:12:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: greed and the internet In-Reply-To: <199701231801.KAA21582@toad.com> Message-ID: <32E7D3A3.4B2E@disposable.com> Internaut wrote: > > Will you send some references for Internet II and the government hubs? There is a www.internet2.edu -rich From rcgraves at disposable.com Thu Jan 23 13:56:09 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 13:56:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: greed and the internet Message-ID: <199701232156.NAA27696@toad.com> Internaut wrote: > > Will you send some references for Internet II and the government hubs? There is a www.internet2.edu -rich From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 23 14:32:14 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:32:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerical applications (was: Development and validation (fwd) Message-ID: <199701232232.OAA28577@toad.com> At 05:20 PM 1/23/97 +1100, proff at suburbia.net wrote: ... >The catch is that positive votes are inherently more valuable than >negative votes, since to obstruct progress requires a number of votes >equal to the outstanding proposals, but to move forward a proposal only >requires a number of votes equal to the proposal. Blind obstructionism >(and blind advocacy) are uneconomical. That's the point of having >more than one vote to potentially spend on an issue, with potentially >more issues than you can vote on all of them. You will have to pick >you battles carefully if you want to avoid being lost in the noise. > Here you risk the media controlling the vote even better. First they push a tearjerker proposal early in the year to swallow up all of the votes, then they ask for special interest legislation to protect their respective monopolies on grounds of ecology, (one paper means more trees, one TV station means clearer communication, etc.) ... >For reciprocity, it's possible to charge off percentages in the >win/lose case to bias the power concentration: if your side wins, it >costs you one less token then you voted, etc.. Again, initial >bylaws are established through constitution provision: "we have the >power that is being shared, therefore, these are the weights". > ... This prompts people to vote with who they think will win as opposed to how they feel. In this case the media shows numerous charts showing a pending landslide in thier favor. What do you know, everyone voted in favor of the media just to recycle votes. ... >Heh. I was thinking more in terms of its value as a cascade trigger >to increasingly complex social organisms in the Internet implementation >space. Representational democracies (republics, really) came about >because of rate limits on communication. The US could not elect a >president by popular vote because there were no methods of verification, >and communication rates were limited by travel time. Therefore, the >US has an Electoral College. But a side effect of this structure is >a bias for bipartite seperation of interests, instead of seperation >into as many interest groups as it takes to do the job of mapping the >interest space. This bias is not removed because the bipartite >interests have (and must continue to have) the power concentration. >This leads to continued "wasted vote syndrome", where people vote >for the lesser of two evils instead of voting their conscience... an >effect of mass psychology. Similar pressures prevent the polling >times from being changed to opening at 8am EST and closing at 8am EST >to prevent early returns from earlier time zones influencing the >outcome of elections before people in later time zones have even voted. >For example, Ross Perot got almost 20% of the vote in the 1992 >election, but 0% of the electors. He would still have lost, given >the actual values. There is actually a case in US history where the >winner of the electoral vote lost the popular vote... the president >was not chosen by the people, but by the electors. ... Actually, our founding fathers thought that the people were morons, a reasonable assumption since news carried so slowly and most people were more worried about how to survive the winter than how to read. ... >Yep. The reason I went weighted, by the way, was the volunteer >nature of the project. In theory, number of vote tokens spent >should be proportional to willingness to actually volunteer. As >you point out, there could be feedback here as well: for instance, >if a proposal passes, if it is completed, the tokens spent on >the vote could be refunded to those who voted for it. If it dies >on the vine, the tokens could be refunded to those who voted >against it. Being right would give you more license to participate, >and being wrong would not, etc.. Again, a matter for the initial >bylaws. ... Not being right, just agreeing with the concensus. Remember that most of the Germans eventually agreed with Hitler, that did not make them right. By the way, the general populus is still mostly morons. Even with a higher literacy rate. Most of them seem to use it to read the National Enquirer and Hollywood based publications. From response at quantcom.com Thu Jan 23 14:38:08 1997 From: response at quantcom.com (CV Communications) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:38:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Remarkable Income Opportunity!! Message-ID: <199701232122.QAA01742@slade.cvcom.net> The following message has been brought to you by Quantum Communications. If you would like advertising rates and information, send an email to info at quantcom.com or visit our website http://www.quantcom.com If you prefer NOT to receive promotional messages inthe future, send an email to remove at quantcom.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Dear fellow entrepreneur, This is a ONE TIME message, there's no need to "remove" your name . If you'll take 60 seconds, we promise you a brief overview of a remarkable income opportunity with no bull, no hype, and no fluff. You're going to hear about what many people believe to be THE BEST income opportunity on the planet today. Bar none. We like to think of this as THE THINKING PERSON'S home based business. But you be the judge. **OVER $300,000 in commissions being paid out DAILY, SIX DAYS PER WEEK! **OVER $100,000,000 in SALES in their first 14 months of business! **STRATEGIC ALLIANCES with two multi Billion Dollar World Leaders **FREE WEB SITE...SUPER SUPPORT TEAM...A TRUE GLOBAL INCOME OPPORTUNITY!! ** A LEGITIMATE HOME BASED BUSINESS FOR AS LITTLE AS $100 ONE TIME COST There are THOUSANDS of people already earning $500 to $5,000 weekly. And much more. Many people are earning over $50,000 monthly in less than 18 months. Naturally, this is not typical income. Maybe you're not a typical entrepreneur. The name of the company is Destiny Telecomm International. DTI is based in Oakland, CA. Destiny Telecomm is part of the multi trillion dollar market of global telecommunications. This industry is doubling every year world wide. DTI was launched July 4th, 1995. They are breaking all networking records. They produced their first $100,000,000 in sales in just 14 months. No network marketing company has ever come close to those numbers in over 50 years. DTI is now just 18 months old and with over 480,000 independent reps. They have now expanded to 31 countries. Their plans include over 100 countries. Destiny is a debt free company and highly regarded by Dun & Bradstreet. DTI owns their own 40,000 sf building and their own high-tech, state-of-the-art LNX4000 phone switches. Destiny has close to 300 full time staff. They offer customer service and enrollment services 24 hours per day. Their concept is simple and obviously very duplicatable. To become a representative, you make a ONE TIME purchase of for as little as $100. You get a collectible, prepaid phone card with 5 hours of time on it. The card allows you to place long distance calls from any touch tone phone to anywhere in the world without the use of credit cards, coins or third party billing. You simply share this concept with a minimum of two people. You are now permanently qualified to receive commissions. Naturally, your income will grow faster the more you continue to share the program. DTI pays commissions SIX DAYS A WEEK on unlimited depth in your organization. It can literally go on forever! There are NO FURTHER MONTHLY PURCHASE requirements nor is there is any inventory to carry or monthly quotas. There are some great additional products and services that are optional such as pagers, custom designed phone cards, discount residential or business service and low international calling rates. The RENAISSANCE SUCCESS TEAM is a passionate group of business people with high aspirations. We are committed to the SUCCESS of EVERY member of our group. We provide the tools and support to get you off to a fast and profitable start. And we don't just get you started, we are with you ALL THE WAY! We know the Internet will be an enormous factor in the promotion of Destiny. We have innovative marketing methods to help you build your income. DTI is a company with long term global vision. THIS OPPORTUNITY IS STILL IN ITS INFANCY! There's going to be many, many millions of dollars earned with this program. There will be a tremendous opportunity to travel the world, first class, marketing this program. We're looking for people who still believe in their dreams. We're looking for people who are teachable and willing to work. This business is FOR REAL. If you'll put in the time, this business can provide you ALL THE MONEY you've ever dreamed of. That's NOT a maybe, it's doing just that for thousands of people. Do YOU really want financial freedom? To find out more about Destiny, the compensation program, their products and services and the Destiny web site, E-MAIL OUR AUTO RESPONDER for an instant package of information. We'll also let you know how the RENAISSANCE SUCCESS TEAM works together as a support group. Do NOT reply to this message that you're reading. To get the information package you must activate our AUTO RESPONDER at destiny at quantcom.com_for an instant reply. Thank you. From mpj at csn.net Thu Jan 23 15:57:01 1997 From: mpj at csn.net (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 15:57:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: North American crypto site -- correction Message-ID: <199701232357.PAA00734@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Correction: the "front door" to the North American crypto site is http://www.sni.net/~mpj/usa/getcrypt.htm (the /usa was missing in in an earlier post) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.0 Personal Edition iQEVAgUBMuWW/W+Iqt/O4EnZAQHnSAgAmMNA1UcEsd8wTkLz50ayj16t8SCFnfLs y86ZwxUd0aD7PoyMwGXbr2KkY9E9/I+CQAf9P56DbxDSCWWPzZA0Tydy0Zb+yeH1 +hIoFYMJbWi4nj34B1OtiZeNW9QbWxqyD7CUu8gdaRncxM83tsFY9UAQd8+wyV3w IFyrT6MZj+WLNBh1IhzkKTSdJzNW1mool97hm2KHH/nVuSYtBiVixmeTXkyoB5NU NfesjceO9g0PrVl0jW7NE1kOCJteFI2AAEaAKVYLVYvgvEdGSUkO0DnAXzVFCGKv Eb7/Wk0S7YVEFgVfamxsHvu/PoofVnvXX92UtXPhcHmbobqANA/yfg== =2ZhX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Jesus Christ is coming back with power and glory! Are you READY? mailto:mpj at csn.net Bible site-> http://www.sni.net/~mpj Is 40:31 BBS 303-772-1062 PGPprint=3E67A5800DFBD16A 6D52D3A91C074E41 From daw at cs.berkeley.edu Thu Jan 23 15:58:41 1997 From: daw at cs.berkeley.edu (David Wagner) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 15:58:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Privacy-enhancing technologies for the Internet Message-ID: <199701232358.PAA00778@toad.com> Ian Goldberg, Eric Brewer, and I wrote a paper giving a high-level introduction to privacy-enhancing technologies for the Internet. Nothing terribly new, but it's about time this stuff made it past oral history and into the literature. To be presented at IEEE COMPCON '97 in February. The paper is available on the web. A html version is at http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daw/privacy-compcon97-www/privacy-html.html and there's a postscript version at http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daw/privacy-compcon97.ps Comments, critiques, and discussions are welcome. From emc at wire.insync.net Thu Jan 23 16:09:19 1997 From: emc at wire.insync.net (Eric Cordian) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:09:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Noise] From The Onion In-Reply-To: <199701231634.LAA07092@homeport.org> Message-ID: <199701240009.SAA02384@wire.insync.net> > SATAN TO REVISE BAR CODE SYSTEM [snip] Not to be outdone, Satan's major competitor, Choronzon, Chief Demonic Officer and only resident of the accursed 10th Aether of the Enochian System, today announced his own plans for a system to label his mortal followers and regulate their business transactions. "Stamping numbers on the foreheads and hands of individuals is primitive technology," Choronzon explained, snapping his barbed tail, and emitting a sulphurous plume. "We are pleased to announce our plans to identify our followers using digital watermarking technology licensed from RSA Data Security, Inc." Implementation of the scheme, which will involve the encoding of a subtle full-body pattern into each individual by surface ablation with high powered eximer lasers, will be managed by Choronzon's Supreme Legate to the Material World, Jim Bidzos. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jan 23 16:52:39 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 16:52:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: GOO_gol Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970124004734.006dc1a4@pop.pipeline.com> Richard Crandall, NeXT scientist, writes eloquently on large numbers in February SciAm. He cites cryptographic strength as one result of research on the gargantuan googol and googolplex. He reviews current work on sieve techniques for factorization -- Quadratic, Number Field, Elliptic Curve Method and others -- as well as advanced algorithms. And exclaims: Blaine Garst, Doug Mitchell, Avadis Tevanian, Jr., and I implemented at NeXT what is one of the strongest -- if not the strongest -- encryption schemes available today, based on Mersenne primes. This patented scheme, termed Fast Elliptic Encryption (FEE), uses the algebra of elliptic curves, and it is very fast. ----- GOO_gol Thanks to PJP for pointing. From steve at miranova.com Thu Jan 23 17:11:26 1997 From: steve at miranova.com (Steven L Baur) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:11:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd In-Reply-To: <199701231426.GAA15678@toad.com> Message-ID: snow writes: >> > Couple of things you can do: >> > 2. Install a more secure "fingerd" such that it only >> > allows "finger `userid at node.domain`" instead of >> > "finger `@node.domain`". > cfingerd can be gotten from: cfingerd is not a safe program. It must run as root, and has some big problems. Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 18:34:43 +0200 (MET DST) From: Janos Farkas To: Administrador da Rede cc: linux-security at tarsier.cv.nrao.edu Subject: Re: Finger Doubt Message-ID: Howdy people! On Tue, 17 Sep 1996, Administrador da Rede wrote: > I use the newest version of cfinger, setted to not allow general finger, just > specific ones. Does anyone knows how this person did that ? I hope I can > find out, otherwise, bye bye finger service. Badly. I have sent the author a letter, but never got any reply back (it's 3 months later now!), so I just take the opportunity to warn the public against its use. Excerpts from the source (1.2.3, older versions have been a bit more directly broken, now it has root privs only at the moments it shouldn't have.) "This daemon must be run as root!" [And unfortunately, does..] ... unlink ("/tmp/fslist"); ... sprintf(st, "%s | tail +2 >> /tmp/fslist", prog_config.finger_program); ... system(st); A similarly terrible one some lines later: system("cat /tmp/fslist | sort > /tmp/fslist.sort"); As it stands, it can allow any local user to destroy any file on the system, including partition tables on disks. Please someone correct me if I am wrong, I tried this with cfingerd-1.2.2 and it allowed me to do bad things. I was a bit disappointed by the lack of any reply from the author, so I think I am now justified to tell that if anyone installed cfingerd (about 1.1 or later) on his system, disable it IMMEDIATELY, until at least the author clarifies this bug in a new version. The current version is BAD. However if you just need a finger daemon, you may take a look at xfingerd, at ftp://ftp.banki.hu:/pub/xfingerd/xfingerd-0.1.tar.gz which is the one I wrote when I got desperate about cfingerd. (If you take a look at its date stamp, you can see that cfingerd is long broken..) I too can't garantee that it's good for you, but it at least doesn't require to be run as root, which is why I started being against cfingerd. I hope this note finds everyone concerned. Janos -- steve at miranova.com baur Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be billed at $250/message. Real men aren't afraid to use chains on icy roads. From camiseta at telnor.net Thu Jan 23 17:12:34 1997 From: camiseta at telnor.net (grupo textil glz ruelas) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:12:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: about the e-mails that im recibing Message-ID: <199701240109.RAA08232@telnor.net> Dir, cypher im recibing all your e-mails and i was wondering if you can do something abuot becouse to me all of this is pure yonk. so please do something and stop the e-mails im not a cypherpunk and i dont understan nothing you write ok see you. From Achieve1 at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 23 17:15:52 1997 From: Achieve1 at ix.netcom.com (Scott Marr) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:15:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Double Your Downline & Triple Your Income With 200 FREE MLM LEADS A Month !! Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970123184501.080f3d8a@popd.ix.netcom.com> Please Enlarge Your Window for Proper Viewing ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------- Our research indicates that the following information may be of interest to you. If it is not and you would like to be removed from future mailings, please press your reply button now and in the subject line enter: remove-leads ______________________________________________________________________________ Dear Network Marketing Professional: Stop wasting valuable time attempting to convert CONTACTS into PROSPECTS. It's a losing battle and there is a better way to find the people you need to build your business. Every week over 50,000 new people join a network marking business opportunity. Continue reading to learn how your organization can gain the competitive advantage needed for lasting success. Network marketing is a tremendous vehicle for achieving financial independence but just like the vehicle in your garage, it needs high octane fuel to perform at its best. By replying to: Infinity1 at airmail.net with HIGH OCTANE in the subject you will receive information that will prove to be rocket fuel for your MLM vehicle. You will learn of a company that can provide you and your down line with: * 200 pre-qualified, MLM-specific, fresh leads per month. * Instructions on how to obtain these valuable contacts absolutely FREE each and every month while earning a generous second or third income. * FREE VoiceMail with 10-minute outgoing and 50 incoming message capacity. * FREE 10-page Fax-On-Demand system. * Complete Network Marketing Training system containing good, solid advice with duplicatable techniques and procedures for success. Don't miss this chance to turbo charge your organization while you put some serious cash in your pocket. You'll be glad you did and so will your down line! To Your MLM Success, Scott Marr P.S. If I receive your request before the month ends, I will include an additional report containing valuable tips on how to improve the response rates of your direct mail and display advertising. From abostick at netcom.com Thu Jan 23 17:18:26 1997 From: abostick at netcom.com (Alan Bostick) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:18:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended consequences of the V-Chip, the programmable device to be included in next-generation television sets sold in the US that supposedly will allow parents to control their children's access to sex and violence on TV. Gladwell makes an analogy between V-Chipped TV content and air-conditioned cars in the New York City subway system in summertime: " . . . we need air-conditioners on subway cars because air-conditioners on subway cars have made stations so hot that subway cars need to be air-conditioned." Similarly, he argues, "the V-chip is likely to increase the amount of sex and violence on television, not decrease it" because when viewers can block offensive programming, there is far less pressure on broadcasters and cable operators to avoid offending. This is just the sort of thing that John Young is given to scanning and putting up on his Web site or sending out to people who send him email with FUN_nie subject lines. If I were him, I'd put it up. And, for the benefit of those people who don't think the V-Chip isn't in itself on-topic for cypherpunks, I might point out that Gladwell's argument applies equally well to mail filtering with procmail recipes -- or Sandy's and John's list moderation experiment. If the noise level on the unmoderated list jumps to even higher than we were seeing before the moderation began, that would provide observational support to Gladwell's argument. -- Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Thu Jan 23 17:31:32 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:31:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701240138.TAA10898@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:59:34 +0100 (MET) > From: Asgaard > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > >The Web does not equal the Internet, straw man argument. > > A semantic comment: > > We here all know that this is right but it's obvious that > the language is sliding towards Internet = Web. Most people Typical modern American attitude, getting it right is too much work so let's lower the benchmark so anyone can be 'right'. You'll be supporting Ebonics next. Blah. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Thu Jan 23 17:35:28 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:35:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701240142.TAA10917@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 02:58:41 -0800 > From: Toto > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > > If the people in those counties want to give away their freedom that > > is their business (and right), not mine, yours, or this countries unless > > there is evidence they are trying to take their views and impose them here. > > Right. And if someone 'chooses' to give their money to a thief with > a gun, then it is not the business of other people, or the police. > I would hate to interfere with someones 'right' to get robbed, > raped, or murdered. This is a perfect example of why we disagree. You feel society has the same responsibilities as an individual, I don't. Countries and societies are a tightly linked concept because man is a social animal. Trying to equate this to an individual who chooses to ignore the moral, ethical, and legal standards of their society is a non-sequiter. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From emc at wire.insync.net Thu Jan 23 17:37:12 1997 From: emc at wire.insync.net (Eric Cordian) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:37:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Noise] From The Onion Message-ID: <199701240137.RAA03221@toad.com> > SATAN TO REVISE BAR CODE SYSTEM [snip] Not to be outdone, Satan's major competitor, Choronzon, Chief Demonic Officer and only resident of the accursed 10th Aether of the Enochian System, today announced his own plans for a system to label his mortal followers and regulate their business transactions. "Stamping numbers on the foreheads and hands of individuals is primitive technology," Choronzon explained, snapping his barbed tail, and emitting a sulphurous plume. "We are pleased to announce our plans to identify our followers using digital watermarking technology licensed from RSA Data Security, Inc." Implementation of the scheme, which will involve the encoding of a subtle full-body pattern into each individual by surface ablation with high powered eximer lasers, will be managed by Choronzon's Supreme Legate to the Material World, Jim Bidzos. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law" From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jan 23 17:38:52 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:38:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: GOO_gol Message-ID: <199701240138.RAA03280@toad.com> Richard Crandall, NeXT scientist, writes eloquently on large numbers in February SciAm. He cites cryptographic strength as one result of research on the gargantuan googol and googolplex. He reviews current work on sieve techniques for factorization -- Quadratic, Number Field, Elliptic Curve Method and others -- as well as advanced algorithms. And exclaims: Blaine Garst, Doug Mitchell, Avadis Tevanian, Jr., and I implemented at NeXT what is one of the strongest -- if not the strongest -- encryption schemes available today, based on Mersenne primes. This patented scheme, termed Fast Elliptic Encryption (FEE), uses the algebra of elliptic curves, and it is very fast. ----- GOO_gol Thanks to PJP for pointing. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Thu Jan 23 17:55:54 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:55:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701240155.RAA03742@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:59:34 +0100 (MET) > From: Asgaard > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > >The Web does not equal the Internet, straw man argument. > > A semantic comment: > > We here all know that this is right but it's obvious that > the language is sliding towards Internet = Web. Most people Typical modern American attitude, getting it right is too much work so let's lower the benchmark so anyone can be 'right'. You'll be supporting Ebonics next. Blah. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Thu Jan 23 18:00:43 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:00:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701240200.SAA03843@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 02:58:41 -0800 > From: Toto > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > > If the people in those counties want to give away their freedom that > > is their business (and right), not mine, yours, or this countries unless > > there is evidence they are trying to take their views and impose them here. > > Right. And if someone 'chooses' to give their money to a thief with > a gun, then it is not the business of other people, or the police. > I would hate to interfere with someones 'right' to get robbed, > raped, or murdered. This is a perfect example of why we disagree. You feel society has the same responsibilities as an individual, I don't. Countries and societies are a tightly linked concept because man is a social animal. Trying to equate this to an individual who chooses to ignore the moral, ethical, and legal standards of their society is a non-sequiter. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From abostick at netcom.com Thu Jan 23 18:01:12 1997 From: abostick at netcom.com (Alan Bostick) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:01:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <199701240201.SAA03868@toad.com> In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended consequences of the V-Chip, the programmable device to be included in next-generation television sets sold in the US that supposedly will allow parents to control their children's access to sex and violence on TV. Gladwell makes an analogy between V-Chipped TV content and air-conditioned cars in the New York City subway system in summertime: " . . . we need air-conditioners on subway cars because air-conditioners on subway cars have made stations so hot that subway cars need to be air-conditioned." Similarly, he argues, "the V-chip is likely to increase the amount of sex and violence on television, not decrease it" because when viewers can block offensive programming, there is far less pressure on broadcasters and cable operators to avoid offending. This is just the sort of thing that John Young is given to scanning and putting up on his Web site or sending out to people who send him email with FUN_nie subject lines. If I were him, I'd put it up. And, for the benefit of those people who don't think the V-Chip isn't in itself on-topic for cypherpunks, I might point out that Gladwell's argument applies equally well to mail filtering with procmail recipes -- or Sandy's and John's list moderation experiment. If the noise level on the unmoderated list jumps to even higher than we were seeing before the moderation began, that would provide observational support to Gladwell's argument. -- Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick at netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick From steve at miranova.com Thu Jan 23 18:01:59 1997 From: steve at miranova.com (Steven L Baur) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:01:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd Message-ID: <199701240201.SAA03902@toad.com> snow writes: >> > Couple of things you can do: >> > 2. Install a more secure "fingerd" such that it only >> > allows "finger `userid at node.domain`" instead of >> > "finger `@node.domain`". > cfingerd can be gotten from: cfingerd is not a safe program. It must run as root, and has some big problems. Date: Wed, 18 Sep 1996 18:34:43 +0200 (MET DST) From: Janos Farkas To: Administrador da Rede cc: linux-security at tarsier.cv.nrao.edu Subject: Re: Finger Doubt Message-ID: Howdy people! On Tue, 17 Sep 1996, Administrador da Rede wrote: > I use the newest version of cfinger, setted to not allow general finger, just > specific ones. Does anyone knows how this person did that ? I hope I can > find out, otherwise, bye bye finger service. Badly. I have sent the author a letter, but never got any reply back (it's 3 months later now!), so I just take the opportunity to warn the public against its use. Excerpts from the source (1.2.3, older versions have been a bit more directly broken, now it has root privs only at the moments it shouldn't have.) "This daemon must be run as root!" [And unfortunately, does..] ... unlink ("/tmp/fslist"); ... sprintf(st, "%s | tail +2 >> /tmp/fslist", prog_config.finger_program); ... system(st); A similarly terrible one some lines later: system("cat /tmp/fslist | sort > /tmp/fslist.sort"); As it stands, it can allow any local user to destroy any file on the system, including partition tables on disks. Please someone correct me if I am wrong, I tried this with cfingerd-1.2.2 and it allowed me to do bad things. I was a bit disappointed by the lack of any reply from the author, so I think I am now justified to tell that if anyone installed cfingerd (about 1.1 or later) on his system, disable it IMMEDIATELY, until at least the author clarifies this bug in a new version. The current version is BAD. However if you just need a finger daemon, you may take a look at xfingerd, at ftp://ftp.banki.hu:/pub/xfingerd/xfingerd-0.1.tar.gz which is the one I wrote when I got desperate about cfingerd. (If you take a look at its date stamp, you can see that cfingerd is long broken..) I too can't garantee that it's good for you, but it at least doesn't require to be run as root, which is why I started being against cfingerd. I hope this note finds everyone concerned. Janos -- steve at miranova.com baur Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be billed at $250/message. Real men aren't afraid to use chains on icy roads. From brettc at tritro.com.au Thu Jan 23 18:32:15 1997 From: brettc at tritro.com.au (Brett Carswell) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:32:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Just another government fuckover: New crypto regulations Message-ID: >-----Original Message----- >From: Toto [SMTP:toto at sk.sympatico.ca] >Sent: Friday, January 24, 1997 12:29 AM >To: Attila T. Hun >Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com >Subject: Re: Just another government fuckover: New crypto regulations > >Attila T. Hun wrote: > >> free speech, which is what we are talking about. supposedly >> absolute freedom of speech in America was in the Articles of >> Confederation and was a major point of the Declaration of >> Independence. free speach was an "intention" of the Magna Carta. > >> ::> books are an intellectual 'solution' to the problem. the real >> ::>problem is the hardware. in order to negate governments and their >> ::>virtually stated intentions of blocking our inalienable freedoms, >> ::>particularly freedom of speach, we must be able to distribute >> ::>universal crypto worldwide, and be able to improve it as the shadow >> ::>governments of the various spook shows improve their ability to >> ::>break our code. > >Dear Mr. Hun, > I see that your post was expunged from the cypherpunks-politically- >correct-outgoing list. > I am assuming that it was as a result of linking crypto to free >speech. >Perhaps you need to fall more into line with the New List Order. > >Toto > >More likely 'grep dimitri ' From DataETRsch at aol.com Thu Jan 23 18:36:45 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 18:36:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... Message-ID: <970123175027_375471135@emout09.mail.aol.com> {If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} {UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you visited.} {UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate correctly.} {UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} {Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been added.} {UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} {UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} {UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} {This advertisement has also been modified.} Hello, Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. o Includes time and date locking features. o Includes file specific unique encryption features. o Includes file authentication guard features. o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed with popular application and database programming languages and environments such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you very much for your time. Sincerely, Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From reiter at research.att.com Thu Jan 23 19:12:40 1997 From: reiter at research.att.com (Mike Reiter) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 19:12:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: 4th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security Message-ID: <199701240309.WAA01239@radish.research.att.com> *** EARLY REGISTRATION DISCOUNT ENDS JANUARY 31 *** Fourth ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (Preliminary Technical Program) Zurich, Switzerland April 1-4, 1997 Sponsored by ACM SIGSAC For more information, including registration and hotel information, see: http://www.zurich.ibm.ch/pub/Other/ACMsec/index.html ================ TUESDAY, APRIL 1 ================ 4 half-day tutorials in two parallel tracks: Theory Track Practice Track Morning Cryptography CERT and Practical Network Security Jim Massey, Ueli Maurer Tom Longstaff (ETH Zurich) (Software Engineering Institute) lunch Afternoon Internet Security Info-Wars Refik Molva Paul Karger (Eurecom) (IBM TJ Watson) ================== WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2 ================== 09:00-09:30 Introduction and Opening Comments Richard Graveman (Bellcore) Phil Janson (IBM Zurich Lab) Li Gong (JavaSoft) Clifford Neuman (Univ. of Southern California) 09:30-10:30 Invited talk 1: To Be Announced 10:30-11:00 Coffee Break 11:00-12:00 Session 1: Fair Exchange of Information Chair: Philippe Janson (IBM Zurich Lab) * Fair Exchange with a Semi-Trusted Third Party Matthew Franklin, Mike Reiter (AT&T Research) * Optimistic Protocols for Fair Exchange N. Asokan, Matthias Schunter, Michael Waidner (IBM Zurich Lab and Univ. Dortmund) 12:00-14:00 Lunch 14:00-15:30 Session 2: Language and System Security Chair: Michael Waidner (IBM Zurich Lab) * Static Typing with Dynamic Linking Drew Dean (Princeton University) * Secure Digital Names Scott Stornetta, Stuart Haber (Surety Technologies) * A Calculus for Cryptographic Protocols: The Spi Calculus Martin Abadi, Andrew D. Gordon (DEC SRC and Cambridge) 15:30-16:00 Coffee Break 16:00-17:30 Panel 1: Programming Languages as a Basis for Security Chair: Drew Dean (Princeton) Panelists: To Be Announced Welcome Cocktail ================= THURSDAY, APRIL 3 ================= 09:00-10:30 Session 3: Authentication Chair: Ravi Sandhu (George Mason Univ.) * Authentication via Keystroke Dynamics Fabian Monrose, Avi Rubin (New York Univ. and Bellcore) * Path Independence for Authentication in Large-Scale Systems Mike Reiter, Stuart Stubblebine (AT&T Research) * Proactive Password Checking with Decision Trees Francesco Bergadano, Bruno Crispo, Giancarlo Ruffo (Univ. of Turin) 10:30-11:00 Coffee Break 11:00-12:00 Invited talk 2: To Be Announced 12:00-14:00 Lunch 14:00-15:30 Session 4: Signatures and Escrow Chair: Martin Abadi (DEC SRC) * Verifiable Partial Key Escrow Mihir Bellare, Shafi Goldwasser (UC San Diego and MIT) * New Blind Signatures Equivalent to Factorisation David Pointcheval, Jacques Stern (ENS/DMI, France) * Proactive Public-Key and Signature Schemes Markus Jakobsson, Stanislaw Jarecki, Amir Herzberg, Hugo Krawczyk, Moti Yung (UC San Diego, MIT, IBM Haifa Lab, IBM TJ Watson, and Bankers Trust) 15:30-16:00 Coffee Break 16:00-17:30 Panel 2: Persistance and Longevity of Digital Signatures Chair: Gene Tsudik (USC/ISI) Panelists: To Be Announced Banquet Dinner =============== FRIDAY, APRIL 4 =============== 09:00-10:30 Session 5: Commerce and Commercial Security Chair: Jacques Stern (ENS/DMI, France) * A New On-Line Cash Check Scheme Robert H. Deng, Yongfei Han, Albert B. Jeng, Teow-Hin Ngair (National University of Singapore) * Conditional Purchase Orders John Kelsey, Bruce Schneier (Counterpane Systems) * The Specification and Implementation of 'Commercial' Security Requirements including Dynamic Segregation of Duties Simon Foley (University College, Cork, Ireland) 10:30-11:00 Coffee Break 11:00-12:30 Session 6: Cryptography Chair: Mike Reiter (AT&T Research) * On the Importance of Securing Your Bins: The Garbage-Man-in-the-Middle Attack Marc Joye, Jean-Jacques Quisquater (Univ. Louvain) * Improved Security Bounds for Pseudorandom Permutations Jacques Patarin (Bull) * Asymmetric Fingerprinting for Larger Collusions Birgit Pfitzmann, Michael Waidner (Univ. Hildesheim and IBM Zurich Lab) 12:30 Conference Adjourns From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 23 19:14:14 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 19:14:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Decision in Karn Case In-Reply-To: <199701230501.AAA23419@dhp.com> Message-ID: lucifer at dhp.com (Anonymous) writes: > By the way, what exactly happend to D.J. Bernstein's and the EFF's > threat to seek an injunction from Judge Patel if the new regulations > were not put on hold subject to constitutional review by January 2? > No updates at www.eff.org. Did EFF strike another deal with the > government? EFF is a bunch of prostitutes, headed by the homosexual fascist Gilmore. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From wcampbel at peganet.com Thu Jan 23 19:52:54 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 19:52:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerce Sec. Hearings and Encryption Message-ID: <199701240344.WAA22520@mercury.peganet.com> toto at sk.sympatico.ca wrote: > Bill Campbell wrote: > > > > I have been watching the confirmation hearings for William Daley, > > and I was amazed at the number of references in the questioning > > to encryption. I have been watching confirmation hearings for a long > > time and have never noticed this much attention being placed on such > > a (formerly?) obscure topic. > > It certainly looks like someone is gearing up for a battle in regard > to cryto. > I find it very interesting that there would be a grand battle over > 'exporting' what is already freely available overseas (and always > will be, despite the export laws). This "freely available overseas" concept is a bit overstated. France and other countries are beginning to come down hard on encryption. (Also note the post from the guy in New Zealand on the hassles exporting from his country.) The US now has a "Crypto Ambassador" roaming the world, and I *don't* think he is encouraging an open common encryption standard. > I suppose that a cynic might > be led to believe that perhaps the anti-export champions' agenda > might be to make more convenient for the average joe to just > give in and accept weak, government approved crypto. Cynic or realist, you make the call. The average Joe doesn't even know *why* he needs encryption...at least not yet. =Bill= From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 23 20:11:06 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:11:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... In-Reply-To: <970123175027_375471135@emout09.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <199701240406.WAA07933@manifold.algebra.com> Mr. Ramos, You promised to release the algorithm of your program as well as crypto-relevant source code. You promised to do it atfer a month, and the time has come. We are eagerly awaiting the promised code. Thank you so much for your openness. igor DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > {If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} > {UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you > visited.} > {UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate > correctly.} > {UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} > {Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been > added.} > {UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} > {UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} > {UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} > {This advertisement has also been modified.} > > Hello, > > Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data > Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that > DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal > Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely > advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, > Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. > > UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... > > o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. > o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. > o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. > o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. > o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. > o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. > o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. > o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. > o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. > o Includes time and date locking features. > o Includes file specific unique encryption features. > o Includes file authentication guard features. > o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. > o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. > o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. > > UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed > with popular application and database programming languages and environments > such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo > Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. > > DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. > > To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: > http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. > > I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you > very much for your time. > > Sincerely, > > Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos > President > DataET Research > Data Engineering Technologies > - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 23 20:22:25 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:22:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? In-Reply-To: <199701232156.NAA27695@toad.com> Message-ID: drose at azstarnet.com writes: > William H. Geiger III wrote: > > >I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of > >days. > > Yup. Ditto Tim May. Fair trade? No. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 23 20:22:56 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:22:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701230640.WAA06684@toad.com> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > But think about this: suppose there is a couple, bob at household.com, > > and alice at household.com. Suppose that Rev. Mallory does not like bob. > > Mallory forges a lot of emails like "I can still taste your sperm > > on my lips", that appear to originate from Cindy at phonesex.org. > > Then, promptly, Mallory sends an anonymous alert to alice at household.com, > > warning her about naughty email activities of bob. Alice gets mad at him > > and divorces him. > > How would bob protect himself against such developments? > > Frame-ups are as old as time. The ones that work the best are those > that are the most believable. O.J., for example. Unless Alice is > unusually flaky or paranoid, she'll consider her options against the > time she has invested in Bob. Here's an interesting twist of Sandfort's moderation policy. My article was crypto-relevant and flame-free and was tossed to cypherpunks-flames. Igor's response to my article was also crypto-relevant and flame-free and was tossed to cypherpunks-flames. Dale's response did not quote me, so it made it to the censored list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 23 20:23:02 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:23:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? In-Reply-To: <199701231941.LAA24236@toad.com> Message-ID: "William H. Geiger III" writes: > I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of > days. > > I am assuming that this means that the list moderation has now started? Yes - anything I say is junked irrespective of content. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU Thu Jan 23 20:25:48 1997 From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. Allen Smith) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:25:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <01IEKJ7UWBPC9AMSTU@mbcl.rutgers.edu> From: IN%"abostick at netcom.com" "Alan Bostick" 23-JAN-1997 23:09:54.72 >In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by >Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended >consequences of the V-Chip, the programmable device to be included in >next-generation television sets sold in the US that supposedly will >allow parents to control their children's access to sex and violence on >TV. >Gladwell makes an analogy between V-Chipped TV content and >air-conditioned cars in the New York City subway system in summertime: >" . . . we need air-conditioners on subway cars because air-conditioners >on subway cars have made stations so hot that subway cars need to be >air-conditioned." Similarly, he argues, "the V-chip is likely to >increase the amount of sex and violence on television, not decrease it" >because when viewers can block offensive programming, there is far less >pressure on broadcasters and cable operators to avoid offending. Personally, I'd view this as a positive development. The puritanical types will be busily still protesting it, but without so many parents who (falsely) believe their children will be harmed by exposure to sex, thus dividing their efforts. Normally one would think that advertisers et al might give in to a small number... but advertisers particularly suceptible to this won't be sponsoring anything but G-rated shows anyway. (Of course, I view the V-chip itself as a bad thing, but if it has an outcome opposite in at least _some_ ways to the one intended by the neo-puritans, I can see the silver lining.) >And, for the benefit of those people who don't think the V-Chip isn't in >itself on-topic for cypherpunks, I might point out that Gladwell's >argument applies equally well to mail filtering with procmail recipes -- >or Sandy's and John's list moderation experiment. If the noise level on >the unmoderated list jumps to even higher than we were seeing before >the moderation began, that would provide observational support to >Gladwell's argument. An interesting question... although I'd point out that the degree of social pressure against spamming et al appears to be ineffective. The herd-like public (referring to the parents with their foolish fears and anyone else brainwashed into believing the puritans/fundamentalists) can put pressure on with their buying patterns... as yet such a market system is lacking in mailing lists (except for putting people on filter lists, which probably exacerbates the problem). In other words, there is no particular reason for the spammers et al to desist even if people _are_ receiving their email. -Allen From brettc at tritro.com.au Thu Jan 23 20:32:44 1997 From: brettc at tritro.com.au (Brett Carswell) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:32:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? Message-ID: >drose at azstarnet.com writes: > >> William H. Geiger III wrote: >> >> >I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple >>of >> >days. >> >> Yup. Ditto Tim May. Fair trade? > >It's all part of Dr Dimitri's social experiment. Create two personalities who >appear to hate each other but are the same person. Watch out for the upcoming >series.... > Dimitri L[abia] Vulis styles his facial hair to look more like pubic hair. o o --/-- <~\ Dimitri L[abia] Vulis __\ _/\ \ / > > From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Thu Jan 23 20:36:40 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:36:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? In-Reply-To: <199701231941.LAA24236@toad.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 23 Jan 1997, William H. Geiger III wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of > days. > > I am assuming that this means that the list moderation has now started? > Actually, rumor has it that he landed a paying job designing ASCII art. ;) -r.w. From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 23 20:39:06 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:39:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701240432.WAA08250@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitry Vulius K.O.T.M. wrote: > Dale Thorn writes: > > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Dr.D. Vulius K.O.T.M. wrote: > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > But think about this: suppose there is a couple, bob at household.com, > > > and alice at household.com. Suppose that Rev. Mallory does not like bob. > > > Mallory forges a lot of emails like "I can still taste your sperm > > > on my lips", that appear to originate from Cindy at phonesex.org. > > > Then, promptly, Mallory sends an anonymous alert to alice at household.com, > > > warning her about naughty email activities of bob. Alice gets mad at him > > > and divorces him. > > > How would bob protect himself against such developments? > > > > Frame-ups are as old as time. The ones that work the best are those > > that are the most believable. O.J., for example. Unless Alice is > > unusually flaky or paranoid, she'll consider her options against the > > time she has invested in Bob. > > Here's an interesting twist of Sandfort's moderation policy. > > My article was crypto-relevant and flame-free and was tossed to > cypherpunks-flames. > > Igor's response to my article was also crypto-relevant and flame-free > and was tossed to cypherpunks-flames. > > Dale's response did not quote me, so it made it to the censored list. Is it really true that my response was tossed out as flames? It was crypto-relevant. BTW, this is a more than perfect illustration why rejections based on "shitstrings" are completely inappropriate for moderating. I have nothing again "grey lists", when moderators are alerted when a message containing certain suspicious word arrives (the way it's done in STUMP), but am opposed to autorejections (unless mods are mailbombed). - Igor. From KALLISTE at delphi.com Thu Jan 23 20:45:06 1997 From: KALLISTE at delphi.com (KALLISTE at delphi.com) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:45:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Changing the Currency Message-ID: <01IEKH3H68GO9AMI9C@delphi.com> 3 Changing the Currency by J. Orlin Grabbe Lemme get this straight. You left home and went to one of them foreign places, got a handful of their money, and it felt like "play money"? But you could still use it in a restaurant, train station, or at the newsstand, right? Okay. But you say it still somehow felt "unreal", and you never were able to shake off that "monopoly money" mind set? Hmmm. Why is that? An American in Paris who gets a 100-franc note with Eugene Delacroix's picture on it, often finds it doesn't kick ass like the US one-dollar bill with George Washington's picture. The Parisian, on the other hand, may feel that the watersnip on the 100-guilder note looks downright ridiculous, while denizens of Amsterdam might prefer the bird image to Sir Donald Sangster's ugly face on the Jamaican hundred dollar bill. The Swiss 50-franc note depicting Konrad Gessner (1516-1565) doesn't say anything about "In God We Trust," but on the other hand it doesn't display the obnoxious "Counterfeiters will be Prosecuted" found on the Russian 100-ruble note (vintage 1993). Money is funny. That's why more than ten years ago when the Federal Reserve was thinking of changing the US currency, it formed focus groups in an attempt to gauge public reaction. It had a company called Market Facts go mall-trolling for potential participants. They went to the Seaview Square Mall in Ocean, New Jersey; the Buena Park Mall in Orange County, California; the Eastland Mall in Charlotte, North Carolina; and the Fox Valley Center in Aurora, Illinois. The report is entitled "Reactions to U.S. Currency Redesign: Analysis of Focus Group Discussions," and was submitted to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System on September 21, 1983. The discussions were recorded, and- -to make sure every bit of information was properly gleaned--groups were also observed in a conference room through a one-way mirror. In general the groups stated that while they did not care about the appearance of money, "they argued not to change it. There was considerable concern that our money would look 'fake' or 'foreign.' Participants also wanted to know why the government would want to change the appearance of the currency." The groups were divided into two categories: "General Public" and "Heavy Currency Handlers". Someone who took orders at McDonald's would fall into the Heavy Currency Handler category. The later groups were strongly of the opinion that money was "dirty"--not in the Michael Sindona sense of turning "dirty" money into "clean" money--but rather in the "dirty," "shabby," "shoddy," and "worn" sense. Some said the US currency was the dirtiest in the world. By contrast, a person in one of the General Public groups noted that money has "the denomination on all four corners." Some of the Heavy Currency Handlers thought it might be a neat idea to have different colors for the different denominations, to make it easier to make change. But more frequently it was remarked that "people don't like change" or "the government should leave well-enough alone." Today we know that the real rationale for currency change is to make the currency detectable by currency-detection equipment in airports (and possibly other places)-- in order to detect money launderers or anyone else carrying large amounts of currency. But the publicly- stated rationale is the misleading "prevention of counterfeiting." In this light, it is interesting that numerous questions were directed at attitudes toward counterfeiting. Many of the group participants thought counterfeiting was a serious problem, but "the majority wanted to know how much counterfeiting actually costs the public each year before taking a position on whether or not currency should be changed." None of the participants admitting to any inclination to actually counterfeit money themselves, even if they could do so without detection, but about half of them said they would pass along counterfeit bills if they received them. The other half thought that passing bogus bills would be morally wrong. But not all of the latter would "turn in bogus bills to the authorities. A few participants recounted stories of persons being hounded by the FBI to recall where they received the counterfeit bill--viewed as a deterrent to reporting counterfeit bills. This group opted, rather, to quietly destroy the bill and take the loss." The report concludes that a Counterfeiting Threat should be used to sell the idea of currency changes: "The extent of counterfeiting and, thus, the importance of adopting a new form of currency must be widely publicized. Without precise knowledge of the severity of the problem the public may assume that the benefits of adopting new money do not outweight the costs." The report doesn't mention any special information discovered by observations made through the one-way glass. January 23, 1997 Web Page: http://www.aci.net/kalliste/ From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Thu Jan 23 20:47:49 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (fuck you) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 20:47:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <19970123.234607.13718.0.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> If anyone has any text files on the following topics please send them. I have many files if any one else needs them. PGP Making decryption tools Anarchy Satan Anything underground From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 23 22:41:51 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:41:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? Message-ID: <199701240641.WAA12137@toad.com> "William H. Geiger III" writes: > I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of > days. > > I am assuming that this means that the list moderation has now started? Yes - anything I say is junked irrespective of content. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From wcampbel at peganet.com Thu Jan 23 22:42:27 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:42:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerce Sec. Hearings and Encryption Message-ID: <199701240642.WAA12178@toad.com> toto at sk.sympatico.ca wrote: > Bill Campbell wrote: > > > > I have been watching the confirmation hearings for William Daley, > > and I was amazed at the number of references in the questioning > > to encryption. I have been watching confirmation hearings for a long > > time and have never noticed this much attention being placed on such > > a (formerly?) obscure topic. > > It certainly looks like someone is gearing up for a battle in regard > to cryto. > I find it very interesting that there would be a grand battle over > 'exporting' what is already freely available overseas (and always > will be, despite the export laws). This "freely available overseas" concept is a bit overstated. France and other countries are beginning to come down hard on encryption. (Also note the post from the guy in New Zealand on the hassles exporting from his country.) The US now has a "Crypto Ambassador" roaming the world, and I *don't* think he is encouraging an open common encryption standard. > I suppose that a cynic might > be led to believe that perhaps the anti-export champions' agenda > might be to make more convenient for the average joe to just > give in and accept weak, government approved crypto. Cynic or realist, you make the call. The average Joe doesn't even know *why* he needs encryption...at least not yet. =Bill= From DataETRsch at aol.com Thu Jan 23 22:42:38 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:42:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... Message-ID: <199701240642.WAA12217@toad.com> {If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} {UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you visited.} {UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate correctly.} {UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} {Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been added.} {UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} {UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} {UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} {This advertisement has also been modified.} Hello, Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. o Includes time and date locking features. o Includes file specific unique encryption features. o Includes file authentication guard features. o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed with popular application and database programming languages and environments such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you very much for your time. Sincerely, Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU Thu Jan 23 22:42:41 1997 From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. Allen Smith) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:42:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <199701240642.WAA12222@toad.com> From: IN%"abostick at netcom.com" "Alan Bostick" 23-JAN-1997 23:09:54.72 >In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by >Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended >consequences of the V-Chip, the programmable device to be included in >next-generation television sets sold in the US that supposedly will >allow parents to control their children's access to sex and violence on >TV. >Gladwell makes an analogy between V-Chipped TV content and >air-conditioned cars in the New York City subway system in summertime: >" . . . we need air-conditioners on subway cars because air-conditioners >on subway cars have made stations so hot that subway cars need to be >air-conditioned." Similarly, he argues, "the V-chip is likely to >increase the amount of sex and violence on television, not decrease it" >because when viewers can block offensive programming, there is far less >pressure on broadcasters and cable operators to avoid offending. Personally, I'd view this as a positive development. The puritanical types will be busily still protesting it, but without so many parents who (falsely) believe their children will be harmed by exposure to sex, thus dividing their efforts. Normally one would think that advertisers et al might give in to a small number... but advertisers particularly suceptible to this won't be sponsoring anything but G-rated shows anyway. (Of course, I view the V-chip itself as a bad thing, but if it has an outcome opposite in at least _some_ ways to the one intended by the neo-puritans, I can see the silver lining.) >And, for the benefit of those people who don't think the V-Chip isn't in >itself on-topic for cypherpunks, I might point out that Gladwell's >argument applies equally well to mail filtering with procmail recipes -- >or Sandy's and John's list moderation experiment. If the noise level on >the unmoderated list jumps to even higher than we were seeing before >the moderation began, that would provide observational support to >Gladwell's argument. An interesting question... although I'd point out that the degree of social pressure against spamming et al appears to be ineffective. The herd-like public (referring to the parents with their foolish fears and anyone else brainwashed into believing the puritans/fundamentalists) can put pressure on with their buying patterns... as yet such a market system is lacking in mailing lists (except for putting people on filter lists, which probably exacerbates the problem). In other words, there is no particular reason for the spammers et al to desist even if people _are_ receiving their email. -Allen From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 23 22:42:44 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:42:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... Message-ID: <199701240642.WAA12223@toad.com> Mr. Ramos, You promised to release the algorithm of your program as well as crypto-relevant source code. You promised to do it atfer a month, and the time has come. We are eagerly awaiting the promised code. Thank you so much for your openness. igor DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > {If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} > {UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you > visited.} > {UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate > correctly.} > {UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} > {Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been > added.} > {UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} > {UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} > {UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} > {This advertisement has also been modified.} > > Hello, > > Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data > Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that > DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal > Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely > advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, > Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. > > UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... > > o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. > o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. > o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. > o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. > o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. > o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. > o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. > o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. > o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. > o Includes time and date locking features. > o Includes file specific unique encryption features. > o Includes file authentication guard features. > o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. > o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. > o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. > > UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed > with popular application and database programming languages and environments > such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo > Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. > > DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. > > To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: > http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. > > I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you > very much for your time. > > Sincerely, > > Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos > President > DataET Research > Data Engineering Technologies > - Igor. From reiter at research.att.com Thu Jan 23 22:42:46 1997 From: reiter at research.att.com (Mike Reiter) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 22:42:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: 4th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security Message-ID: <199701240642.WAA12224@toad.com> *** EARLY REGISTRATION DISCOUNT ENDS JANUARY 31 *** Fourth ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security (Preliminary Technical Program) Zurich, Switzerland April 1-4, 1997 Sponsored by ACM SIGSAC For more information, including registration and hotel information, see: http://www.zurich.ibm.ch/pub/Other/ACMsec/index.html ================ TUESDAY, APRIL 1 ================ 4 half-day tutorials in two parallel tracks: Theory Track Practice Track Morning Cryptography CERT and Practical Network Security Jim Massey, Ueli Maurer Tom Longstaff (ETH Zurich) (Software Engineering Institute) lunch Afternoon Internet Security Info-Wars Refik Molva Paul Karger (Eurecom) (IBM TJ Watson) ================== WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2 ================== 09:00-09:30 Introduction and Opening Comments Richard Graveman (Bellcore) Phil Janson (IBM Zurich Lab) Li Gong (JavaSoft) Clifford Neuman (Univ. of Southern California) 09:30-10:30 Invited talk 1: To Be Announced 10:30-11:00 Coffee Break 11:00-12:00 Session 1: Fair Exchange of Information Chair: Philippe Janson (IBM Zurich Lab) * Fair Exchange with a Semi-Trusted Third Party Matthew Franklin, Mike Reiter (AT&T Research) * Optimistic Protocols for Fair Exchange N. Asokan, Matthias Schunter, Michael Waidner (IBM Zurich Lab and Univ. Dortmund) 12:00-14:00 Lunch 14:00-15:30 Session 2: Language and System Security Chair: Michael Waidner (IBM Zurich Lab) * Static Typing with Dynamic Linking Drew Dean (Princeton University) * Secure Digital Names Scott Stornetta, Stuart Haber (Surety Technologies) * A Calculus for Cryptographic Protocols: The Spi Calculus Martin Abadi, Andrew D. Gordon (DEC SRC and Cambridge) 15:30-16:00 Coffee Break 16:00-17:30 Panel 1: Programming Languages as a Basis for Security Chair: Drew Dean (Princeton) Panelists: To Be Announced Welcome Cocktail ================= THURSDAY, APRIL 3 ================= 09:00-10:30 Session 3: Authentication Chair: Ravi Sandhu (George Mason Univ.) * Authentication via Keystroke Dynamics Fabian Monrose, Avi Rubin (New York Univ. and Bellcore) * Path Independence for Authentication in Large-Scale Systems Mike Reiter, Stuart Stubblebine (AT&T Research) * Proactive Password Checking with Decision Trees Francesco Bergadano, Bruno Crispo, Giancarlo Ruffo (Univ. of Turin) 10:30-11:00 Coffee Break 11:00-12:00 Invited talk 2: To Be Announced 12:00-14:00 Lunch 14:00-15:30 Session 4: Signatures and Escrow Chair: Martin Abadi (DEC SRC) * Verifiable Partial Key Escrow Mihir Bellare, Shafi Goldwasser (UC San Diego and MIT) * New Blind Signatures Equivalent to Factorisation David Pointcheval, Jacques Stern (ENS/DMI, France) * Proactive Public-Key and Signature Schemes Markus Jakobsson, Stanislaw Jarecki, Amir Herzberg, Hugo Krawczyk, Moti Yung (UC San Diego, MIT, IBM Haifa Lab, IBM TJ Watson, and Bankers Trust) 15:30-16:00 Coffee Break 16:00-17:30 Panel 2: Persistance and Longevity of Digital Signatures Chair: Gene Tsudik (USC/ISI) Panelists: To Be Announced Banquet Dinner =============== FRIDAY, APRIL 4 =============== 09:00-10:30 Session 5: Commerce and Commercial Security Chair: Jacques Stern (ENS/DMI, France) * A New On-Line Cash Check Scheme Robert H. Deng, Yongfei Han, Albert B. Jeng, Teow-Hin Ngair (National University of Singapore) * Conditional Purchase Orders John Kelsey, Bruce Schneier (Counterpane Systems) * The Specification and Implementation of 'Commercial' Security Requirements including Dynamic Segregation of Duties Simon Foley (University College, Cork, Ireland) 10:30-11:00 Coffee Break 11:00-12:30 Session 6: Cryptography Chair: Mike Reiter (AT&T Research) * On the Importance of Securing Your Bins: The Garbage-Man-in-the-Middle Attack Marc Joye, Jean-Jacques Quisquater (Univ. Louvain) * Improved Security Bounds for Pseudorandom Permutations Jacques Patarin (Bull) * Asymmetric Fingerprinting for Larger Collusions Birgit Pfitzmann, Michael Waidner (Univ. Hildesheim and IBM Zurich Lab) 12:30 Conference Adjourns From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Thu Jan 23 23:12:16 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (fuck you) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 23:12:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701240712.XAA13326@toad.com> If anyone has any text files on the following topics please send them. I have many files if any one else needs them. PGP Making decryption tools Anarchy Satan Anything underground From sandfort at crl.com Thu Jan 23 23:13:38 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 23:13:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701240432.WAA08250@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > Is it really true that my response was tossed out as flames? a) NO posts have been "tossed out." Your response was sorted into the "flames" list--not because it flamed directly, but because it was part of the threat started by Dimitri in which he engaged in flaming. b) While I realize this is a judgment call that others might dispute, I don't think it makes much sense to post to the moderated list only the parts of threads that are not flamish. I would rather keep thread intact on one list or the other. There are exceptions. I put one of Dimitri's post on this thread into the moderated list because the point he made did not require particular knowledge of the entire thread and had non-inflamatory relevance. > It was crypto-relevant. Perhaps, but crypto-relevance is NOT the criterion by which I am moderating the list. I am sort on the basis of (a) emotional, non-relevant personal attacks on list members, and (b) spam. I believe (and so far the postings have borne me out) that in an atmosphere of civil, reasoned discourse, the relevance issue will largely take care of itself. By the way, contrary to what Dimitri has alleged, I have posted every message from him in which he was able to restrain himself with regard to gratuitous insults and/or spam. In other words, the set of Dimitri posts that have appeared on the moderated list is not the null set. By the way number two, this response will be posted to the flames list and NOT the moderated list. Even though I have not flamed anyone, two things keep it off the moderated list: (1) my policy about keeping thread on the same list where possible (see above), and (2) basic precepts of fairness. Though Dimitri has stated-- without a scintilla of evidence--that my moderation policy would be used to attack him and not give him the opportunity or forum to defend himself, I am keeping ALL personal attacks off the moderated list. Those who are subscribed to the "flam" postings can see numerous unkind posts about Dimitri that I have not allowed on the moderated list. That policy applies to me just as much as to anyone else. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Thu Jan 23 23:19:02 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 23:19:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Degausser Message-ID: <199701240719.AAA18312@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> When Timmy `C' May's mother gave birth to him after fucking with a bunch of sailors, she didn't know who the father was but decided to tell him that he was a Russian as the Russian sailor was the one who satisfied her the most. /~~~\ {-O^O-} Timmy `C' May \ o / (-) From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 23 23:37:58 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 23:37:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701240733.BAA10190@manifold.algebra.com> I would like to start a thread to discuss the moderation and rejection policy. My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames mailing list. You can receive a copy of my article by an email request. The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including its quoted part. Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy the current readership. - Igor. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 00:11:13 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 00:11:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerce Sec. Hearings and Encryption In-Reply-To: <199701240344.WAA22520@mercury.peganet.com> Message-ID: <32E88046.427C@sk.sympatico.ca> Bill Campbell wrote: > > toto at sk.sympatico.ca wrote: > > Bill Campbell wrote: > This "freely available overseas" concept is a bit overstated. > France and other countries are beginning to come down hard > on encryption. True. Perhaps I should have said "freely available, but it might cost you more than you expect." > Cynic or realist, you make the call. The average Joe > doesn't even know *why* he needs encryption...at least > not yet. The average joe is quickly becoming aware of the issue of data security (and therefore being exposed to the 'concept' of encryption as something that will impact his life). Of course, this is coming about as a result of commercial pressures to make him feel safe about handing over his Visa number, etc. To me, this indicates that this is the opportune time to inject a deeper level of understanding into the issue of crypto, at a time when the average joe has his attention directed toward the crypto arena. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 00:11:19 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 00:11:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701240138.TAA10898@einstein> Message-ID: <32E8846B.3E52@sk.sympatico.ca> Jim Choate wrote: > Typical modern American attitude, getting it right is too much work so let's > lower the benchmark so anyone can be 'right'. Are you referring to the CypherPunks 'censored' list? Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 00:11:30 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 00:11:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip In-Reply-To: <01IEKJ7UWBPC9AMSTU@mbcl.rutgers.edu> Message-ID: <32E88A09.18BA@sk.sympatico.ca> > From: IN%"abostick at netcom.com" "Alan Bostick" 23-JAN-1997 23:09:54.72 > > >In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by > >Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended > >consequences of the V-Chip I noticed that when my nephews buy video games, the first ones they check out are the ones plastered with the 'protective' ratings-symbols that proclaim that the game is the 'baddest of the bad' in terms of violence, etc. Thanks to the violence-rating system, they no longer have to waste time checking out 'dweeb' programs that contain absolutely no blood and gore. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 00:11:31 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 00:11:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? In-Reply-To: <199701231237.MAA10676@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: <32E8875D.5392@sk.sympatico.ca> William H. Geiger III wrote: > I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of > days. > > I am assuming that this means that the list moderation has now started? Yes. No postings from John Gilmore on the cypherpunks-censored list either, lately. I guess Sandy's not putting up with his crap anymore, as well. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 00:13:11 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 00:13:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E8884C.44B9@sk.sympatico.ca> Alan Bostick wrote: > And, for the benefit of those people who don't think the V-Chip isn't in > itself on-topic for cypherpunks, I might point out... Alan, Good idea to 'explain' yourself, in case 'they' are watching. One can never be too careful when the crypto-censors are lurking in the background. Toto From krenn at nym.alias.net Fri Jan 24 00:39:52 1997 From: krenn at nym.alias.net (Krenn) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 00:39:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before... Message-ID: <19970124083945.20833.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > {If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} > {UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you > visited.} > {UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate > correctly.} > {UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} > {Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been > added.} > {UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} > {UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} > {UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} > {This advertisement has also been modified.} Well halellujah. > Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data > Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that > DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal > Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely > advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, > Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. > > UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... OH! OF COURSE! IMDMP! COOL!! > > o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. > o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. WOW!! 150!!! > o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. > o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. Of course, who doesn't?! > o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. > o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. 18?! HOLY COW!! > o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. What a breakthrough! Astounding!! > o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. > o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. Of course not, it's IMDMP!! > o Includes time and date locking features. > o Includes file specific unique encryption features. Specific unique encryption features!! NO WAY!! COOL!!! > o Includes file authentication guard features. > o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. > o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. Of course, everyone knows the public key cryptosystem method is the best! Excellent! > o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. > > UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed > with popular application and database programming languages and environments > such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo > Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. > > DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. Hey, v2.0, neat name, where'd you come up with it?! > > To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: > http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. AOL!! Oh YES! Cool! > > I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you > very much for your time. Oh most certainly! I'm gonna run out and implement EVERYTHING in UDCM!! Thanks man!! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMuhyVUnqfwPpt/QVAQFM4wQAymizJEI/F5SFcWILNfGNoIsxxYza6Bfo yadEF9BnlcXujq0ZFZiRv7SddXjTS5TgVZLutZdEIx/NYPESkH7MXh18CyI/EXo6 NSyAiE0pFFRIrAgV4FWVVS9jsTWKucfI7NbWKSLEWTK8e6fdywAlXzlvbPT+1v6C b4vWK4akrBs= =74mf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From gbroiles at netbox.com Fri Jan 24 00:44:16 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 00:44:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970124004457.006b77b8@mail.io.com> At 04:57 PM 1/23/97 -0800, Alan Bostick wrote: >In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by >Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended >consequences of the V-Chip, the programmable device to be included in >next-generation television sets sold in the US that supposedly will >allow parents to control their children's access to sex and violence on >TV. While I think it's always useful to consider unintended (or otherwise unexpected) consequences, Gladwell's argument sent a shiver down my spine with its shameless paternalism. This bit (from roughly the middle of his piece) is what I found creepiest: "According to one recent study, somewhere between twenty and twenty-seven per cent of the parents of four-to six-year-olds never restrict their children's viewing hours, never decide what programs they can watch, never change the channel when something objectionable comes on, and never forbid the watching of certain programs. It has apparently never occurred to these parents that television can be a bad influence, and it strains credulity to think that the advent of the V-chip is going to wake them up. Yet their families - mainly lower-income, ill-educated - are the very ones most in need of protection from television violence. Here is a rearranging effect with a vengeance: not only does the V-chip make television worse, it makes television worse precisely for those already most vulnerable to its excesses." I understood Gladwell's point to be, in essence, that the V-chip will allow TV producers to generate higher levels of morally impure content which he fears will pollute the minds of poor children because their parents are too stupid to protect them from the harmful content and too poor to buy new televisions which will include V-chips. While I think 95% of broadcast TV is crap which isn't worth the time expended watching it, even reading arguments like "poor people should be protected from harmful ideas they're too stupid (or too poorly educated) to avoid and too poor to purchase protection from" makes me feel dirty. I don't think Gladwell is, in any meaningful way, an opponent of government control of speech/expression - he's just an opponent of inefficient or optional forms of government control of speech/expression. He's a reasonable writer, but he's chosen to use his powers for evil instead of for good. (Some of his work is available on the web; apparently he once worked as a reporter for the Washington Post and is now on the staff of the New Yorker.) -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From attila at primenet.com Fri Jan 24 01:50:52 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 01:50:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: seeds of our own destruction In-Reply-To: <32E72BCB.3CBA@deltanet.com> Message-ID: <199701240950.CAA01462@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <32E72BCB.3CBA at deltanet.com>, on 01/23/97 at 01:13 AM, Kevin Stephenson said: +You wrote some very interesting articles. It is the UN. if you want a real scare, read the UN "world constitution" on human rights and privacy --their idea of a Bill of Rights. It just happens that it is virtually word for word equivalent to the mainland Chinese "rights" -in other words: rights as long as they are consistent with the aims of the state (UN) and the security needs of the state at the given moment. ...and the UN is to be granted overall sovereignity by virtue of the right to unilateraly tax its 'member' states, and not necessarily in an equitable fashion. to put it in context, it is clearly the havenots reducing everyone to the status of havenot; there will be no others. this, of course, will eventually give way to tribal governments and the cycle will start over after the population is reduced by its own pollution and starvation to a new balance with nature. disease, more than starvation, will be the biggest killer. men will be too hungry, and too sick, to fight until it stabilizes. there will be exceptions, of course, but they will lack sufficient power to extend their sphere of influence before they are overrun by the mass, or destroyed by chemical and germ warfare in the last gasp. the meaning of the 144,000 becomes more clear... +Read Revelations (if you haven't). have more than several textbooks on it, and have taught classes on Revelation. however, I strongly believe the interpretations are still 'every man for himself' --presuming, of course, the propounder has at least the prerequisite grounding and understanding in the fundamental concepts, starting with John the Revelator, who never died, and why portions of the book are sealed. the best general reference on symbology, at least of what I have seen so far: Opening the Seven Seals (The Visions of John the Revelator) Richard D. Draper Desert Books, Salt Lake City ISBN 087579-547-1, SKU 2142298 +Maybe put some scriptures on cypherpunks. casting pearls before swine? +Happy Armageddon. Frances Ford Coppola wasted the good title: 'Apocolypse Now' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMuc64b04kQrCC2kFAQFXBwP/RhEeldizuSelbrHtfCSDsrwRaT0hn1qd e/j6Q0IPHMkzrFS+bnTGia5hLogTgU61tdvq38AGlRt2LpQZVekStZqCog4Jfmx0 olK1xzpNEr71UsDxxYe5ooIhHwWVWfZsxtj6k8/eSYtLbontN+BCHbk6V+Py3BOi HOpugpbs8V4= =2XXx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 24 02:40:27 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 02:40:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list In-Reply-To: <199701240733.BAA10190@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <4N711D11w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > I would like to start a thread to discuss the moderation and rejection > policy. I predict that Sandy won't allow any posts on the censored list that question his moderation poilicy - only the unanymous praises. > My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks > on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous > remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames > mailing list. A dishonorable act. > You can receive a copy of my article by an email request. Perhaps you want to start putting up rejected articles on a Web page? > The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected > my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances > of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including > its quoted part. That's correct. > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. Sandy's personal likes and dislikes of certain posters are the criterion. > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > the current readership. You won't be allowed to on this censored mailing list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 24 02:42:11 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 02:42:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701240655.WAA12732@toad.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com writes: > Dr.Dimitry Vulius K.O.T.M. wrote: > > Dale Thorn writes: > > > > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > Dr.D. Vulius K.O.T.M. wrote: > > > > > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > > > > > But think about this: suppose there is a couple, bob at household.com, > > > > and alice at household.com. Suppose that Rev. Mallory does not like bob. > > > > Mallory forges a lot of emails like "I can still taste your sperm > > > > on my lips", that appear to originate from Cindy at phonesex.org. > > > > Then, promptly, Mallory sends an anonymous alert to alice at household.com > > > > warning her about naughty email activities of bob. Alice gets mad at hi > > > > and divorces him. > > > > How would bob protect himself against such developments? > > > > > > Frame-ups are as old as time. The ones that work the best are those > > > that are the most believable. O.J., for example. Unless Alice is > > > unusually flaky or paranoid, she'll consider her options against the > > > time she has invested in Bob. > > > > Here's an interesting twist of Sandfort's moderation policy. > > > > My article was crypto-relevant and flame-free and was tossed to > > cypherpunks-flames. > > > > Igor's response to my article was also crypto-relevant and flame-free > > and was tossed to cypherpunks-flames. > > > > Dale's response did not quote me, so it made it to the censored list. > > Is it really true that my response was tossed out as flames? Yes. > It was crypto-relevant. So was my original article. They did not contain any flames or personal attacks, contrary to what Sandy claims. > BTW, this is a more than perfect illustration why rejections > based on "shitstrings" are completely inappropriate for moderating. > > I have nothing again "grey lists", when moderators are alerted when a > message containing certain suspicious word arrives (the way it's done in > STUMP), but am opposed to autorejections (unless mods are mailbombed). It's ironic that Igor's article which I'm quoting ALSO got tossed into cypherpunks-flames, even though it wasn't a flame. Apparently the only comments on moderation that Sandy passes to the censored list are the ones praising him. This way he'll be able to report unanymous support for his moderation policies. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 03:07:59 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 03:07:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before... In-Reply-To: <19970124083945.20833.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> Message-ID: <32E898A2.6EE6@sk.sympatico.ca> Krenn wrote: > Oh most certainly! I'm gonna run out and implement EVERYTHING in UDCM!! > Thanks man!! Yours is the post these guys have been waiting for. All of those other CypherPunks just 'flamed' them by asking technical questions about their products. Who knows, they may make you their marketing manager. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 03:08:00 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 03:08:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list In-Reply-To: <199701240733.BAA10190@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32E8B499.27B5@sk.sympatico.ca> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks > on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous > remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames > mailing list. I have noticed that the 'sorting' of messages seems to be based as much on personality as upon content. > The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected > my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances > of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including > its quoted part. The standard of what constitutes a 'flame' seems to rest very much upon whom a comment is directed at, or merely 'vaguely toward'. There have been more than a few postings stronly lambasting various generic grouping of individuals which have passed without censoring. Your post, however, included Dr. Dimitri's vague reference to a homosexual 'elite'. While it was directed toward no one in particular, I suppose one could 'infer', from his past postings, that it referred to certain individuals, or a group of individuals. So it would seem that, in quoting the posts of others, one must take into consideration what various readers may infer from their previous posts. > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > criterion by which he moderates this list. This was more than obvious to anyone who cared to cast an objective eye on the process, but their input was pooh-paah'd by the 'washed masses'. > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > the current readership. Like all of the 'opinions' that were expressed prior to the censorship of the list? I haven't seen any indication that these opinions were given the slightest consideration. This is not the readership's list. It is a private individual's list. My view of Sandy's moderation is that it is rather willy-nilly, and not done particularly objectively. There have been personal insults directed toward various individuals, including myself, which seem not to have been considered 'flames', while there are more than a few posts which, even on the closest of inspection, I can see no reason for dumping the the 'flame-crapper', other than the fact that they are somewhat associated to the 'unclean' list members. The moderation, at best, seems to encourage 'snide' commentary meant to be ill-disguised cheap-shots. I would much rather have list members taking strong, clean shots at their 'targets', than to be subjected to two-faced people talking out of the side of their mouths. In short, I don't see the moderation as being 'fair', and I don't think it was ever meant to be. I don't have a problem with this, since it's a private list, and, as far as I am concerned, the list-owner can censor it, or have it censored, any way he or she sees fit. I would like to point out, however, that anyone who has had their posts 'sorted' into the 'flames list' is now a 'known flamer', as evidenced by the fact that their post has been designated a 'flame' on a list run by a champion of free speech on the electronic frontier. It is obvious that some of the more intuitively intelligent list members are aware of this, as is indicated by the nervous fear with which they 'explain why' their post is crypto-relevant. Toto From peter.allan at aeat.co.uk Fri Jan 24 04:26:56 1997 From: peter.allan at aeat.co.uk (Peter M Allan) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:26:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd Message-ID: <9701241227.AA11148@clare.risley.aeat.co.uk> Hi, These messages have been sent about fingerd. My preference for fiddling with remote fingers is to leave fingerd as supplied by the vendor (run by "nobody") and replace the finger program itself. It can be made to recognise when it is being run by "nobody" and behave differently from when run by another user. Source at the end of this file. (Bashed out fairly quickly starting from a utmp-eraser I made for a luser who wouldn't tolerate wall messages from shutdown.) I have (among other things) an extension to TCP-wrappers (a new hosts_access.c file), and a prog to find disk space wasted by duplicated files. (mail me with Subject: "send goodies" for these.) -- Peter Allan peter.allan at aeat.co.uk Date: 23 Jan 1997 17:22:10 -0800 From: Steven L Baur > cfingerd is not a safe program. It must run as root, and has some big > problems. > On Tue, 17 Sep 1996, Administrador da Rede wrote: > > I use the newest version of cfinger, setted to not allow general finger, just > > specific ones. Does anyone knows how this person did that ? I hope I can > > find out, otherwise, bye bye finger service. > Badly. > I have sent the author a letter, but never got any reply back (it's 3 > months later now!), so I just take the opportunity to warn the public > against its use. /* * * compile and test myfinger * * cc -C -o myfinger myfinger.c * * * (assuming the standard finger is /usr/ucb/finger) * cp /usr/ucb/finger /usr/ucb/finger.real * cp myfinger /usr/ucb/finger * * * (if using TCP wrapper reverse-fingers, make them NOT nobody, * but another id such as nobody2.) * * I disclaim any disasters........ * */ /* * * my finger program - local only, to be less informative than /usr/ucb/finger * */ #undef _utmp_h #define TRUE 1 #define FALSE 0 #define FAKE 1 #define WIPE 2 #define UTMP "/etc/utmp" #include #include #include "utmp.h" #include main(argc, argv, env) int argc; char **argv; char **env; { int i, listed; struct passwd *pwent; if (argc < 1) exit(0); /* beat sneaks */ /* If run by "nobody" (uid=65534) assume this is a remote finger */ /* otherwise run the standard finger command */ if (65534!=getuid()) { execv("/usr/ucb/finger.real", argv); /** if we get here exec failed, so we default to my finger **/ } printf("Login Name Where\n"); listed = 1; while ((pwent = getpwent()) != NULL) { if (argc > 1) { /* * if there are args, and name is NOT one of them, we skip * it */ listed = 0; for (i = 1; (!listed) && (i < argc); i++) { if (!strcmp(argv[i], pwent->pw_name)) listed = 1; } } if (listed) info(pwent); } } info(pwent) struct passwd *pwent; { long lpos; FILE *fp; int i; struct utmp *sp; struct utmp utmpentry; char *login,*gecos; login=pwent->pw_name; gecos=pwent->pw_gecos; sp = &utmpentry; if ((fp = fopen(UTMP, "r")) == NULL) { fprintf(stderr, "failed to open utmp for reading\n"); exit(1); } i = fseek(fp, 0, 0); if (i) { puts("failed to fseek start of file"); exit(2); } do { /* get current pos in file using ftell */ lpos = ftell(fp); /* fread the struct */ fread(sp, sizeof utmpentry, 1, fp); if (!feof(fp)) { if (!strcmp(login, sp->ut_name)) { if (!nonuser(utmpentry)) { utmpentry.ut_host[15]='\0'; printf("%s\t%s\t%s\t%s\n",login,gecos,sp->ut_line,sp->ut_host); } } } /* on error we close & exit */ if (ferror(fp)) { fprintf(stderr, " file error! so failed to find our session in utmp\n"); fclose(fp); exit(3); } } while (!feof(fp)); fclose(fp); } /* end */ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 24 04:30:17 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:30:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? In-Reply-To: <199701240641.WAA12137@toad.com> Message-ID: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" writes: > "William H. Geiger III" writes: > > > I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of > > days. > > > > I am assuming that this means that the list moderation has now started? > > Yes - anything I say is junked irrespective of content. I see that Moderator Sandfort has allowed this article through (to prove me wrong) but has tossed all my other articles into cypherpunks-flames. Most of them were crypto-relevant, on-topic, and contained no flames. I bet he's going to toss this one too. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 24 04:30:18 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 04:30:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homosexuals In-Reply-To: <199701240712.XAA13326@toad.com> Message-ID: fuck you writes in the censored list: > If anyone has any text files on the following topics please send them. ... > Anything underground Anything? My good friend TRRCJ3 reports from San Francisco that the city is much nicer now that so many homosexuals are 6 feet under. Thank God for AIDS. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com Fri Jan 24 05:57:30 1997 From: MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen, Patrick) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 05:57:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... Message-ID: >From: DataETRsch at aol.com[SMTP:DataETRsch at aol.com] >o Includes time and date locking features. How do you implement this feature? Where is the time/date information stored? Is this in that header you were talking about before? Is there some method which is designed to thwart simply changing the CMOS time? Thanks! ~ Patrick >---------- >From: DataETRsch at aol.com[SMTP:DataETRsch at aol.com] >Sent: Thursday, January 23, 1997 9:35 PM >To: cypherpunks at toad.com >Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... > >{If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} >{UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you >visited.} >{UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate >correctly.} >{UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} >{Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been >added.} >{UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} >{UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} >{UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} >{This advertisement has also been modified.} > >Hello, > >Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data >Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that >DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal >Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely >advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, >Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. > >UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... > >o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. >o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. >o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. >o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. >o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. >o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. >o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. >o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. >o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. >o Includes time and date locking features. >o Includes file specific unique encryption features. >o Includes file authentication guard features. >o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. >o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. >o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. > >UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed >with popular application and database programming languages and environments >such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo >Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. > >DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. > >To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: >http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. > >I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you >very much for your time. > >Sincerely, > >Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos >President >DataET Research >Data Engineering Technologies > > From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 05:57:40 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 05:57:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <199701241357.FAA24866@toad.com> > From: IN%"abostick at netcom.com" "Alan Bostick" 23-JAN-1997 23:09:54.72 > > >In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by > >Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended > >consequences of the V-Chip I noticed that when my nephews buy video games, the first ones they check out are the ones plastered with the 'protective' ratings-symbols that proclaim that the game is the 'baddest of the bad' in terms of violence, etc. Thanks to the violence-rating system, they no longer have to waste time checking out 'dweeb' programs that contain absolutely no blood and gore. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 05:58:43 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 05:58:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701241358.FAA24907@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: > Typical modern American attitude, getting it right is too much work so let's > lower the benchmark so anyone can be 'right'. Are you referring to the CypherPunks 'censored' list? Toto From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 24 05:59:14 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 05:59:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701241359.FAA24927@toad.com> I would like to start a thread to discuss the moderation and rejection policy. My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames mailing list. You can receive a copy of my article by an email request. The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including its quoted part. Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy the current readership. - Igor. From krenn at nym.alias.net Fri Jan 24 05:59:44 1997 From: krenn at nym.alias.net (Krenn) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 05:59:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before... Message-ID: <199701241359.FAA24942@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > {If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} > {UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you > visited.} > {UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate > correctly.} > {UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} > {Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been > added.} > {UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} > {UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} > {UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} > {This advertisement has also been modified.} Well halellujah. > Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data > Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that > DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal > Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely > advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, > Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. > > UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... OH! OF COURSE! IMDMP! COOL!! > > o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. > o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. WOW!! 150!!! > o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. > o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. Of course, who doesn't?! > o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. > o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. 18?! HOLY COW!! > o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. What a breakthrough! Astounding!! > o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. > o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. Of course not, it's IMDMP!! > o Includes time and date locking features. > o Includes file specific unique encryption features. Specific unique encryption features!! NO WAY!! COOL!!! > o Includes file authentication guard features. > o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. > o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. Of course, everyone knows the public key cryptosystem method is the best! Excellent! > o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. > > UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed > with popular application and database programming languages and environments > such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo > Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. > > DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. Hey, v2.0, neat name, where'd you come up with it?! > > To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: > http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. AOL!! Oh YES! Cool! > > I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you > very much for your time. Oh most certainly! I'm gonna run out and implement EVERYTHING in UDCM!! Thanks man!! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMuhyVUnqfwPpt/QVAQFM4wQAymizJEI/F5SFcWILNfGNoIsxxYza6Bfo yadEF9BnlcXujq0ZFZiRv7SddXjTS5TgVZLutZdEIx/NYPESkH7MXh18CyI/EXo6 NSyAiE0pFFRIrAgV4FWVVS9jsTWKucfI7NbWKSLEWTK8e6fdywAlXzlvbPT+1v6C b4vWK4akrBs= =74mf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From sandfort at crl9.crl.com Fri Jan 24 05:59:59 1997 From: sandfort at crl9.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 05:59:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] Message-ID: <199701241359.FAA24956@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > Is it really true that my response was tossed out as flames? a) NO posts have been "tossed out." Your response was sorted into the "flames" list--not because it flamed directly, but because it was part of the threat started by Dimitri in which he engaged in flaming. b) While I realize this is a judgment call that others might dispute, I don't think it makes much sense to post to the moderated list only the parts of threads that are not flamish. I would rather keep thread intact on one list or the other. There are exceptions. I put one of Dimitri's post on this thread into the moderated list because the point he made did not require particular knowledge of the entire thread and had non-inflamatory relevance. > It was crypto-relevant. Perhaps, but crypto-relevance is NOT the criterion by which I am moderating the list. I am sort on the basis of (a) emotional, non-relevant personal attacks on list members, and (b) spam. I believe (and so far the postings have borne me out) that in an atmosphere of civil, reasoned discourse, the relevance issue will largely take care of itself. By the way, contrary to what Dimitri has alleged, I have posted every message from him in which he was able to restrain himself with regard to gratuitous insults and/or spam. In other words, the set of Dimitri posts that have appeared on the moderated list is not the null set. By the way number two, this response will be posted to the flames list and NOT the moderated list. Even though I have not flamed anyone, two things keep it off the moderated list: (1) my policy about keeping thread on the same list where possible (see above), and (2) basic precepts of fairness. Though Dimitri has stated-- without a scintilla of evidence--that my moderation policy would be used to attack him and not give him the opportunity or forum to defend himself, I am keeping ALL personal attacks off the moderated list. Those who are subscribed to the "flam" postings can see numerous unkind posts about Dimitri that I have not allowed on the moderated list. That policy applies to me just as much as to anyone else. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 06:01:57 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:01:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Commerce Sec. Hearings and Encryption Message-ID: <199701241401.GAA25011@toad.com> Bill Campbell wrote: > > toto at sk.sympatico.ca wrote: > > Bill Campbell wrote: > This "freely available overseas" concept is a bit overstated. > France and other countries are beginning to come down hard > on encryption. True. Perhaps I should have said "freely available, but it might cost you more than you expect." > Cynic or realist, you make the call. The average Joe > doesn't even know *why* he needs encryption...at least > not yet. The average joe is quickly becoming aware of the issue of data security (and therefore being exposed to the 'concept' of encryption as something that will impact his life). Of course, this is coming about as a result of commercial pressures to make him feel safe about handing over his Visa number, etc. To me, this indicates that this is the opportune time to inject a deeper level of understanding into the issue of crypto, at a time when the average joe has his attention directed toward the crypto arena. Toto From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 24 06:10:43 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:10:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Dimitri?? Message-ID: <199701241410.GAA25218@toad.com> "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" writes: > "William H. Geiger III" writes: > > > I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of > > days. > > > > I am assuming that this means that the list moderation has now started? > > Yes - anything I say is junked irrespective of content. I see that Moderator Sandfort has allowed this article through (to prove me wrong) but has tossed all my other articles into cypherpunks-flames. Most of them were crypto-relevant, on-topic, and contained no flames. I bet he's going to toss this one too. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 24 06:10:44 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:10:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701241410.GAA25221@toad.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > I would like to start a thread to discuss the moderation and rejection > policy. I predict that Sandy won't allow any posts on the censored list that question his moderation poilicy - only the unanymous praises. > My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks > on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous > remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames > mailing list. A dishonorable act. > You can receive a copy of my article by an email request. Perhaps you want to start putting up rejected articles on a Web page? > The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected > my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances > of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including > its quoted part. That's correct. > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. Sandy's personal likes and dislikes of certain posters are the criterion. > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > the current readership. You won't be allowed to on this censored mailing list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From attila at primenet.com Fri Jan 24 06:11:23 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:11:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: seeds of our own destruction Message-ID: <199701241411.GAA25269@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <32E72BCB.3CBA at deltanet.com>, on 01/23/97 at 01:13 AM, Kevin Stephenson said: +You wrote some very interesting articles. It is the UN. if you want a real scare, read the UN "world constitution" on human rights and privacy --their idea of a Bill of Rights. It just happens that it is virtually word for word equivalent to the mainland Chinese "rights" -in other words: rights as long as they are consistent with the aims of the state (UN) and the security needs of the state at the given moment. ...and the UN is to be granted overall sovereignity by virtue of the right to unilateraly tax its 'member' states, and not necessarily in an equitable fashion. to put it in context, it is clearly the havenots reducing everyone to the status of havenot; there will be no others. this, of course, will eventually give way to tribal governments and the cycle will start over after the population is reduced by its own pollution and starvation to a new balance with nature. disease, more than starvation, will be the biggest killer. men will be too hungry, and too sick, to fight until it stabilizes. there will be exceptions, of course, but they will lack sufficient power to extend their sphere of influence before they are overrun by the mass, or destroyed by chemical and germ warfare in the last gasp. the meaning of the 144,000 becomes more clear... +Read Revelations (if you haven't). have more than several textbooks on it, and have taught classes on Revelation. however, I strongly believe the interpretations are still 'every man for himself' --presuming, of course, the propounder has at least the prerequisite grounding and understanding in the fundamental concepts, starting with John the Revelator, who never died, and why portions of the book are sealed. the best general reference on symbology, at least of what I have seen so far: Opening the Seven Seals (The Visions of John the Revelator) Richard D. Draper Desert Books, Salt Lake City ISBN 087579-547-1, SKU 2142298 +Maybe put some scriptures on cypherpunks. casting pearls before swine? +Happy Armageddon. Frances Ford Coppola wasted the good title: 'Apocolypse Now' -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMuc64b04kQrCC2kFAQFXBwP/RhEeldizuSelbrHtfCSDsrwRaT0hn1qd e/j6Q0IPHMkzrFS+bnTGia5hLogTgU61tdvq38AGlRt2LpQZVekStZqCog4Jfmx0 olK1xzpNEr71UsDxxYe5ooIhHwWVWfZsxtj6k8/eSYtLbontN+BCHbk6V+Py3BOi HOpugpbs8V4= =2XXx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 06:11:25 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:11:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701241411.GAA25271@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks > on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous > remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames > mailing list. I have noticed that the 'sorting' of messages seems to be based as much on personality as upon content. > The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected > my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances > of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including > its quoted part. The standard of what constitutes a 'flame' seems to rest very much upon whom a comment is directed at, or merely 'vaguely toward'. There have been more than a few postings stronly lambasting various generic grouping of individuals which have passed without censoring. Your post, however, included Dr. Dimitri's vague reference to a homosexual 'elite'. While it was directed toward no one in particular, I suppose one could 'infer', from his past postings, that it referred to certain individuals, or a group of individuals. So it would seem that, in quoting the posts of others, one must take into consideration what various readers may infer from their previous posts. > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > criterion by which he moderates this list. This was more than obvious to anyone who cared to cast an objective eye on the process, but their input was pooh-paah'd by the 'washed masses'. > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > the current readership. Like all of the 'opinions' that were expressed prior to the censorship of the list? I haven't seen any indication that these opinions were given the slightest consideration. This is not the readership's list. It is a private individual's list. My view of Sandy's moderation is that it is rather willy-nilly, and not done particularly objectively. There have been personal insults directed toward various individuals, including myself, which seem not to have been considered 'flames', while there are more than a few posts which, even on the closest of inspection, I can see no reason for dumping the the 'flame-crapper', other than the fact that they are somewhat associated to the 'unclean' list members. The moderation, at best, seems to encourage 'snide' commentary meant to be ill-disguised cheap-shots. I would much rather have list members taking strong, clean shots at their 'targets', than to be subjected to two-faced people talking out of the side of their mouths. In short, I don't see the moderation as being 'fair', and I don't think it was ever meant to be. I don't have a problem with this, since it's a private list, and, as far as I am concerned, the list-owner can censor it, or have it censored, any way he or she sees fit. I would like to point out, however, that anyone who has had their posts 'sorted' into the 'flames list' is now a 'known flamer', as evidenced by the fact that their post has been designated a 'flame' on a list run by a champion of free speech on the electronic frontier. It is obvious that some of the more intuitively intelligent list members are aware of this, as is indicated by the nervous fear with which they 'explain why' their post is crypto-relevant. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 06:12:32 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:12:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before... Message-ID: <199701241412.GAA25302@toad.com> Krenn wrote: > Oh most certainly! I'm gonna run out and implement EVERYTHING in UDCM!! > Thanks man!! Yours is the post these guys have been waiting for. All of those other CypherPunks just 'flamed' them by asking technical questions about their products. Who knows, they may make you their marketing manager. Toto From gbroiles at netbox.com Fri Jan 24 06:12:34 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:12:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <199701241412.GAA25303@toad.com> At 04:57 PM 1/23/97 -0800, Alan Bostick wrote: >In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by >Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended >consequences of the V-Chip, the programmable device to be included in >next-generation television sets sold in the US that supposedly will >allow parents to control their children's access to sex and violence on >TV. While I think it's always useful to consider unintended (or otherwise unexpected) consequences, Gladwell's argument sent a shiver down my spine with its shameless paternalism. This bit (from roughly the middle of his piece) is what I found creepiest: "According to one recent study, somewhere between twenty and twenty-seven per cent of the parents of four-to six-year-olds never restrict their children's viewing hours, never decide what programs they can watch, never change the channel when something objectionable comes on, and never forbid the watching of certain programs. It has apparently never occurred to these parents that television can be a bad influence, and it strains credulity to think that the advent of the V-chip is going to wake them up. Yet their families - mainly lower-income, ill-educated - are the very ones most in need of protection from television violence. Here is a rearranging effect with a vengeance: not only does the V-chip make television worse, it makes television worse precisely for those already most vulnerable to its excesses." I understood Gladwell's point to be, in essence, that the V-chip will allow TV producers to generate higher levels of morally impure content which he fears will pollute the minds of poor children because their parents are too stupid to protect them from the harmful content and too poor to buy new televisions which will include V-chips. While I think 95% of broadcast TV is crap which isn't worth the time expended watching it, even reading arguments like "poor people should be protected from harmful ideas they're too stupid (or too poorly educated) to avoid and too poor to purchase protection from" makes me feel dirty. I don't think Gladwell is, in any meaningful way, an opponent of government control of speech/expression - he's just an opponent of inefficient or optional forms of government control of speech/expression. He's a reasonable writer, but he's chosen to use his powers for evil instead of for good. (Some of his work is available on the web; apparently he once worked as a reporter for the Washington Post and is now on the staff of the New Yorker.) -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From response at quantcom.com Fri Jan 24 06:13:04 1997 From: response at quantcom.com (CV Communications) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:13:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: ATTENTION HOMEOWNER Message-ID: <199701241354.IAA12840@glenn.cvcom.net> The following message has been brought to you by Quantum Communications. If you would like advertising rates and information, send an email to info at quantcom.com or visit our website http://www.quantcom.com If you prefer NOT to receive promotional messages inthe future, send an email to remove at quantcom.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ATTENTION HOMEOWNER: Here are the FACTS your mortgage lender doesn't want you to know. * After paying 15 years on a 30-year mortgage, you'll still owe 90% of your loan balance * After paying nearly 24 years, you'll still owe over 50% of your loan balance * You'll pay over 3 times the amount originally borrowed before paying off your mortgage * To make matters worse, the F.D.I.C. estimates that one out of every two mortgages are MISCALCULATED - OVERCHARGING homeowners $8-$10 billion each and every year! Using THE MORTGAGE MANAGER TM will solve ALL these problems for you ... ABSOLUTELY FREE! The Mortgage Manager TM Lets You ... * Saves thousands of dollars on your home mortgage without increasing your payment * Shortens your 30-year mortgage by 7-15 years without refinancing * Builds equity in your home 300% faster * Turns your current mortgage into an investment program * Increases your net worth dramatically * Tracks your savings and audits your loan to find lender mistakes which occur about 50% of the time according to the F.D.I.C. The Mortgage Manager TM gives you all this with ... NO Refinancing NO Credit Reports NO Home Appraisal NO Closing Costs NO Change of Lender In fact, it requires ... NO change to your current mortgage agreement at all! FREE SOFTWARE - FREE SERVICE Get the complete details on how much you can save. The service is FREE and there's no obligation whatsoever - no strings attached. We're not trying to sell you any high-priced service or products, now or ever, so make your selection below (free software or printed analysis) and e-mail this form back today! *** Mortgage Manager TM on 3.5" Floppy Disk *** NOW AVAILABLE IN PRINTED FORMAT PRINTED SAVINGS ANALYSIS. Please fill out the following information on your 30-year mortgage so we can mail you a printed mortgage savings analysis: Loan Amount Interest Rate Fixed Variable Date of First Payment Name Address Phone E-Mail Send to home at quantcom.com for more information or to send this data to From Mullen Fri Jan 24 06:13:06 1997 From: Mullen (Mullen) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:13:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... Message-ID: <199701241413.GAA25332@toad.com> >From: DataETRsch at aol.com[SMTP:DataETRsch at aol.com] >o Includes time and date locking features. How do you implement this feature? Where is the time/date information stored? Is this in that header you were talking about before? Is there some method which is designed to thwart simply changing the CMOS time? Thanks! ~ Patrick >---------- >From: DataETRsch at aol.com[SMTP:DataETRsch at aol.com] >Sent: Thursday, January 23, 1997 9:35 PM >To: cypherpunks at toad.com >Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... > >{If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} >{UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you >visited.} >{UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate >correctly.} >{UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} >{Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been >added.} >{UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} >{UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} >{UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} >{This advertisement has also been modified.} > >Hello, > >Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data >Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that >DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal >Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely >advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, >Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. > >UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... > >o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. >o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. >o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. >o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. >o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. >o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. >o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. >o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. >o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. >o Includes time and date locking features. >o Includes file specific unique encryption features. >o Includes file authentication guard features. >o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. >o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. >o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. > >UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed >with popular application and database programming languages and environments >such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo >Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. > >DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. > >To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: >http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. > >I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you >very much for your time. > >Sincerely, > >Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos >President >DataET Research >Data Engineering Technologies > > From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 24 06:14:13 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:14:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homosexuals Message-ID: <199701241414.GAA25350@toad.com> fuck you writes in the censored list: > If anyone has any text files on the following topics please send them. ... > Anything underground Anything? My good friend TRRCJ3 reports from San Francisco that the city is much nicer now that so many homosexuals are 6 feet under. Thank God for AIDS. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From peter.allan at aeat.co.uk Fri Jan 24 06:14:54 1997 From: peter.allan at aeat.co.uk (Peter M Allan) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:14:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd Message-ID: <199701241414.GAA25351@toad.com> Hi, These messages have been sent about fingerd. My preference for fiddling with remote fingers is to leave fingerd as supplied by the vendor (run by "nobody") and replace the finger program itself. It can be made to recognise when it is being run by "nobody" and behave differently from when run by another user. Source at the end of this file. (Bashed out fairly quickly starting from a utmp-eraser I made for a luser who wouldn't tolerate wall messages from shutdown.) I have (among other things) an extension to TCP-wrappers (a new hosts_access.c file), and a prog to find disk space wasted by duplicated files. (mail me with Subject: "send goodies" for these.) -- Peter Allan peter.allan at aeat.co.uk Date: 23 Jan 1997 17:22:10 -0800 From: Steven L Baur > cfingerd is not a safe program. It must run as root, and has some big > problems. > On Tue, 17 Sep 1996, Administrador da Rede wrote: > > I use the newest version of cfinger, setted to not allow general finger, just > > specific ones. Does anyone knows how this person did that ? I hope I can > > find out, otherwise, bye bye finger service. > Badly. > I have sent the author a letter, but never got any reply back (it's 3 > months later now!), so I just take the opportunity to warn the public > against its use. /* * * compile and test myfinger * * cc -C -o myfinger myfinger.c * * * (assuming the standard finger is /usr/ucb/finger) * cp /usr/ucb/finger /usr/ucb/finger.real * cp myfinger /usr/ucb/finger * * * (if using TCP wrapper reverse-fingers, make them NOT nobody, * but another id such as nobody2.) * * I disclaim any disasters........ * */ /* * * my finger program - local only, to be less informative than /usr/ucb/finger * */ #undef _utmp_h #define TRUE 1 #define FALSE 0 #define FAKE 1 #define WIPE 2 #define UTMP "/etc/utmp" #include #include #include "utmp.h" #include main(argc, argv, env) int argc; char **argv; char **env; { int i, listed; struct passwd *pwent; if (argc < 1) exit(0); /* beat sneaks */ /* If run by "nobody" (uid=65534) assume this is a remote finger */ /* otherwise run the standard finger command */ if (65534!=getuid()) { execv("/usr/ucb/finger.real", argv); /** if we get here exec failed, so we default to my finger **/ } printf("Login Name Where\n"); listed = 1; while ((pwent = getpwent()) != NULL) { if (argc > 1) { /* * if there are args, and name is NOT one of them, we skip * it */ listed = 0; for (i = 1; (!listed) && (i < argc); i++) { if (!strcmp(argv[i], pwent->pw_name)) listed = 1; } } if (listed) info(pwent); } } info(pwent) struct passwd *pwent; { long lpos; FILE *fp; int i; struct utmp *sp; struct utmp utmpentry; char *login,*gecos; login=pwent->pw_name; gecos=pwent->pw_gecos; sp = &utmpentry; if ((fp = fopen(UTMP, "r")) == NULL) { fprintf(stderr, "failed to open utmp for reading\n"); exit(1); } i = fseek(fp, 0, 0); if (i) { puts("failed to fseek start of file"); exit(2); } do { /* get current pos in file using ftell */ lpos = ftell(fp); /* fread the struct */ fread(sp, sizeof utmpentry, 1, fp); if (!feof(fp)) { if (!strcmp(login, sp->ut_name)) { if (!nonuser(utmpentry)) { utmpentry.ut_host[15]='\0'; printf("%s\t%s\t%s\t%s\n",login,gecos,sp->ut_line,sp->ut_host); } } } /* on error we close & exit */ if (ferror(fp)) { fprintf(stderr, " file error! so failed to find our session in utmp\n"); fclose(fp); exit(3); } } while (!feof(fp)); fclose(fp); } /* end */ From frissell at panix.com Fri Jan 24 06:44:36 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:44:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970124082356.0169ded8@panix.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970124094348.00756658@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 08:23 AM 1/24/97 -0500, Alan Bostick wrote: >Gladwell makes an analogy between V-Chipped TV content and >air-conditioned cars in the New York City subway system in summertime: >" . . . we need air-conditioners on subway cars because air-conditioners >on subway cars have made stations so hot that subway cars need to be >air-conditioned." Great analogy except that it's wrong. Subway tunnels were hot before the cars ever had air conditioning. The traditional method of controlling the amount of power delivered to an electric traction motor was to run the juice through a resistor array. As the motorman moved the controller up and down, the current would pass through fewer and more banks on the grid of resistors and the amount delivered to the motors would change. Well you might guess that at 600 V DC and I don't know how many Watts, those resistor grids had to dump a lot of heat. They were/are located on the tops or bottoms of cars and are quite apparent when the cars pass you on a winter morning. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMujKnYVO4r4sgSPhAQHgmAQAh82IvjwPXFdDchT1JvOuwf0pHGyO1xzY FsuPo2ig696dnWfXEyRhAcCvK6MKpXyaXPwtsPvJD6o8VUY2kU9UB5oddPBG7Q65 KAEwF/CBAtk3qyGmbfsd1ax65vjSkqm/+D675g/kHjAgOfaNFoRdlEXi4TLFjZZO ocj3IrSqZSE= =U0/n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 06:54:12 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (fuck you) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:54:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <19970124.094351.21326.2.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> Are their any H/ P/ V/ A/ C ers on this list?? From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 07:05:46 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 07:05:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: seeds of our own destruction In-Reply-To: <199701240950.CAA01462@infowest.com> Message-ID: <19970124.100221.21326.4.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> Very soon humans will not have any purpose in life but to replicate themselves. At least before the computer came along we kept ourselves busy. But now we are getting computers to do the jobs that make up life. We already precluded the need for math a long time ago.But know their are spell checkers and even applications that check your spelling as you write. I just saw on "The Site" how computers will be in shoes, in milk cartons and in door mats. The human bodies salinity will act as a conductor for the binary information. You pick up the milk carton which then tells your your shoes that its not fresh. Then when your foot touches the door mat in Publix it tells your watch to beep and say "You DONT Got Milk" Then their will be that the floor in your apartment tells the coffee pot to make coffee because it found a low caffeine level in your body. You can shake hands with someone and automatically transmit their business card to the hard drive in your shoe. The pay phone will know exactly who to bill the second the receiver is touched. But what if I bump into you, now I have your business card. What if I steal your shoe! Oh but dont worry, all this information will be ENCRYPTED.As we all know once something is encrypted its perfectly safe.Yeah right, And Bill Gates still uses a 310 baud modem. If someone really needs to know what's on your shoeputer then they will set their 1586 700Mhz (or whatever they have by then) do do just that. So what if it takes 2 weeks or 2 months. They will have every single aspect of your life from your medical records to credit card numbers to phone number(will they even USE phone numbers by then) to your shoe size. But wait theirs more. If you haven't been crawling through a cave for the past few months you will see that Intel boasts that their chips will be able to perform 2 gigaflops or 2 billion calculations per second.Can you imagine that. If you did one mathematical calculation per second it would take you 31 thousand years. It did it in a second, don't you feel dumb. Now imagine had one of these bad boys and your shoes. How long would it take? Two hours, three or maybe, if its really dragging, a day.Thats just the good old steal it and use it technique. I don't even want to go into how people could intercept information, copy it, or make their own.Well , I think I caused you enough cranial burden for today, so remember technology is like drugs, there are always more and they keep getting more effective but you do not need them. They need you. Jonathan Leto From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 24 07:11:49 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 07:11:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: seeds of our own destruction In-Reply-To: <199701240950.CAA01462@infowest.com> Message-ID: <32E8D0C7.368B@gte.net> Attila T. Hun wrote: > at 01:13 AM, Kevin Stephenson said: > +You wrote some very interesting articles. It is the UN. > if you want a real scare, read the UN "world constitution" on > human rights and privacy --their idea of a Bill of Rights. It just > happens that it is virtually word for word equivalent to the > mainland Chinese "rights" -in other words: rights as long as they > are consistent with the aims of the state (UN) and the security > needs of the state at the given moment. [snip] > +Read Revelations (if you haven't). > the best general reference on symbology, at least of what I > have seen so far: Opening the Seven Seals (The Visions of John the Revelator) > Richard D. Draper, Desert Books, Salt Lake City, ISBN 087579-547-1, SKU 2142298 Wendy Wallace (I think) has written something about the 4 horsemen of the Apocalypse, and they've been running excerpts in Paranoia magazine. I really like Paranoia mag, check it out. If you like heavy-duty scary symbology writing (can't vouch for the exact content), check out Texe Marrs who has a recent book on the subject (can't remember the title, but pictures of the symbols on the cover, in paperback). From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 07:11:50 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 07:11:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject In-Reply-To: <199701240719.AAA18312@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Message-ID: <19970124.100807.21326.5.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> Does any one know of any other good mailing Lists either with crypto or anything underground From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 24 07:27:05 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 07:27:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd In-Reply-To: <9701241227.AA11148@clare.risley.aeat.co.uk> Message-ID: <199701241522.JAA13433@manifold.algebra.com> Peter M Allan wrote: > > These messages have been sent about fingerd. > My preference for fiddling with remote fingers is to > leave fingerd as supplied by the vendor (run by "nobody") and > replace the finger program itself. It can be made to recognise > when it is being run by "nobody" and behave differently > from when run by another user. > > Source at the end of this file. (Bashed out fairly quickly > starting from a utmp-eraser I made for a luser who wouldn't > tolerate wall messages from shutdown.) > > I have (among other things) an extension to TCP-wrappers > (a new hosts_access.c file), and a prog to find disk space wasted by duplicated files. > (mail me with Subject: "send goodies" for these.) > /* > * > * compile and test myfinger > * > * cc -C -o myfinger myfinger.c > * > * > * (assuming the standard finger is /usr/ucb/finger) > * cp /usr/ucb/finger /usr/ucb/finger.real > * cp myfinger /usr/ucb/finger > * > * > * (if using TCP wrapper reverse-fingers, make them NOT nobody, > * but another id such as nobody2.) > * > * I disclaim any disasters........ > * > */ > > /* > * > * my finger program - local only, to be less informative than /usr/ucb/finger > * > */ > > > #undef _utmp_h > #define TRUE 1 > #define FALSE 0 > #define FAKE 1 > #define WIPE 2 > #define UTMP "/etc/utmp" > > > #include > #include > #include "utmp.h" > #include > > main(argc, argv, env) > int argc; > char **argv; > char **env; > { > int i, listed; > struct passwd *pwent; > > if (argc < 1) > exit(0); /* beat sneaks */ argc is never less than one. > /* If run by "nobody" (uid=65534) assume this is a remote finger */ > /* otherwise run the standard finger command */ > if (65534!=getuid()) { > execv("/usr/ucb/finger.real", argv); > /** if we get here exec failed, so we default to my finger **/ igor From frissell at panix.com Fri Jan 24 07:55:37 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 07:55:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <199701241555.HAA27671@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 08:23 AM 1/24/97 -0500, Alan Bostick wrote: >Gladwell makes an analogy between V-Chipped TV content and >air-conditioned cars in the New York City subway system in summertime: >" . . . we need air-conditioners on subway cars because air-conditioners >on subway cars have made stations so hot that subway cars need to be >air-conditioned." Great analogy except that it's wrong. Subway tunnels were hot before the cars ever had air conditioning. The traditional method of controlling the amount of power delivered to an electric traction motor was to run the juice through a resistor array. As the motorman moved the controller up and down, the current would pass through fewer and more banks on the grid of resistors and the amount delivered to the motors would change. Well you might guess that at 600 V DC and I don't know how many Watts, those resistor grids had to dump a lot of heat. They were/are located on the tops or bottoms of cars and are quite apparent when the cars pass you on a winter morning. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMujKnYVO4r4sgSPhAQHgmAQAh82IvjwPXFdDchT1JvOuwf0pHGyO1xzY FsuPo2ig696dnWfXEyRhAcCvK6MKpXyaXPwtsPvJD6o8VUY2kU9UB5oddPBG7Q65 KAEwF/CBAtk3qyGmbfsd1ax65vjSkqm/+D675g/kHjAgOfaNFoRdlEXi4TLFjZZO ocj3IrSqZSE= =U0/n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 07:55:38 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (fuck you) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 07:55:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701241555.HAA27672@toad.com> Are their any H/ P/ V/ A/ C ers on this list?? From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 24 08:10:45 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 08:10:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: seeds of our own destruction Message-ID: <199701241610.IAA28244@toad.com> Attila T. Hun wrote: > at 01:13 AM, Kevin Stephenson said: > +You wrote some very interesting articles. It is the UN. > if you want a real scare, read the UN "world constitution" on > human rights and privacy --their idea of a Bill of Rights. It just > happens that it is virtually word for word equivalent to the > mainland Chinese "rights" -in other words: rights as long as they > are consistent with the aims of the state (UN) and the security > needs of the state at the given moment. [snip] > +Read Revelations (if you haven't). > the best general reference on symbology, at least of what I > have seen so far: Opening the Seven Seals (The Visions of John the Revelator) > Richard D. Draper, Desert Books, Salt Lake City, ISBN 087579-547-1, SKU 2142298 Wendy Wallace (I think) has written something about the 4 horsemen of the Apocalypse, and they've been running excerpts in Paranoia magazine. I really like Paranoia mag, check it out. If you like heavy-duty scary symbology writing (can't vouch for the exact content), check out Texe Marrs who has a recent book on the subject (can't remember the title, but pictures of the symbols on the cover, in paperback). From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 24 08:10:47 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 08:10:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: fingerd Message-ID: <199701241610.IAA28245@toad.com> Peter M Allan wrote: > > These messages have been sent about fingerd. > My preference for fiddling with remote fingers is to > leave fingerd as supplied by the vendor (run by "nobody") and > replace the finger program itself. It can be made to recognise > when it is being run by "nobody" and behave differently > from when run by another user. > > Source at the end of this file. (Bashed out fairly quickly > starting from a utmp-eraser I made for a luser who wouldn't > tolerate wall messages from shutdown.) > > I have (among other things) an extension to TCP-wrappers > (a new hosts_access.c file), and a prog to find disk space wasted by duplicated files. > (mail me with Subject: "send goodies" for these.) > /* > * > * compile and test myfinger > * > * cc -C -o myfinger myfinger.c > * > * > * (assuming the standard finger is /usr/ucb/finger) > * cp /usr/ucb/finger /usr/ucb/finger.real > * cp myfinger /usr/ucb/finger > * > * > * (if using TCP wrapper reverse-fingers, make them NOT nobody, > * but another id such as nobody2.) > * > * I disclaim any disasters........ > * > */ > > /* > * > * my finger program - local only, to be less informative than /usr/ucb/finger > * > */ > > > #undef _utmp_h > #define TRUE 1 > #define FALSE 0 > #define FAKE 1 > #define WIPE 2 > #define UTMP "/etc/utmp" > > > #include > #include > #include "utmp.h" > #include > > main(argc, argv, env) > int argc; > char **argv; > char **env; > { > int i, listed; > struct passwd *pwent; > > if (argc < 1) > exit(0); /* beat sneaks */ argc is never less than one. > /* If run by "nobody" (uid=65534) assume this is a remote finger */ > /* otherwise run the standard finger command */ > if (65534!=getuid()) { > execv("/usr/ucb/finger.real", argv); > /** if we get here exec failed, so we default to my finger **/ igor From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 08:10:50 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 08:10:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: seeds of our own destruction Message-ID: <199701241610.IAA28246@toad.com> Very soon humans will not have any purpose in life but to replicate themselves. At least before the computer came along we kept ourselves busy. But now we are getting computers to do the jobs that make up life. We already precluded the need for math a long time ago.But know their are spell checkers and even applications that check your spelling as you write. I just saw on "The Site" how computers will be in shoes, in milk cartons and in door mats. The human bodies salinity will act as a conductor for the binary information. You pick up the milk carton which then tells your your shoes that its not fresh. Then when your foot touches the door mat in Publix it tells your watch to beep and say "You DONT Got Milk" Then their will be that the floor in your apartment tells the coffee pot to make coffee because it found a low caffeine level in your body. You can shake hands with someone and automatically transmit their business card to the hard drive in your shoe. The pay phone will know exactly who to bill the second the receiver is touched. But what if I bump into you, now I have your business card. What if I steal your shoe! Oh but dont worry, all this information will be ENCRYPTED.As we all know once something is encrypted its perfectly safe.Yeah right, And Bill Gates still uses a 310 baud modem. If someone really needs to know what's on your shoeputer then they will set their 1586 700Mhz (or whatever they have by then) do do just that. So what if it takes 2 weeks or 2 months. They will have every single aspect of your life from your medical records to credit card numbers to phone number(will they even USE phone numbers by then) to your shoe size. But wait theirs more. If you haven't been crawling through a cave for the past few months you will see that Intel boasts that their chips will be able to perform 2 gigaflops or 2 billion calculations per second.Can you imagine that. If you did one mathematical calculation per second it would take you 31 thousand years. It did it in a second, don't you feel dumb. Now imagine had one of these bad boys and your shoes. How long would it take? Two hours, three or maybe, if its really dragging, a day.Thats just the good old steal it and use it technique. I don't even want to go into how people could intercept information, copy it, or make their own.Well , I think I caused you enough cranial burden for today, so remember technology is like drugs, there are always more and they keep getting more effective but you do not need them. They need you. Jonathan Leto From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 08:12:26 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 08:12:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701241612.IAA28256@toad.com> Does any one know of any other good mailing Lists either with crypto or anything underground From privsoft at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 24 08:18:44 1997 From: privsoft at ix.netcom.com (Steven M Orrin) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 08:18:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: 2 Questions Message-ID: <199701241618.IAA07543@dfw-ix5.ix.netcom.com> Hey guys, 2 quick questions: Are there any known hacks or weaknesses in S/Key? Has Anyone heard of a new product called SecureWin from Cipher Logics Corp. It looks like vaporware but is a little more sophisticated than the usual product spams (like IPG, POTP, Encrypt-it, WinKrypt etc.) [I checked there web page some interesting fuctions, , No software available yet and Phone numbers are either busy or not in service, go figure] thanks Steveo From jya at pipeline.com Fri Jan 24 08:56:32 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 08:56:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: PSS_sst Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970124165119.006bf090@pop.pipeline.com> New Scientist of 25 January reviews the Bernstein's case against crypto export, US global seduction of foreign goverrments to suppress domestic calls for privacy, and therewith deftly alerts British leaders and readers to undermining the "secretive bureaucratic" Uncle Sam scam, says the deft-underminer cpunkers quoted. ----- PSS_sst From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca Fri Jan 24 09:25:17 1997 From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 09:25:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <9700248541.AA854137494@smtplink.alis.ca> ichudov at algebra.com wrote> >Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the >criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. > >I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies >satisfy the current readership. > > - Igor. I am not enthused about the perceived need for moderation. But neither was I enthused with the state of the list. However, I will reserve judgement as to the success or failure of the experiment for a while yet. The question for me is how much the moderation improves the S/N ratio v.s. how much it impedes dialogue. I expect Sandy to make mistakes, even by his own criterion. But anyone who will publicly admit to shaving his eyebrows is probably not swayed by popular opinion. James From ptrei at acm.org Fri Jan 24 09:44:42 1997 From: ptrei at acm.org (Peter Trei) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 09:44:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Message-ID: <199701241741.JAA01398@toad.com> DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Friday, Jan 23 1997 Peter Trei Next Tuesday morning, 9AM, RSA is scheduled to release the 'real' $10,000 DES challenge data. My software is in a state where it can be used for the challenge, though there is room for improvement. It currently tests about 185,000 keys/sec on my 90MHz machine. This translates to about 205,000 keys/sec on a 100 MHz machine. I still have to replace my DES round, which takes 25 clock cycles, with Svend Mikkelsen's, which takes only 18. Since the DES rounds are well over 80% of the work, this should boost the speed to over 250,000 keys/sec at 100 MHz. If I'm lucky, I'll perform this conversion over the weekend. I've sent out early betas to a few people for porting, but have had no feedback yet. I've approached several restricted FTP sites as possible distribution sites, and have had some positive responses, but nothing definitive yet. I'm being pretty strict in my interpretation of EAR for this purpose. In advance of the challenge, I'm willing to email copies as a ~100k uuencoded zip file to people, but to do so, you must comply with the following: 1. Send the request to ptrei at acm.org, NOT trei at process.com. I won't be able to read the latter for the next 10 days. 2. Include your 'true name' and residence address, as well as the email address to which it should be sent, . 3. A statement of your nationality. I'll mail it only to US Citizens, Canadian citizens, and US Green Card holders, residing in the US or Canada. 4. A statement to the effect that you understand that this is restricted code, and that cannot be exported or given to non-US/Canadian citizens I'm going to hold this information in strict confidence, and will surrender it only to a valid court order. It's similar to what you have to go through to download the domestic version of Netscape Navigator or PGP from MIT. You are free to distribute the software further. If you've complied with the requirements above, I believe that at that point I've done more than due diligence under ITAR/EAR. My software gets it's challenge data either from a text file cut-and-pasted from the RSA page, or from internally stored data. Tuesday night, I'll recompile the program with the real challenge data, and redistribute. My version runs on WinNT or Win95, on 486's and above. It's set up as a console app, which can run in background. I don't yet have a version for Win 3.1 or below 486, but may do in the future. The software is set up in such a way that it can be used either on a standalone system, or in a LAN environment with shared disks. The latter has a slightly more complex setup, but will allow many machines to share one executable and results file. I envisage people installing one copy on a shared disk in their workplace, and then adding the appropriate commands to the autoexec.bat file of every machine they can, so the program will start running whenever the machine is booted. (I HOPE you get permission!). The distribution includes both source and the Win32 executable. The source includes both fast Intel assembler, and much slower generic 'C'. There's nothing that's really Microsoft specific in the code - it should be easy to port to other systems with 32 bit or better processors. I'm attempting to do a 'PGP style' distribution with a signed, nested zip file. The signing key I'm using is available at http://www.ziplink.net/users/trei/crypto.html (I hope I've done this right). I'm only going to send out signed archives. If you get one where the signature fails, or one lacking a signature, I repudiate it - and you should be suspicous of it. I'll be trying to set up that URL as a page describing the project, with info on other efforts, and FAQs. Once the challenge starts, I hope you'll all evangelize it to your friends and acquaintences. I'd like to see 100,000 machines trying for the $10,000. All next week I'm in the San Francisco area (I'm flying out in a couple hours). I'll be attending the Verisign Partner's Day on Monday, and I'll be at the RSA Data Security Conference Tuesday through Friday. I'll be trying to read cypherpunks and coderpunks at least once a day, along with checking mail to ptrei at acm.org. I can't read cryptography at c2.net from an archive, so I will not see it unless it cc's ptrei at acm.org (Perry, could you temporarily subscribe ptrei at acm.org?) Happy hunting! Peter Trei ptrei at acm.org From nobody at REPLAY.COM Fri Jan 24 10:07:57 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:07:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy dumps Igor but allows KOTM Message-ID: <199701241711.SAA28269@basement.replay.com> Sandy Sandfort, our Leader, Moderator, Guidance Counselor, Censor, and Speaker-to-Gilmour said: "By the way, contrary to what Dimitri has alleged, I have posted every message from him in which he was able to restrain himself with regard to gratuitous insults and/or spam. In other words, the set of Dimitri posts that have appeared on the moderated list is not the null set." However, KOTM wrote: "Anything? My good friend TRRCJ3 reports from San Francisco that the city is much nicer now that so many homosexuals are 6 feet under. "Thank God for AIDS." (end quote from KOTM) Nice to know Sandy is doing such an efficient job of moderating out the "flames," such as by kicking Igor's crypto-relevant article on denial of service attacks to the flame bucket while bending over backwards to appear to be "fair" to KOTM. Face it, it's a bad idea. The Cypherpunks community is not the private sandbox of Gilmour and Sandfort, and we don't need Sandy's "guidance" to keep us from being straying sheep. The list may currently be hosted on Gilmour's computer, but having Sandy decide what's right for us to read is inconsistent with Cypherpunks ideals. GenX -- From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Fri Jan 24 10:16:54 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:16:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <199701241816.KAA02469@toad.com> At 04:57 PM 1/23/97 -0800, Alan Bostick wrote: >In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by >Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended >consequences of the V-Chip, the programmable device to be included in >next-generation television sets sold in the US that supposedly will >allow parents to control their children's access to sex and violence on >TV. > >Gladwell makes an analogy between V-Chipped TV content and >air-conditioned cars in the New York City subway system in summertime: >" . . . we need air-conditioners on subway cars because air-conditioners >on subway cars have made stations so hot that subway cars need to be >air-conditioned." Similarly, he argues, "the V-chip is likely to >increase the amount of sex and violence on television, not decrease it" >because when viewers can block offensive programming, there is far less >pressure on broadcasters and cable operators to avoid offending. > >This is just the sort of thing that John Young is given to scanning and >putting up on his Web site or sending out to people who send him email >with FUN_nie subject lines. If I were him, I'd put it up. > >And, for the benefit of those people who don't think the V-Chip isn't in >itself on-topic for cypherpunks, I might point out that Gladwell's >argument applies equally well to mail filtering with procmail recipes -- >or Sandy's and John's list moderation experiment. If the noise level on >the unmoderated list jumps to even higher than we were seeing before >the moderation began, that would provide observational support to >Gladwell's argument. You forgot about one thing, TV is one way. The V-chip will have dueling results. On the one hand, advertisers will only pay for shows that will have a large viewership. If that means that a rather objectionable show, which would traditionally draw a large population of pre-teens, can't be seen by its largest body of fans, it will probably be cut. On the other hand, TV execs won't have to worry about objections any longer and thus can broadcast what they want, assuming that they can find a decently large group of closet viewers. (Not a misstype, I meant people who are in the closet about their preferences, such as the minister with the playboy channel.) And TV is mostly one way. This net is two way, many of the shock posts were put here to draw fire. If the audience of these shock posts can not be reach to be outraged, the vile spewer will first raise the stakes, spewing even more garbage and then, finally, giving up. Just like the old argument, don't encourage them, just ignore them. Plus, a number of reply posts to the garbage will never be written because thier authors will have never seen the trash that they would have replied to. From jya at pipeline.com Fri Jan 24 10:17:55 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:17:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: PSS_sst Message-ID: <199701241817.KAA02540@toad.com> New Scientist of 25 January reviews the Bernstein's case against crypto export, US global seduction of foreign goverrments to suppress domestic calls for privacy, and therewith deftly alerts British leaders and readers to undermining the "secretive bureaucratic" Uncle Sam scam, says the deft-underminer cpunkers quoted. ----- PSS_sst From privsoft at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 24 10:19:42 1997 From: privsoft at ix.netcom.com (Steven M Orrin) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:19:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: 2 Questions Message-ID: <199701241819.KAA02578@toad.com> Hey guys, 2 quick questions: Are there any known hacks or weaknesses in S/Key? Has Anyone heard of a new product called SecureWin from Cipher Logics Corp. It looks like vaporware but is a little more sophisticated than the usual product spams (like IPG, POTP, Encrypt-it, WinKrypt etc.) [I checked there web page some interesting fuctions, , No software available yet and Phone numbers are either busy or not in service, go figure] thanks Steveo From EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU Fri Jan 24 10:41:35 1997 From: EALLENSMITH at ocelot.Rutgers.EDU (E. Allen Smith) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:41:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Vulis posting on the moderated list Message-ID: <199701241841.KAA03202@toad.com> Umm... is something going wrong with the moderation routines? Sandy also had a posting that he specifically _said_ was going to the flames & unedited lists _only_ that got to me. -Allen From: IN%"dlv at bwalk.dm.com" "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" 24-JAN-1997 12:43:05.89 To: IN%"cypherpunks at toad.com" CC: Subj: Homosexuals Received: from toad.com by mbcl.rutgers.edu (PMDF #12194) id <01IELB4M5E1C94FEIV at mbcl.rutgers.edu>; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:42 EDT Received: (from majordom at localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA25350; Fri, 24 Jan 1997 06:14:13 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 97 07:17:13 EST From: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" Subject: Homosexuals Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com To: cypherpunks at toad.com Message-id: <199701241414.GAA25350 at toad.com> X-Envelope-to: EALLENSMITH Precedence: bulk fuck you writes in the censored list: > If anyone has any text files on the following topics please send them. ... > Anything underground Anything? My good friend TRRCJ3 reports from San Francisco that the city is much nicer now that so many homosexuals are 6 feet under. Thank God for AIDS. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca Fri Jan 24 10:43:20 1997 From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:43:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701241843.KAA03251@toad.com> ichudov at algebra.com wrote> >Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the >criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. > >I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies >satisfy the current readership. > > - Igor. I am not enthused about the perceived need for moderation. But neither was I enthused with the state of the list. However, I will reserve judgement as to the success or failure of the experiment for a while yet. The question for me is how much the moderation improves the S/N ratio v.s. how much it impedes dialogue. I expect Sandy to make mistakes, even by his own criterion. But anyone who will publicly admit to shaving his eyebrows is probably not swayed by popular opinion. James From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Fri Jan 24 10:56:45 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:56:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <199701241856.KAA03653@toad.com> At 04:57 PM 1/23/97 -0800, Alan Bostick wrote: >In the Jan. 20, 1997, issue of THE NEW YORKER, the "Comment", written by >Malcolm Gladwell, makes a powerful arguement about the unintended >consequences of the V-Chip, the programmable device to be included in >next-generation television sets sold in the US that supposedly will >allow parents to control their children's access to sex and violence on >TV. > >Gladwell makes an analogy between V-Chipped TV content and >air-conditioned cars in the New York City subway system in summertime: >" . . . we need air-conditioners on subway cars because air-conditioners >on subway cars have made stations so hot that subway cars need to be >air-conditioned." Similarly, he argues, "the V-chip is likely to >increase the amount of sex and violence on television, not decrease it" >because when viewers can block offensive programming, there is far less >pressure on broadcasters and cable operators to avoid offending. > >This is just the sort of thing that John Young is given to scanning and >putting up on his Web site or sending out to people who send him email >with FUN_nie subject lines. If I were him, I'd put it up. > >And, for the benefit of those people who don't think the V-Chip isn't in >itself on-topic for cypherpunks, I might point out that Gladwell's >argument applies equally well to mail filtering with procmail recipes -- >or Sandy's and John's list moderation experiment. If the noise level on >the unmoderated list jumps to even higher than we were seeing before >the moderation began, that would provide observational support to >Gladwell's argument. You forgot about one thing, TV is one way. The V-chip will have dueling results. On the one hand, advertisers will only pay for shows that will have a large viewership. If that means that a rather objectionable show, which would traditionally draw a large population of pre-teens, can't be seen by its largest body of fans, it will probably be cut. On the other hand, TV execs won't have to worry about objections any longer and thus can broadcast what they want, assuming that they can find a decently large group of closet viewers. (Not a misstype, I meant people who are in the closet about their preferences, such as the minister with the playboy channel.) And TV is mostly one way. This net is two way, many of the shock posts were put here to draw fire. If the audience of these shock posts can not be reach to be outraged, the vile spewer will first raise the stakes, spewing even more garbage and then, finally, giving up. Just like the old argument, don't encourage them, just ignore them. Plus, a number of reply posts to the garbage will never be written because thier authors will have never seen the trash that they would have replied to. From ptrei at ACM.ORG Fri Jan 24 10:56:52 1997 From: ptrei at ACM.ORG (Peter Trei) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 10:56:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Message-ID: <199701241856.KAA03668@toad.com> DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Friday, Jan 23 1997 Peter Trei Next Tuesday morning, 9AM, RSA is scheduled to release the 'real' $10,000 DES challenge data. My software is in a state where it can be used for the challenge, though there is room for improvement. It currently tests about 185,000 keys/sec on my 90MHz machine. This translates to about 205,000 keys/sec on a 100 MHz machine. I still have to replace my DES round, which takes 25 clock cycles, with Svend Mikkelsen's, which takes only 18. Since the DES rounds are well over 80% of the work, this should boost the speed to over 250,000 keys/sec at 100 MHz. If I'm lucky, I'll perform this conversion over the weekend. I've sent out early betas to a few people for porting, but have had no feedback yet. I've approached several restricted FTP sites as possible distribution sites, and have had some positive responses, but nothing definitive yet. I'm being pretty strict in my interpretation of EAR for this purpose. In advance of the challenge, I'm willing to email copies as a ~100k uuencoded zip file to people, but to do so, you must comply with the following: 1. Send the request to ptrei at acm.org, NOT trei at process.com. I won't be able to read the latter for the next 10 days. 2. Include your 'true name' and residence address, as well as the email address to which it should be sent, . 3. A statement of your nationality. I'll mail it only to US Citizens, Canadian citizens, and US Green Card holders, residing in the US or Canada. 4. A statement to the effect that you understand that this is restricted code, and that cannot be exported or given to non-US/Canadian citizens I'm going to hold this information in strict confidence, and will surrender it only to a valid court order. It's similar to what you have to go through to download the domestic version of Netscape Navigator or PGP from MIT. You are free to distribute the software further. If you've complied with the requirements above, I believe that at that point I've done more than due diligence under ITAR/EAR. My software gets it's challenge data either from a text file cut-and-pasted from the RSA page, or from internally stored data. Tuesday night, I'll recompile the program with the real challenge data, and redistribute. My version runs on WinNT or Win95, on 486's and above. It's set up as a console app, which can run in background. I don't yet have a version for Win 3.1 or below 486, but may do in the future. The software is set up in such a way that it can be used either on a standalone system, or in a LAN environment with shared disks. The latter has a slightly more complex setup, but will allow many machines to share one executable and results file. I envisage people installing one copy on a shared disk in their workplace, and then adding the appropriate commands to the autoexec.bat file of every machine they can, so the program will start running whenever the machine is booted. (I HOPE you get permission!). The distribution includes both source and the Win32 executable. The source includes both fast Intel assembler, and much slower generic 'C'. There's nothing that's really Microsoft specific in the code - it should be easy to port to other systems with 32 bit or better processors. I'm attempting to do a 'PGP style' distribution with a signed, nested zip file. The signing key I'm using is available at http://www.ziplink.net/users/trei/crypto.html (I hope I've done this right). I'm only going to send out signed archives. If you get one where the signature fails, or one lacking a signature, I repudiate it - and you should be suspicous of it. I'll be trying to set up that URL as a page describing the project, with info on other efforts, and FAQs. Once the challenge starts, I hope you'll all evangelize it to your friends and acquaintences. I'd like to see 100,000 machines trying for the $10,000. All next week I'm in the San Francisco area (I'm flying out in a couple hours). I'll be attending the Verisign Partner's Day on Monday, and I'll be at the RSA Data Security Conference Tuesday through Friday. I'll be trying to read cypherpunks and coderpunks at least once a day, along with checking mail to ptrei at acm.org. I can't read cryptography at c2.net from an archive, so I will not see it unless it cc's ptrei at acm.org (Perry, could you temporarily subscribe ptrei at acm.org?) Happy hunting! Peter Trei ptrei at acm.org From biz25 at prodigy.net Fri Jan 24 11:03:32 1997 From: biz25 at prodigy.net (biz25 at prodigy.net) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:03:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Just drop you a note Message-ID: <199701241827.NAA144000@mail1y-int.prodigy.net> Hi, Just thought I would drop you a note letting you know of an opportunity that I came across lately. I have been amazed at the success I have had with this product. Please email me for URL (more details) if you are interested. Type "URL" in the subject line. Regards Sonia From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 24 11:19:10 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:19:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy dumps Igor but allows KOTM In-Reply-To: <199701241711.SAA28269@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: <199701241914.NAA15177@manifold.algebra.com> Anonymous wrote: > Sandy Sandfort, our Leader, Moderator, Guidance Counselor, Censor, and > Speaker-to-Gilmour said: > > "By the way, contrary to what Dimitri has alleged, I have posted > every message from him in which he was able to restrain himself > with regard to gratuitous insults and/or spam. In other words, > the set of Dimitri posts that have appeared on the moderated list > is not the null set." > > However, KOTM wrote: > > "Anything? My good friend TRRCJ3 reports from San Francisco that the > city is much nicer now that so many homosexuals are 6 feet under. > > "Thank God for AIDS." > > (end quote from KOTM) > > Nice to know Sandy is doing such an efficient job of moderating out the > "flames," such as by kicking Igor's crypto-relevant article on denial of > service attacks to the flame bucket while bending over backwards to appear > to be "fair" to KOTM. My article was not about denial of service technically, but rather about using computers to set people up. igor > Face it, it's a bad idea. The Cypherpunks community is not the private > sandbox of Gilmour and Sandfort, and we don't need Sandy's "guidance" to > keep us from being straying sheep. The list may currently be hosted on > Gilmour's computer, but having Sandy decide what's right for us to read is > inconsistent with Cypherpunks ideals. > > GenX > > > -- > - Igor. From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Fri Jan 24 11:20:56 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:20:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mondex Message-ID: <199701241919.MAA22802@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timothy C. May has been fired from Intel for stealing office supplies. o \ o / _ o __| \ / |__ o _ \ o / o /|\ | /\ ___\o \o | o/ o/__ /\ | /|\ Timothy C. May / \ / \ | \ /) | ( \ /o\ / ) | (\ / | / \ / \ From ptrei at ACM.ORG Fri Jan 24 11:25:28 1997 From: ptrei at ACM.ORG (Peter Trei) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:25:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Message-ID: <199701241925.LAA04648@toad.com> DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Friday, Jan 23 1997 Peter Trei Next Tuesday morning, 9AM, RSA is scheduled to release the 'real' $10,000 DES challenge data. My software is in a state where it can be used for the challenge, though there is room for improvement. It currently tests about 185,000 keys/sec on my 90MHz machine. This translates to about 205,000 keys/sec on a 100 MHz machine. I still have to replace my DES round, which takes 25 clock cycles, with Svend Mikkelsen's, which takes only 18. Since the DES rounds are well over 80% of the work, this should boost the speed to over 250,000 keys/sec at 100 MHz. If I'm lucky, I'll perform this conversion over the weekend. I've sent out early betas to a few people for porting, but have had no feedback yet. I've approached several restricted FTP sites as possible distribution sites, and have had some positive responses, but nothing definitive yet. I'm being pretty strict in my interpretation of EAR for this purpose. In advance of the challenge, I'm willing to email copies as a ~100k uuencoded zip file to people, but to do so, you must comply with the following: 1. Send the request to ptrei at acm.org, NOT trei at process.com. I won't be able to read the latter for the next 10 days. 2. Include your 'true name' and residence address, as well as the email address to which it should be sent, . 3. A statement of your nationality. I'll mail it only to US Citizens, Canadian citizens, and US Green Card holders, residing in the US or Canada. 4. A statement to the effect that you understand that this is restricted code, and that cannot be exported or given to non-US/Canadian citizens I'm going to hold this information in strict confidence, and will surrender it only to a valid court order. It's similar to what you have to go through to download the domestic version of Netscape Navigator or PGP from MIT. You are free to distribute the software further. If you've complied with the requirements above, I believe that at that point I've done more than due diligence under ITAR/EAR. My software gets it's challenge data either from a text file cut-and-pasted from the RSA page, or from internally stored data. Tuesday night, I'll recompile the program with the real challenge data, and redistribute. My version runs on WinNT or Win95, on 486's and above. It's set up as a console app, which can run in background. I don't yet have a version for Win 3.1 or below 486, but may do in the future. The software is set up in such a way that it can be used either on a standalone system, or in a LAN environment with shared disks. The latter has a slightly more complex setup, but will allow many machines to share one executable and results file. I envisage people installing one copy on a shared disk in their workplace, and then adding the appropriate commands to the autoexec.bat file of every machine they can, so the program will start running whenever the machine is booted. (I HOPE you get permission!). The distribution includes both source and the Win32 executable. The source includes both fast Intel assembler, and much slower generic 'C'. There's nothing that's really Microsoft specific in the code - it should be easy to port to other systems with 32 bit or better processors. I'm attempting to do a 'PGP style' distribution with a signed, nested zip file. The signing key I'm using is available at http://www.ziplink.net/users/trei/crypto.html (I hope I've done this right). I'm only going to send out signed archives. If you get one where the signature fails, or one lacking a signature, I repudiate it - and you should be suspicous of it. I'll be trying to set up that URL as a page describing the project, with info on other efforts, and FAQs. Once the challenge starts, I hope you'll all evangelize it to your friends and acquaintences. I'd like to see 100,000 machines trying for the $10,000. All next week I'm in the San Francisco area (I'm flying out in a couple hours). I'll be attending the Verisign Partner's Day on Monday, and I'll be at the RSA Data Security Conference Tuesday through Friday. I'll be trying to read cypherpunks and coderpunks at least once a day, along with checking mail to ptrei at acm.org. I can't read cryptography at c2.net from an archive, so I will not see it unless it cc's ptrei at acm.org (Perry, could you temporarily subscribe ptrei at acm.org?) Happy hunting! Peter Trei ptrei at acm.org From dsmith at prairienet.org Fri Jan 24 11:27:50 1997 From: dsmith at prairienet.org (David E. Smith) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:27:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970124132442.006b1fc4@midwest.net> I'm playing with SecureDrive; the problem is not with using it with a Zip disk so much as it is trying to get it to play nice with Windows 95. ObCrypto: Check this out (from the readme.txt that comes on every Zip disk before you delete it) 7. Secure sensitive files. To keep sensitive or confidential information safe, store it on a Zip disk and use your Zip Tools software to assign a password that must be used in order to read from or write to the disk. At work, you can protect sensitive information such as personnel files, company directories, and product plans and designs. At home, you can secure personal information such as tax records, budgets, and computerized checkbooks. Iomega hasn't been willing to tell me how the password is stored, so this looks like a big boiling pot of snake oil. Anyone out there played with Zip drive/disk internals and know how it works? dave From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 11:57:27 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 11:57:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy dumps Igor but allows KOTM In-Reply-To: <199701241711.SAA28269@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: <32E92D85.7A3@sk.sympatico.ca> Anonymous wrote: > > Face it, it's a bad idea. The Cypherpunks community is not the private > sandbox of Gilmour and Sandfort Yes it is. The fact that they are able to tell others when and how they will be moderated or censored makes it so. > The list may currently be hosted on > Gilmour's computer, but having Sandy decide what's right for us to read is > inconsistent with Cypherpunks ideals. So what is your point? The moderation process has little to do with rights or ideals. Now that the WWW is making the InterNet a money-making entity, rights and ideals will play a decreasingly important role in decisions regarding its use and the censorship thereof. Also, since John is becoming an increasingly important political entity in the InterNet community, I am sure that it is very important to him to be able to control the direction of his private list (and to use the age-old political device of having a 'front man' to take the 'heat' for his decisions). It is not the first time in history that fame and fortune (or even the smell of it in the wind) has led to 'rights' and 'ideals' needing a small bit of 'adjustment'. Toto From attila at primenet.com Fri Jan 24 12:19:51 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:19:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homosexuals In-Reply-To: <199701241414.GAA25350@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701242019.NAA20386@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701241414.GAA25350 at toad.com>, on 01/24/97 at 07:17 AM, "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" said: +Anything? My good friend TRRCJ3 reports from San Francisco that the +city is much nicer now that so many homosexuals are 6 feet under. +Thank God for AIDS. when AIDS was relatively obscure, I always dismissed AIDS as God's response to homosexuality (and other crimes against nature); i.e. -settlement by a just God. Unfortunately, some of these boy-girls could not keep it among themselves, and the closet queens brought it home. AIDS replicates asexually, knowing no boundaries. I would not wish the disease upon anyone, but if you play, you just might pay --as in "...reap what thy hath sown." One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died protesting he did not have the disease, nor was he a carrier. The flight steward was still sexually active until his impending death removed even his ability to passively participate. Unfortunately, he was not only in total denial as to the disease and its communicability, but he was also immensely profligate, having surrendered to total licentiousnous. To be strongly opposed to homosexuality has nothing to do with bigotry, political correctness, or aberrationist apologists; it is an exposition of the natural order among the species. and for those who deny God, read Darwin as to the relative rate of survival for deviant and/or abnormal species. == "eschewing my enmity is exemplary, even transcending my fraternity. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMukZO704kQrCC2kFAQHdVgP+K5WJPhgPDY3DJerIYHmz4PbsItrSQCF0 eoS2wyYVTG3PZ5YDhk+dRfn2OuhEE0n/vLiDlXakAjqQBtncyIF74pfE4mxn3DWC 1xLMJr9vFI7x0soX6sPIzSD9Yh0CyKHIk75r/RQk2T4doVoGSxJWbe0YKCItiGz4 PvH9hGh6F7E= =A2up -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 12:26:14 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:26:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970124132442.006b1fc4@midwest.net> Message-ID: <32E933F4.45CE@sk.sympatico.ca> David E. Smith wrote: > I'm playing with SecureDrive; the problem is not with using it > with a Zip disk so much as it is trying to get it to play nice > with Windows 95. > Iomega hasn't been willing to tell me how the password is stored, > so this looks like a big boiling pot of snake oil. Anyone out > there played with Zip drive/disk internals and know how it works? > Dave, I came across a 'cracker' program that claims to be able to hack the SecureDrive encryption system. Off the top of my head, I think it was called ZipCracker, or something similar in name to one of the PKZip encryption cracking programs. I found it on one of the hacker websites, and there was a text file regarding SecureDrive which went into some detail re: both the hardware and software aspects of the Zip drives and the encryption itself. Toto From rah at shipwright.com Fri Jan 24 12:31:21 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:31:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Online Spending with Smart Cards and E.Cash to To US$3.5bn byyear 2000 Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Date: Fri, 24 Jan 97 00:04:40 +0100 To: dcsb at ai.mit.edu Subject: Online Spending with Smart Cards and E.Cash to To US$3.5bn by year 2000 Cc: nelson at media.mit.edu.geer@OpenMarket.com From: a9050756 at unet.univie.ac.at (Mike Alexander) Sender: bounce-dcsb at ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: a9050756 at unet.univie.ac.at (Mike Alexander) >>[some Fed reserve guy's] argument for stored value cards is that the >>business costs of handling cash are so substantial that there is room >>for merchants to discount purchases when made by a means that does >>not require that handling cost. > >Does anyone know of a source for information on the overhead of >accepting various forms of payment? I assume the cost of cash is >smaller than credit cards for purchases under, say, $500. Any >estimates on smart cards? On pure digital cash (delivered via a >browser)? > >I'm particularly interested in micropayments, but the larger question >is interesting as well. I've worked on this topic extensively in the past months (writing a doctoral thesis on efficiency and risk in the payment system). I can assure you this: cash in is still and will remain one of the most efficient payment instruments. This holds looking at it from a private as well as social cost perspective with sufficient empirical support. Best Regards, Michael Alexander Doctoral Student at the University of Vienna -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.3i mQCNAzIhxYwAAAEEALtfkL/X6GuZpEECWnmkmbqqtGwNalb94Om82VUiBE8iU1OX 2e5WXQGsq1oManSqVQn3TpVo7VE9pMJr5vITAmkEA6szGRt5zbK5u/dIqhLnJnRE sVpiY61Xw6RvQKoXX7LSqOYSCqvIiY8GJ5gRpiKQNPZVuJRqbLipmU0fPqylAAUR tDFNaWNoYWVsIEYuIEFsZXhhbmRlciA8YTkwNTA3NTZAdW5ldC51bml2aWUuYWMu YXQ+iQCVAwUQMiHFjbipmU0fPqylAQGy4QP+LjB6lZXVYFZDpoVB7j8AGvkghSsr XicZapXPmsFX6xpt+S29EF4DGoDJIDq6VLJMZ2rQ1gFfEvvWzL7ekZ3orhLSpJoO WWRZF1MNZVWBNhzxBcdK2T6yrx4cBwQX7t299Ho0y1Go69VE9e3LN8YInIXoQYp5 bc4M0u16GqmV5eI= =5l49 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To unsubscribe from the dcsb list, send a letter to: Majordomo at ai.mit.edu In the body of the message, write: unsubscribe dcsb Or, to subscribe, write: subscribe dcsb If you have questions, write to me at Owner-DCSB at ai.mit.edu --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com Fri Jan 24 12:39:43 1997 From: MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen, Patrick) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 12:39:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: Igor sez: >Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the >criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. I question this, too. What, exactly, is the criterion? Cypherpunks charter sez: The cypherpunks list is a forum for discussing personal defenses for privacy in the digital domain. How does personal attacks through forged and anonymous mail not fit this topic? However, I _do_ have to say such a topic would have to keep with a descriptive attitude, rather than demonstrative... :-) On another note, even though some messages which may be of interest may get lost in the shuffle, I do like the reduced volume, esp. since I get listmail at work. Unfortunately, the reduced mail is a result of censorship... :-( ~ Patrick >---------- >From: ichudov at algebra.com[SMTP:ichudov at algebra.com] >Sent: Friday, January 24, 1997 2:33 AM >To: Cypherpunks >Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list > >I would like to start a thread to discuss the moderation and rejection >policy. > >My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks >on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous >remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames >mailing list. > >You can receive a copy of my article by an email request. > >The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected >my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances >of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including >its quoted part. > >Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the >criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. > >I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy >the current readership. > > - Igor. > > From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 24 13:12:34 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:12:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <199701242112.NAA07638@toad.com> David E. Smith wrote: > I'm playing with SecureDrive; the problem is not with using it > with a Zip disk so much as it is trying to get it to play nice > with Windows 95. > Iomega hasn't been willing to tell me how the password is stored, > so this looks like a big boiling pot of snake oil. Anyone out > there played with Zip drive/disk internals and know how it works? > Dave, I came across a 'cracker' program that claims to be able to hack the SecureDrive encryption system. Off the top of my head, I think it was called ZipCracker, or something similar in name to one of the PKZip encryption cracking programs. I found it on one of the hacker websites, and there was a text file regarding SecureDrive which went into some detail re: both the hardware and software aspects of the Zip drives and the encryption itself. Toto From Mullen Fri Jan 24 13:12:36 1997 From: Mullen (Mullen) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:12:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701242112.NAA07643@toad.com> Igor sez: >Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the >criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. I question this, too. What, exactly, is the criterion? Cypherpunks charter sez: The cypherpunks list is a forum for discussing personal defenses for privacy in the digital domain. How does personal attacks through forged and anonymous mail not fit this topic? However, I _do_ have to say such a topic would have to keep with a descriptive attitude, rather than demonstrative... :-) On another note, even though some messages which may be of interest may get lost in the shuffle, I do like the reduced volume, esp. since I get listmail at work. Unfortunately, the reduced mail is a result of censorship... :-( ~ Patrick >---------- >From: ichudov at algebra.com[SMTP:ichudov at algebra.com] >Sent: Friday, January 24, 1997 2:33 AM >To: Cypherpunks >Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list > >I would like to start a thread to discuss the moderation and rejection >policy. > >My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks >on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous >remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames >mailing list. > >You can receive a copy of my article by an email request. > >The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected >my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances >of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including >its quoted part. > >Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the >criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. > >I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy >the current readership. > > - Igor. > > From attila at primenet.com Fri Jan 24 13:12:40 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:12:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homosexuals Message-ID: <199701242112.NAA07645@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701241414.GAA25350 at toad.com>, on 01/24/97 at 07:17 AM, "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" said: +Anything? My good friend TRRCJ3 reports from San Francisco that the +city is much nicer now that so many homosexuals are 6 feet under. +Thank God for AIDS. when AIDS was relatively obscure, I always dismissed AIDS as God's response to homosexuality (and other crimes against nature); i.e. -settlement by a just God. Unfortunately, some of these boy-girls could not keep it among themselves, and the closet queens brought it home. AIDS replicates asexually, knowing no boundaries. I would not wish the disease upon anyone, but if you play, you just might pay --as in "...reap what thy hath sown." One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died protesting he did not have the disease, nor was he a carrier. The flight steward was still sexually active until his impending death removed even his ability to passively participate. Unfortunately, he was not only in total denial as to the disease and its communicability, but he was also immensely profligate, having surrendered to total licentiousnous. To be strongly opposed to homosexuality has nothing to do with bigotry, political correctness, or aberrationist apologists; it is an exposition of the natural order among the species. and for those who deny God, read Darwin as to the relative rate of survival for deviant and/or abnormal species. == "eschewing my enmity is exemplary, even transcending my fraternity. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMukZO704kQrCC2kFAQHdVgP+K5WJPhgPDY3DJerIYHmz4PbsItrSQCF0 eoS2wyYVTG3PZ5YDhk+dRfn2OuhEE0n/vLiDlXakAjqQBtncyIF74pfE4mxn3DWC 1xLMJr9vFI7x0soX6sPIzSD9Yh0CyKHIk75r/RQk2T4doVoGSxJWbe0YKCItiGz4 PvH9hGh6F7E= =A2up -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dsmith at prairienet.org Fri Jan 24 13:14:16 1997 From: dsmith at prairienet.org (David E. Smith) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:14:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <199701242114.NAA07698@toad.com> I'm playing with SecureDrive; the problem is not with using it with a Zip disk so much as it is trying to get it to play nice with Windows 95. ObCrypto: Check this out (from the readme.txt that comes on every Zip disk before you delete it) 7. Secure sensitive files. To keep sensitive or confidential information safe, store it on a Zip disk and use your Zip Tools software to assign a password that must be used in order to read from or write to the disk. At work, you can protect sensitive information such as personnel files, company directories, and product plans and designs. At home, you can secure personal information such as tax records, budgets, and computerized checkbooks. Iomega hasn't been willing to tell me how the password is stored, so this looks like a big boiling pot of snake oil. Anyone out there played with Zip drive/disk internals and know how it works? dave From rah at shipwright.com Fri Jan 24 13:14:19 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:14:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Online Spending with Smart Cards and E.Cash to To US$3.5bn by year 2000 Message-ID: <199701242114.NAA07699@toad.com> --- begin forwarded text Date: Fri, 24 Jan 97 00:04:40 +0100 To: dcsb at ai.mit.edu Subject: Online Spending with Smart Cards and E.Cash to To US$3.5bn by year 2000 Cc: nelson at media.mit.edu.geer@OpenMarket.com From: a9050756 at unet.univie.ac.at (Mike Alexander) Sender: bounce-dcsb at ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: a9050756 at unet.univie.ac.at (Mike Alexander) >>[some Fed reserve guy's] argument for stored value cards is that the >>business costs of handling cash are so substantial that there is room >>for merchants to discount purchases when made by a means that does >>not require that handling cost. > >Does anyone know of a source for information on the overhead of >accepting various forms of payment? I assume the cost of cash is >smaller than credit cards for purchases under, say, $500. Any >estimates on smart cards? On pure digital cash (delivered via a >browser)? > >I'm particularly interested in micropayments, but the larger question >is interesting as well. I've worked on this topic extensively in the past months (writing a doctoral thesis on efficiency and risk in the payment system). I can assure you this: cash in is still and will remain one of the most efficient payment instruments. This holds looking at it from a private as well as social cost perspective with sufficient empirical support. Best Regards, Michael Alexander Doctoral Student at the University of Vienna -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.3i mQCNAzIhxYwAAAEEALtfkL/X6GuZpEECWnmkmbqqtGwNalb94Om82VUiBE8iU1OX 2e5WXQGsq1oManSqVQn3TpVo7VE9pMJr5vITAmkEA6szGRt5zbK5u/dIqhLnJnRE sVpiY61Xw6RvQKoXX7LSqOYSCqvIiY8GJ5gRpiKQNPZVuJRqbLipmU0fPqylAAUR tDFNaWNoYWVsIEYuIEFsZXhhbmRlciA8YTkwNTA3NTZAdW5ldC51bml2aWUuYWMu YXQ+iQCVAwUQMiHFjbipmU0fPqylAQGy4QP+LjB6lZXVYFZDpoVB7j8AGvkghSsr XicZapXPmsFX6xpt+S29EF4DGoDJIDq6VLJMZ2rQ1gFfEvvWzL7ekZ3orhLSpJoO WWRZF1MNZVWBNhzxBcdK2T6yrx4cBwQX7t299Ho0y1Go69VE9e3LN8YInIXoQYp5 bc4M0u16GqmV5eI= =5l49 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To unsubscribe from the dcsb list, send a letter to: Majordomo at ai.mit.edu In the body of the message, write: unsubscribe dcsb Or, to subscribe, write: subscribe dcsb If you have questions, write to me at Owner-DCSB at ai.mit.edu --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From isptv at access.digex.net Fri Jan 24 13:16:56 1997 From: isptv at access.digex.net (ISP-TV Main Contact) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:16:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: CPSR President Aki Namioka Interviewed on "Real Time" Monday Message-ID: <199701242115.QAA10544@access5.digex.net> *** ISP-TV Program Announcement: CPSR President Aki Namioka Interviewed on "Real Time" *** *** Monday, Jan. 27 *** *** 9 PM ET / 6 PM PT *** Aki Namioka is President of the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR), a non-profit, public-interest group which advocates for civil rights with respect to electronic information. Netizens may remember Namioka's speech against the CDA at Seattle's "Internet Day of Protest" Rally. We'll ask Ms. Namioka about the history of the CPSR, and current issues CPSR follows in cyber rights, civil liberties, and technology education. She will be interviewed remotely over CU-SeeMe from the Speakeasy Cafe in Seattle, Washington (http://www.speakeasy.org/). Call-in questions will be taken during the show at (301) 847-6571. **** This video interview can be viewed on the ISP-TV main CU-SeeMe reflector at IP 205.197.248.54, or other ISP-TV affiliate reflectors listed at http://www.digex.net/isptv/members.html. See URL http://www.digex.net/isptv for more information about the ISP-TV Network To get email about future programming on ISP-TV, email the word "subscribe" to isptv-prog-request at isptv.digex.net. To obtain Enhanced CU-SeeMe software, go to: http://goliath.wpine.com/cudownload.htm From cynthb at sonetis.com Fri Jan 24 13:29:39 1997 From: cynthb at sonetis.com (Cynthia H. Brown) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:29:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list In-Reply-To: <32E8B499.27B5@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected > > my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances > > of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including > > its quoted part. > > The standard of what constitutes a 'flame' seems to rest very much > upon whom a comment is directed at, or merely 'vaguely toward'. Beauty, flames and censorship are all in the eyes of the beholder. However, by providing both "raw" and "cooked" versions of the list, Sandy is allowing readers to choose for themselves whether or not they want someone else's filters applied to their mailbox. Personally, I choose to press the "Delete" key myself. > > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > > criterion by which he moderates this list. > > This was more than obvious to anyone who cared to cast an objective > eye on the process, but their input was pooh-paah'd by the 'washed > masses'. Note that Sandy also stated that the post in question would not be sent to the 'washed masses'. > > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > > the current readership. > > Like all of the 'opinions' that were expressed prior to the censorship > of the list? I haven't seen any indication that these opinions were > given the slightest consideration. This is not the readership's list. > It is a private individual's list. Agreed, and said private individual can do as s/he sees fit. My only objection is that the moderated version has the same name as the original list (sounds like Rogers Cable's recent attempt at "Costs More Unless You Speak Up Now" channels). > In short, I don't see the moderation as being 'fair', and I don't > think it was ever meant to be. Again, fairness is in the eyes of the beholder. I don't object to the list being filtered, as long as everyone understands that this is happening. What will happen, I wonder, if at the end of the trial period the number of subscribers to the "raw" list outnumbers those who get the "cooked" list, or vice versa? Is that one of the criteria for determining the "success" of the experiment? Cynthia =============================================================== Cynthia H. Brown, P.Eng. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada E-mail: cynthb at sonetis.com Home Page: http://www.sonetis.com/~cynthb/ PGP Key: See Home Page Junk mail will be ignored in the order in which it is received. Klein bottle for rent; enquire within. From attila at primenet.com Fri Jan 24 13:34:48 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 13:34:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701242134.OAA23867@infowest.com> aga's original message follows pgp----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- when AIDS was relatively obscure, I always dismissed AIDS as God's response to homosexuality (and other crimes against nature); i.e. -settlement by a just God. Unfortunately, some of these boy-girls could not keep it among themselves, and the closet queens brought it home. AIDS replicates asexually, knowing no boundaries. I would not wish the disease upon anyone, but if you play, you just might pay --as in "...reap what thy hath sown." One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died protesting he did not have the disease, nor was he a carrier. The flight steward was still sexually active until his impending death removed even his ability to passively participate. Unfortunately, he was not only in total denial as to the disease and its communicability, but he was also immensely profligate, having surrendered to total licentiousnous. To be strongly opposed to homosexuality has nothing to do with bigotry, political correctness, or aberrationist apologists; it is an exposition of the natural order among the species. and for those who deny God, read Darwin as to the relative rate of survival for deviant and/or abnormal species. == "eschewing my enmity is exemplary, even transcending my fraternity. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMukqX704kQrCC2kFAQGsDAQAxAMLt2JwaKqfz1Kw5IMf+EAQnQaoxpzR LtyTbCEvwhZRymfFwLZPj3P9Ph074ufOv0r/EmntvF2KmTETWM7k8ol5EySGjCbf 2mytxMy5VQiy5TBJWCvnxwdp/UjACtBM1sY8X16UyMLSE0tyzy4k3sF0TmPPkKdG FUQZzjXwYfQ= =TNlj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- In , on 01/16/97 at 06:28 AM, aga said: +> "Who Are The Patients? +> "In the United States, homosexual and bisexual males make up > +approximately 62 percent of the total patients. The other major group > +afflicted with AIDS are intravenous drug abusers -- both men and women +-- +> who constitute 20 percent of the total. . . ." +> +> "ADULTS AND ADOLESCENTS WITH AIDS, 1981-87 +> ================================== Males % Females % Both sexes +% > Homosexual/bisexual males 50,325 68 0 +50,325 62 > Intravenous (IV) drug abusers 12,529 17 3,622 52 +16,151 20 > Homosexual male an IV drug abusers 5,874 8 +5,874 7 > Hemophilia/coagulation disorder 751 1 22 0 +773 1 > Heterosexuals 1,516 2 2,073 30 +3,589 4 > Blood transfusion 1,297 2 747 11 +2,044 3 > Undetermined (1) 2,143 3 519 7 +2,662 3 > TOTAL 74,435 91 6,983 9 +81,418 100 > +========================================================================= +> "Note: Provisional data. Cases with more than one risk factor than +the > combinations listed are tabulated only in the category listed +first. > (1) Includes patients on whom risk information is incomplete, +patients > still under investigation, men reported only to have had +heterosexual > contact with a prostitute, and patients for whom no +specific risk was > identified; also includes one health care worker +who developed AIDS after > a documented needle-stick to blood. Source: +Centers for Disease Control." > +========================================================================= +> Cited in "The Universal Almanac 1990", Andrews and McMeel, 1989. > +========================================================================= From gen2600 at aracnet.com Fri Jan 24 14:34:04 1997 From: gen2600 at aracnet.com (Genocide) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:34:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <199701241555.HAA27672@toad.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, fuck you wrote: > Are their any H/ P/ V/ A/ C ers on this list?? Yes. Genocide Head of the Genocide2600 Group ============================================================================ **Coming soon! www.Genocide2600.com! ____________________ *---===| |===---* *---===| Genocide |===---* "You can be a king or a street *---===| 2600 |===---* sweeper, but everyone dances with the *---===|__________________|===---* Grim Reaper." Email: gen2600 at aracnet.com Web: http://www.aracnet.com/~gen2600 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. It is by the Mountain Dew that the thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. ================================================================================ From gen2600 at aracnet.com Fri Jan 24 14:43:02 1997 From: gen2600 at aracnet.com (Genocide) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:43:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail Message-ID: <199701242243.OAA10349@toad.com> On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, fuck you wrote: > Are their any H/ P/ V/ A/ C ers on this list?? Yes. Genocide Head of the Genocide2600 Group ============================================================================ **Coming soon! www.Genocide2600.com! ____________________ *---===| |===---* *---===| Genocide |===---* "You can be a king or a street *---===| 2600 |===---* sweeper, but everyone dances with the *---===|__________________|===---* Grim Reaper." Email: gen2600 at aracnet.com Web: http://www.aracnet.com/~gen2600 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. It is by the Mountain Dew that the thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. ================================================================================ From attila at primenet.com Fri Jan 24 14:43:04 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:43:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive Message-ID: <199701242243.OAA10355@toad.com> aga's original message follows pgp----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- when AIDS was relatively obscure, I always dismissed AIDS as God's response to homosexuality (and other crimes against nature); i.e. -settlement by a just God. Unfortunately, some of these boy-girls could not keep it among themselves, and the closet queens brought it home. AIDS replicates asexually, knowing no boundaries. I would not wish the disease upon anyone, but if you play, you just might pay --as in "...reap what thy hath sown." One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died protesting he did not have the disease, nor was he a carrier. The flight steward was still sexually active until his impending death removed even his ability to passively participate. Unfortunately, he was not only in total denial as to the disease and its communicability, but he was also immensely profligate, having surrendered to total licentiousnous. To be strongly opposed to homosexuality has nothing to do with bigotry, political correctness, or aberrationist apologists; it is an exposition of the natural order among the species. and for those who deny God, read Darwin as to the relative rate of survival for deviant and/or abnormal species. == "eschewing my enmity is exemplary, even transcending my fraternity. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMukqX704kQrCC2kFAQGsDAQAxAMLt2JwaKqfz1Kw5IMf+EAQnQaoxpzR LtyTbCEvwhZRymfFwLZPj3P9Ph074ufOv0r/EmntvF2KmTETWM7k8ol5EySGjCbf 2mytxMy5VQiy5TBJWCvnxwdp/UjACtBM1sY8X16UyMLSE0tyzy4k3sF0TmPPkKdG FUQZzjXwYfQ= =TNlj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- In , on 01/16/97 at 06:28 AM, aga said: +> "Who Are The Patients? +> "In the United States, homosexual and bisexual males make up > +approximately 62 percent of the total patients. The other major group > +afflicted with AIDS are intravenous drug abusers -- both men and women +-- +> who constitute 20 percent of the total. . . ." +> +> "ADULTS AND ADOLESCENTS WITH AIDS, 1981-87 +> ================================== Males % Females % Both sexes +% > Homosexual/bisexual males 50,325 68 0 +50,325 62 > Intravenous (IV) drug abusers 12,529 17 3,622 52 +16,151 20 > Homosexual male an IV drug abusers 5,874 8 +5,874 7 > Hemophilia/coagulation disorder 751 1 22 0 +773 1 > Heterosexuals 1,516 2 2,073 30 +3,589 4 > Blood transfusion 1,297 2 747 11 +2,044 3 > Undetermined (1) 2,143 3 519 7 +2,662 3 > TOTAL 74,435 91 6,983 9 +81,418 100 > +========================================================================= +> "Note: Provisional data. Cases with more than one risk factor than +the > combinations listed are tabulated only in the category listed +first. > (1) Includes patients on whom risk information is incomplete, +patients > still under investigation, men reported only to have had +heterosexual > contact with a prostitute, and patients for whom no +specific risk was > identified; also includes one health care worker +who developed AIDS after > a documented needle-stick to blood. Source: +Centers for Disease Control." > +========================================================================= +> Cited in "The Universal Almanac 1990", Andrews and McMeel, 1989. > +========================================================================= From cynthb at sonetis.com Fri Jan 24 14:44:44 1997 From: cynthb at sonetis.com (Cynthia H. Brown) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:44:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701242244.OAA10411@toad.com> On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > The explanation that Sandy Sandfort gave me mentioned that he rejected > > my message because it continued a thread where Sandy noticed instances > > of "flaming". Note that my message was free of any flames, including > > its quoted part. > > The standard of what constitutes a 'flame' seems to rest very much > upon whom a comment is directed at, or merely 'vaguely toward'. Beauty, flames and censorship are all in the eyes of the beholder. However, by providing both "raw" and "cooked" versions of the list, Sandy is allowing readers to choose for themselves whether or not they want someone else's filters applied to their mailbox. Personally, I choose to press the "Delete" key myself. > > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > > criterion by which he moderates this list. > > This was more than obvious to anyone who cared to cast an objective > eye on the process, but their input was pooh-paah'd by the 'washed > masses'. Note that Sandy also stated that the post in question would not be sent to the 'washed masses'. > > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > > the current readership. > > Like all of the 'opinions' that were expressed prior to the censorship > of the list? I haven't seen any indication that these opinions were > given the slightest consideration. This is not the readership's list. > It is a private individual's list. Agreed, and said private individual can do as s/he sees fit. My only objection is that the moderated version has the same name as the original list (sounds like Rogers Cable's recent attempt at "Costs More Unless You Speak Up Now" channels). > In short, I don't see the moderation as being 'fair', and I don't > think it was ever meant to be. Again, fairness is in the eyes of the beholder. I don't object to the list being filtered, as long as everyone understands that this is happening. What will happen, I wonder, if at the end of the trial period the number of subscribers to the "raw" list outnumbers those who get the "cooked" list, or vice versa? Is that one of the criteria for determining the "success" of the experiment? Cynthia =============================================================== Cynthia H. Brown, P.Eng. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada E-mail: cynthb at sonetis.com Home Page: http://www.sonetis.com/~cynthb/ PGP Key: See Home Page Junk mail will be ignored in the order in which it is received. Klein bottle for rent; enquire within. From frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu Fri Jan 24 14:44:49 1997 From: frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:44:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: (fwd) Re: PGP implementation source code Message-ID: <199701242244.RAA28907@yakko.cs.wmich.edu> [The discussion started with Pretty Safe Mail, the recent "PGP-compatible" Mac program, and whether or not it was safe. Source code is not available. Some authors noted that PSM was much slower than PGP, but so far lives up to its promise of user-friendliness. A Win95 version is in the works.] >From: Ian_Miller at bifroest.demon.co.uk (Ian Miller) Newsgroups: comp.security.pgp.discuss,comp.security.pgp.resources Subject: Re: PGP implementation source code (was "Imminent Death of PGP?" revisited) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 19:55:46 +0000 Lines: 66 Message-ID: In article <5c2kap$1tu at topcat.uk.gdscorp.com>, Steve Gilham wrote: >PGP defines, but, IIRC does not inspect, a comment packet type. This >packet type could be added to a .pgp file and contain anything the >implementor wished (your plaintext secret key if it has been used in >this instance of the program, any IDEA key used, your passphrase, if >given) without any standard PGP implementation being aware of it The IDEA initialisation vector could also be used as a subliminal channel, it is only 8 bytes but it could (for example) leak a random 60 bits of one prime in your secret key with the remain 4 bits saying which set of 60 bits. Worse is the possibility that the program could put a back door into RSA key generation to make the modulus trivially factorisable by someone in the know. There are a number of mechanisms for this of varying detectability up to detectable only by reverse-engineering. Here are some of the (endless) possibilities in order of increasing sophistication:- 1) Make one of the primes a constant. Factorise by dividing by this number. Detectable by inspection of public keys alone. (For more details, see my article "There are no common factors in the Public keyring", 13th Jan in comp.security.pgp.announce.) 2) Select the first prime P at random but make second prime Q the smallest prime larger than PK where K is a constant. Factorise by searching from root(N/K). Probably detectable by suitable inspection of several secret keys generated by the product, but (I think) undetectable from public keys alone. 3) Select a random seed and using a good PRNG, make the rest of generation process deterministic based on the seed. Use the "deadbeef" technique to select a modulus that has this seed as its least significant bytes. Factorise by extracting the seed from the modulus and repeating the deterministic key generation. This is detectable only by reverse engineering. 4) Select a random seed and use a short key PKE key exchange system (e.g. Elliptic curve) to generate a session key and a key exchange cyphertext. Use a key generation similar to (3) except that you seed the PRNG with the session key and deadbeef to make a key ending in the key exchange cyphertext. Factorise by extracting and decrypting the session key (requires a secret key), and repeating the key generation. Again this is only detectable by reverse engineering, but even after executing the reverse engineering you still cannot factor the keys generated because the program only contains the public key not the secret key. Method (4) is an interesting example of a "locked back-door". There is often an unstated assumption that back-doors have to be open. i.e. If you can find them you can get in. It isn't always true. Whereas it seems intuitively unlikely, it is not inconceivable that there is a way of putting a locked back-door into some forms of Feistel ciphers. The NSA would have been reluctant to put an open back-door into DES, but they would not have hesitated to put in a locked back-door. In my opinion the only safe assumption is that they could and they did. In cryptography you shouldn't trust your intuition, code with source or unexplained algorithm components. Ian Ian_Miller at bifroest.demon.co.uk FAI-D10204 PGP key 1024/FCE97719 FP: 2A 20 46 10 E5 96 27 40 91 B1 95 BA CA D3 BC 14 Antworten auf Deutsch waeren mir angenehm. -- http://yakko.cs.wmich.edu/~frogfarm ...for the best in unapproved information Tell your friends 'n neighbors you read this on the evil pornographic Internet "Where one burns books, one will also burn people eventually." -Heinrich Heine People and books aren't for burning. No more Alexandrias, Auschwitzs or Wacos. From pal at king.cts.com Fri Jan 24 14:59:37 1997 From: pal at king.cts.com (pal at king.cts.com) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 14:59:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Extra Income Message-ID: <199701241240.EAA12093@mh1.CTS.COM> *********************************************************************** Our Research Has Indicated That The Following Message Will Be Of Interest To You. *********************************************************************** Imagine what you can do with... UP TO $800.00 A WEEK EXTRA INCOME! Here's How To Get Started Let me tell you which companies to contact so you can start to receive your checks. They can be $200.00, $400.00, even $800.00 per week, depending on what you do. You can earn this excellent income right at home. And you work only when you want to. My name is Henry Summers. I investigate income opportunities that are advertised in magazines or by mail or are listed in home work directories and other sources. Then I talk to people who are actually using these opportunities. I ask how much money they make... and whether they enjoy the work. This helps me direct you to the best opportunities that are available today. Ones that people are using right now to earn all the money they want. Get Paid For Stuffing Envelopes. No Fees. Nothing To Buy. This easy work is very appealing, but most people do not know how to get it. That's because so many of the envelope stuffing programs being advertised are not what you expect. And you don't find that out until after you send in your money. Let me tell you the real facts. With true envelope stuffing... * You do not need to pay any fee or buy any materials to get started. * You do not do any advertising or handle any orders. * All printing, postage, and mailing lists are supplied free by the companies that pay you. * Your pay is based entirely on how many envelopes you complete. Rosie Martinez is an example of someone who earns money stuffing envelopes. The company delivers all the materials right to her door. She stuffs the envelopes, seals them, and applies the mailing labels and postage stamps that are supplied. Then she gets paid for every envelope completed. Rosie says, "I'm retired, and I enjoy having something to do. I usually watch television while I work. The home shopping shows are much more fun now that I have money to spend." If you'd like to do this kind of work, just follow the directions in Chapter 3 of my book "Real Home Income". Or try any of the other opportunities covered. Hundreds of companies are ready to help you make money. I'll tell you what each one has available now. Choose the kind of work you like and write to the companies who offer it. Pick any you want. You can work as an independent contractor for as many companies as you have time for. There are no qualifications to meet, so you will not be turned down. I guarantee it. If you don't like one company or you want to make more money, there are plenty of others you can try. Get Paid For Assembling Miniatures Gina Walker of Texas likes to assemble miniature furniture for doll houses. All the necessary materials are supplied by the company that pays her. She puts them together and sends them back to the company. Everything is conveniently handled by mail and UPS. The company sends her a nice pay check for each batch she completes. Gina says: "I really like the work, and the extra money helps pay my bills. I'm glad I found out about these companies." You can get paid the same way. And you don't have to make miniatures. You can choose from many other types of work. You can sew baby bonnets, assemble beaded jewelry, crochet doll clothes, make wooden items, assemble stuffed animals, paint figurines, weave rattan reed, and many more. You get the names and addresses of over 50 companies that will pay for things you make or assemble at home. No experience is required, and it makes no difference where you live. Almost all the companies supply the needed materials. Just do the work and get paid for each batch you send back. Wouldn't you like to get those pay checks? I'll show you how to get started fast. How I Made $800.00 Per Week After Losing My Job I became interested in home income opportunities several years ago when I lost my job. I sent for dozens of money making offers. Most were totally worthless. Others did not appeal to me. But circular mailing caught my interest... and it actually worked. In just six weeks, I was making over $800.00 a week working part time at home. It was better than my previous job. I soon paid off my bills and bought a new car. Yet that was only the beginning. As I learned more about it and tried different things, the money poured in even faster. It made a huge difference when I applied certain secrets that are used by the experts. I was amazed at how profitable it could be. In "Real Home Income" you'll learn how to use those secrets yourself. I'll tell you which companies to contact to get started. I'll show you some simple steps you can take to double your income without doing any more work. If you want, you can do all of this without handling any orders. Your name and address does not have to appear on anything you mail. You just mail circulars for companies and receive nice fat checks from them. With my proven methods, you can soon be earning more money than you ever imagined. Just follow my directions, and you can start receiving checks from the same companies I do. Receive One Dollar For Each Envelope You Stuff. Envelopes Come To You Already Stamped And Addressed. This easy work is advertised by over thirty- five companies. But they require that you pay $25.00 to $45.00 to register in their program. And then the program seldom turns out to be what you'd expect. That's where my book can help out. I describe the three kinds of mail programs that pay one dollar per envelope. But there is only ONE that I recommend. Not only is it more profitable overall, but you don't have to pay any fee to do it. Not even a dollar. Read about "The World's Best Dollar- Per- Envelope Program" in Chapter 4. How To Avoid Disappointment So many worthless offers are commonly advertised that many people give up before they come across a good one. That won't happen to you when you have my book. It tells you exactly how to recognize and avoid worthless offers. The most common ripoffs are covered in detail. This knowledge can save you a great deal of time and money. You can then take advantage of the many practical, down- to- earth opportunities that are described. Ones that enable you to start making money fast. Even just one extra source of income can make a big difference in your standard of living. Start To Earn Money In 48 Hours When you get the book, look over the many excellent opportunities. Each listing includes a brief description of what is offered. Write to the companies you like and request an application form. They have openings right now, and they'll be happy to get you started. You can begin to make money even faster if you choose one of the programs or plans that the book describes in detail. I'll tell you everything you need to know to get started. By taking a few simple steps, you can already be making money just 48 hours after you receive the book. Unlimited No Nonsense Guarantee "Real Home Income" costs just $29.95 plus $3.00 for postage and handling. I'm so confident you can make the money I've talked about that I back it with a lifetime, money- back guarantee. If at any time you feel the book has not helped you make all the money you want, just send it back. I'll promptly send you a full refund of everything you paid, including postage and tax. Start to enjoy more income and a better life as soon as possible. Please complete the order form and mail it today. Everything will be rushed to you by first class mail. Sincerely, Henry Summers P.S. I've recently discovered an amazingly profitable opportunity. One person I talked to made $20,000 in his first six weeks... working right at home in his spare time. It is not multi- level marketing. I've never seen anything like it before. I'l give you a toll free number to call so you can get started. Please Print and Mail This Order Form ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUMMERS PUBLICATIONS # 30516 1010 Calle Cordillera, P.O. Box 3127 San Clemente, CA 92672 ( ) Yes, I would like to get started. Please rush me "Real Home Income" under your lifetime money- back guarantee. Enclosed is $29.95 plus $3.00 for postage and handling. $32.95 total. (If you live in California, please send $34.95) Name____________________________________________ Address___________________________________________ City, State, Zip_____________________________________ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu Fri Jan 24 15:20:37 1997 From: frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 15:20:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: (fwd) New keyserver available Message-ID: <199701242320.SAA29771@yakko.cs.wmich.edu> >From: tage at cc.uit.no (Tage Stabell-Kulo) Newsgroups: comp.security.pgp.tech Subject: New keyserver available Date: 24 Jan 1997 16:11:26 GMT Lines: 12 Message-ID: <5camve$3d4 at news.uit.no> A new PGP keyserver, still _very_ experimental, is available at host dslab1.cs.uit.no at port 24162, use telnet(1). In general it will find a key in a few seconds. Your comments and suggestions are solicited. -- //// Tage Stabell-Kuloe | e-mail: Tage at ACM.org //// /// Department of Computer Science/IMR | Phone : +47-776-44032 /// // 9037 University of Tromsoe, Norway | Fax : +47-776-44580 // / "'oe' is '\o' in TeX" | URL:http://www.cs.uit.no/~tage/ -- http://yakko.cs.wmich.edu/~frogfarm ...for the best in unapproved information "We think people like seeing somebody in a uniform on the porch." -US Postal spokeswoman, quoted in AP, 1/27/96. I don't know about you, but most people I know who saw someone in uniform on their porch would pull out the shotgun... From frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu Fri Jan 24 15:29:20 1997 From: frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 15:29:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: (fwd) Re: PGP implementation source code Message-ID: <199701242329.PAA11838@toad.com> [The discussion started with Pretty Safe Mail, the recent "PGP-compatible" Mac program, and whether or not it was safe. Source code is not available. Some authors noted that PSM was much slower than PGP, but so far lives up to its promise of user-friendliness. A Win95 version is in the works.] >From: Ian_Miller at bifroest.demon.co.uk (Ian Miller) Newsgroups: comp.security.pgp.discuss,comp.security.pgp.resources Subject: Re: PGP implementation source code (was "Imminent Death of PGP?" revisited) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 19:55:46 +0000 Lines: 66 Message-ID: In article <5c2kap$1tu at topcat.uk.gdscorp.com>, Steve Gilham wrote: >PGP defines, but, IIRC does not inspect, a comment packet type. This >packet type could be added to a .pgp file and contain anything the >implementor wished (your plaintext secret key if it has been used in >this instance of the program, any IDEA key used, your passphrase, if >given) without any standard PGP implementation being aware of it The IDEA initialisation vector could also be used as a subliminal channel, it is only 8 bytes but it could (for example) leak a random 60 bits of one prime in your secret key with the remain 4 bits saying which set of 60 bits. Worse is the possibility that the program could put a back door into RSA key generation to make the modulus trivially factorisable by someone in the know. There are a number of mechanisms for this of varying detectability up to detectable only by reverse-engineering. Here are some of the (endless) possibilities in order of increasing sophistication:- 1) Make one of the primes a constant. Factorise by dividing by this number. Detectable by inspection of public keys alone. (For more details, see my article "There are no common factors in the Public keyring", 13th Jan in comp.security.pgp.announce.) 2) Select the first prime P at random but make second prime Q the smallest prime larger than PK where K is a constant. Factorise by searching from root(N/K). Probably detectable by suitable inspection of several secret keys generated by the product, but (I think) undetectable from public keys alone. 3) Select a random seed and using a good PRNG, make the rest of generation process deterministic based on the seed. Use the "deadbeef" technique to select a modulus that has this seed as its least significant bytes. Factorise by extracting the seed from the modulus and repeating the deterministic key generation. This is detectable only by reverse engineering. 4) Select a random seed and use a short key PKE key exchange system (e.g. Elliptic curve) to generate a session key and a key exchange cyphertext. Use a key generation similar to (3) except that you seed the PRNG with the session key and deadbeef to make a key ending in the key exchange cyphertext. Factorise by extracting and decrypting the session key (requires a secret key), and repeating the key generation. Again this is only detectable by reverse engineering, but even after executing the reverse engineering you still cannot factor the keys generated because the program only contains the public key not the secret key. Method (4) is an interesting example of a "locked back-door". There is often an unstated assumption that back-doors have to be open. i.e. If you can find them you can get in. It isn't always true. Whereas it seems intuitively unlikely, it is not inconceivable that there is a way of putting a locked back-door into some forms of Feistel ciphers. The NSA would have been reluctant to put an open back-door into DES, but they would not have hesitated to put in a locked back-door. In my opinion the only safe assumption is that they could and they did. In cryptography you shouldn't trust your intuition, code with source or unexplained algorithm components. Ian Ian_Miller at bifroest.demon.co.uk FAI-D10204 PGP key 1024/FCE97719 FP: 2A 20 46 10 E5 96 27 40 91 B1 95 BA CA D3 BC 14 Antworten auf Deutsch waeren mir angenehm. -- http://yakko.cs.wmich.edu/~frogfarm ...for the best in unapproved information Tell your friends 'n neighbors you read this on the evil pornographic Internet "Where one burns books, one will also burn people eventually." -Heinrich Heine People and books aren't for burning. No more Alexandrias, Auschwitzs or Wacos. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Fri Jan 24 16:04:12 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 16:04:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) Message-ID: <199701250011.SAA14159@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 24 Jan 97 21:33:41 +0000 > From: "Attila T. Hun" > Subject: Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive Much drivel about AIDS deleted. > One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the > man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier > #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died The correct term is 'Patient 0'. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu Fri Jan 24 16:10:56 1997 From: frogfarm at yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 16:10:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: (fwd) New keyserver available Message-ID: <199701250010.QAA13349@toad.com> >From: tage at cc.uit.no (Tage Stabell-Kulo) Newsgroups: comp.security.pgp.tech Subject: New keyserver available Date: 24 Jan 1997 16:11:26 GMT Lines: 12 Message-ID: <5camve$3d4 at news.uit.no> A new PGP keyserver, still _very_ experimental, is available at host dslab1.cs.uit.no at port 24162, use telnet(1). In general it will find a key in a few seconds. Your comments and suggestions are solicited. -- //// Tage Stabell-Kuloe | e-mail: Tage at ACM.org //// /// Department of Computer Science/IMR | Phone : +47-776-44032 /// // 9037 University of Tromsoe, Norway | Fax : +47-776-44580 // / "'oe' is '\o' in TeX" | URL:http://www.cs.uit.no/~tage/ -- http://yakko.cs.wmich.edu/~frogfarm ...for the best in unapproved information "We think people like seeing somebody in a uniform on the porch." -US Postal spokeswoman, quoted in AP, 1/27/96. I don't know about you, but most people I know who saw someone in uniform on their porch would pull out the shotgun... From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Fri Jan 24 16:26:01 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 16:26:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) Message-ID: <199701250026.QAA13770@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 24 Jan 97 21:33:41 +0000 > From: "Attila T. Hun" > Subject: Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive Much drivel about AIDS deleted. > One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the > man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier > #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died The correct term is 'Patient 0'. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From aaron at herringn.com Fri Jan 24 16:35:32 1997 From: aaron at herringn.com (aaron at herringn.com) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 16:35:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... In-Reply-To: <199701242243.OAA10355@toad.com> Message-ID: Presented in a "this will help 911" context. Still disconcerting. [...] Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls have been given additional incentive with a Federal Communications Commission order that all cell phone service companies have location programs in place by the year 2001. [...] http://cnn.com/US/9701/22/911.rescue/index.html From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 24 16:40:28 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 16:40:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homosexuality In-Reply-To: <199701241612.IAA28256@toad.com> Message-ID: Lou Zer writes: > Does any one know of any other good mailing Lists either with crypto or > anything underground Perhaps we should start an unmoderated list and call it "cypherpunks". Or create alt.cypherpunks. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 24 16:43:18 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 16:43:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Airport security [no such thing] In-Reply-To: <199701241359.FAA24956@toad.com> Message-ID: <3D021D18w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Sandy Sandfort writes: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, ... > By the way number two, this response will be posted to the flames > list and NOT the moderated list. Even though I have not flamed > anyone, two things keep it off the moderated list: (1) my policy > about keeping thread on the same list where possible (see above), > and (2) basic precepts of fairness. Sandy lied - he posted this aritcle to BOTH cypherpunks-flames and the censored list. Does anyone else enjoy the privilege of posting their articles to BOTH lists? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 18:02:04 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 18:02:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Comments Message-ID: <19970124.205910.21590.3.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> All comments on my article will be welcome and replied to. From wcampbel at peganet.com Fri Jan 24 18:03:51 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 18:03:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anyone have info on foreign "ITARS" Message-ID: <199701250155.UAA03593@mercury.peganet.com> Does anyone have any pointers to info about the import/export restrictions on encryption products in various countries. I know any such summary would be very dynamic, but perhaps there's something out there. Thanks! =Bill= From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 24 18:25:27 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 18:25:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: greed and the internet Message-ID: > The Internet will no no longer be the peoples net, and the > commercial greedies are establishing a faster, more secure > network with controlled access points; leaving the common man's > access in the mud, still paying the exorbitant rates on a pay > before play basis. That, and it gives control of information to > the government --which, as we all know. is 'heavenly white' > -above sin. > Rather than being forced by pressures from the market, smaller ISPs appear to be holding their own and in many cases thriving. A significant number of them have begun to form their own cooperatives to operate mini-NAPs, mosty to aggregate local traffic and reduce unnecessary traffic to the NAPs. It isn't too far a stretch to envision that should this practive become commonplace, these smaller ISPs could band together to create their own Net overlay, bypassing the NAPs. This trend could spell trouble for gov't agencies expecting to monitor Net traffic from only a few convenient locations (i.e., NAPs). --Steve From hugh at ecotone.toad.com Fri Jan 24 18:33:22 1997 From: hugh at ecotone.toad.com (Hugh Daniel) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 18:33:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <199701250229.SAA13141@ecotone.toad.com> FYI: >From: jsp at betz.biostr.washington.edu >Sent: Friday, January 24, 1997 2:31 PM >Subject: Meanwhile, back in the Free World... > > >Encrypted Email For Finns, Swedes, Danes > by Sami Kuusela > > 4:43 pm PST 23 Jan 97 - While keeping a watchful eye on the emerging > American encryption policy, Scandinavian countries are embarking > on a joint project to implement the first international email security > service. > > Nordic Post Security Service (NPSS) - involving Finland, Norway, > Sweden, and Denmark - hopes to provide secure email, and > officials say that soon every Nordic citizen can walk into the > nearest post office and sign up for it. > > But no matter the success of the secure email system, the NPSS > project is a clear sign that, unlike the United States, Northern > Europe is moving forward with exporting encryption technology > across national barriers. > > "Finnish policy has not been to start with regulations and fear of > Net issues," says Anu Lamberg, the head of the Information > Network Unit in the Finnish Ministry of Transport and > Communications. "The American discussion on this matter has > been funny to watch, but I hope nobody in Europe or Finland starts > to question the very basics of democracy." > > Based on PGP, with no "third-party" key holder, the Nordic system > uses unbreakable RSA-algorithm encryption with a 1024-bit key. > > However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a > smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their > computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of > Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers > will become standard on computers in Scandinavia. "It is a really > big help for users, who don't have to remember dozens of > passwords when using different kind of services," Andler says. > > The project has been moderately successful in Finland - the first > Nordic country to offer the secure email - as the system isn't any > more difficult to use than a standard email program. All the user > has to do is click "send." > > For project developers, using strong crypto was never an issue. > "From the very beginning we've been basing this on strong crypto," > says Vesa-Pekka Moilanen, technical director for Finland Post, and > mastermind of the email project. "At first, the customers are going > to be mainly professionals," he says, "but quite soon private > individuals will start using it." But the use of secure email probably > won't be widespread until 1998 - if then. > > "If strong crypto is banned it's going to have major effects on the > development of information society," says Risto Siilasmaa, the > CEO and president of DataFellows, one of the only makers of > encryption programs in Finland. The Finnish government awarded > DataFellows "most innovative company" honors in 1996. "But > nobody is going to limit strong crypto. I haven't met a single > leading Nordic official who says otherwise." > > One question, though: What if a Nordic citizen enters the United > States with the email program installed on his or her laptop? For > now, Nordic officials are only beginning to contemplate the > ramifications. From tekmasta at global.california.com Fri Jan 24 18:52:48 1997 From: tekmasta at global.california.com (tekmasta at global.california.com) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 18:52:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970125025428.00687400@global.california.com> At 02:37 PM 1/24/97 -0800, you wrote: >On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, fuck you wrote: > >> Are their any H/ P/ V/ A/ C ers on this list?? > > Yes. > >Genocide >Head of the Genocide2600 Group > > >============================================================================ > **Coming soon! www.Genocide2600.com! > ____________________ > *---===| |===---* > *---===| Genocide |===---* "You can be a king or a street > *---===| 2600 |===---* sweeper, but everyone dances with the > *---===|__________________|===---* Grim Reaper." > >Email: gen2600 at aracnet.com Web: http://www.aracnet.com/~gen2600 > >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. > It is by the Mountain Dew that the thoughts acquire speed, > the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. > It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. >=========================================================================== ===== try my site too http://gcwp.com/fadedimage can anyone help me out with getting pgp working... I just got 2.6.2 excutable the freeware one and its for dos... I need to get one that works with eudora or netscape.... please help! ,_ ,. .`.--- . ,-,-,-. ,---. .---. |_ / | ,-| |__ ,-|.`,| | | ,-.| -' ,-.,'\___ | /~~|-.| |,| | || | ; | .,-|| ,-'|-' \ | ,' `-'`-'`^---`-'' ' `-'`-^`---| `-' `---' ' ,-.| `-+' ,-. . .,-. . . . ,-_/,.,--. | | ,-.,-| | | ,-.,-|,-.,-.,-.,-.,-.. .,-.,-| ' |_|/| | | | .| || | | | .| || ||-'| | || | || || || | /| | | \| `--^-'' '`-' `--^-'' '`-'`-'' `-|' `-'`-'' '`-' `' `'`--\ ,| `' -= http://gcwp.com/fadedimage =- From frissell at panix.com Fri Jan 24 19:16:10 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 19:16:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701250026.QAA13770@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970124221710.01968f84@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 06:11 PM 1/24/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > >Forwarded message: > >> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 97 21:33:41 +0000 >> From: "Attila T. Hun" >> Subject: Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive > >Much drivel about AIDS deleted. > >> One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the >> man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier >> #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died > >The correct term is 'Patient 0'. > > Also he was an Air Canada steward. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMul7M4VO4r4sgSPhAQHe8wP+KB2rk12gJJJozsNH5FKKOi6Gnk5zdggf N91N/3rOa6c0ZQFdDD9xE887pJe6wl3qER1S9OMeXMemG2J3RuCLWnIGBNcHAN0z FAMezugL832jzGRwy5ARTNnOYzq3DtgTQpynpo9atZjPMumyI+QQ7Qec8SOO9Nyc VnG2L9UL2zg= =QN46 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From no_one at nowhere.org Fri Jan 24 19:54:38 1997 From: no_one at nowhere.org (no_one at nowhere.org) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 19:54:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) Message-ID: In article <199701250026.QAA13770 at toad.com>, ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) wrote: > Much drivel about AIDS deleted. > > > One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the > > man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier > > #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died > > The correct term is 'Patient 0'. And the CDC is the Centers for Disease Control; and it has since found many, many prior cases of AIDS. These three minor errors are indicative of Attila's reliability of the subject. Of course, no one at CDC or NIH believes any of this crap; it was tired a decade ago. ObCrypto? How to implement RL anonymity protocols for medical treatment? (Of course I'm stretching it - but "carriers" were the *first* horseman. From ravage at ssz.com Fri Jan 24 20:16:40 1997 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 20:16:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) Message-ID: <199701250424.WAA14604@einstein> Forwarded message: > From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 22:06:53 1997 > Subject: Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) > Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 22:57:52 EST > > YOU ARE BOTH WRONG THE CORRECT TERM IS INDEX CASE > >The correct term is 'Patient 0'. You are welcome to contact the CDC in Georgia and correct their terminology. I am shure they would appreciate it. http://www.cdc.gov/ Their webpage search capability is temporarily down so you might have to talk to a real person, Center for Disease Control and Prevention 1600 Clifton Rd., NE. Atlanta, GA 30333 404-639-3311 Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Fri Jan 24 20:19:01 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 20:19:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks In-Reply-To: <199701242114.NAA07698@toad.com> Message-ID: <0muMYz200YUf0oJKY0@andrew.cmu.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "David E. Smith" writes: > 7. Secure sensitive files. > To keep sensitive or confidential information safe, store it > on a Zip disk and use your Zip Tools software to assign a > password that must be used in order to read from or write to > the disk. At work, you can protect sensitive information > such as personnel files, company directories, and product > plans and designs. At home, you can secure personal > information such as tax records, budgets, and computerized > checkbooks. FWIW (not much), Iomega claims that it can't recover the data on a password-protected disk. However, they do export those things, so I doubt it's strong. Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMumJOskz/YzIV3P5AQHLZAL+MJhEH/aCbB9BX5R4nY4BIRBOGZw8socG 39D0q+UT8sS3YsMaeL6GqfEo04lsnQwAUWtI0I8/FcqYlWVGxwsOAboK3BZmJz40 y3/GmUz5dUpz0PctKbGYYQj/w6pbt/6z =mv67 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ravage at ssz.com Fri Jan 24 20:19:50 1997 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 20:19:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm Message-ID: <199701250427.WAA14615@einstein> _________________________________________________________________ OVERVIEW OF HIV/AIDS _________________________________________________________________ Some important facts about the evidence that HIV causes AIDS are: * Tests for HIV antibody in persons with AIDS show that they are infected with the virus. * HIV has been isolated from persons with AIDS and grown in pure culture. * Studies of blood transfusion recipients before 1985 documented the transmission of HIV to previously uninfected persons who subsequently developed AIDS. Before the discovery of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus that causes AIDS, epidemiologic studies of AIDS patients' sex partners and AIDS cases occurring in blood transfusion recipients before 1985 clearly showed that the underlying cause of AIDS was an infectious agent. Infection with HIV has been the only common factor shared by persons with AIDS throughout the world, including homosexual men, transfusion recipients, persons with hemophilia, sex partners of infected persons, children born to infected women, and health care workers who were infected with HIV while on the job, mainly by being stuck with a needle used on an HIV-infected patient. Although we know that HIV is the cause of AIDS, much remains to be known about exactly how HIV causes the immune system to break down. Scientists are constantly discovering more information about HIV and AIDS. These discoveries help people learn how to stop transmission of the virus and help people infected with HIV to live longer, healthier lives. One important question to answer is why some people exposed to HIV become infected and others do not. Scientists believe it is most likely because of how infectious the other person is and how they are exposed. For example, more than 90 percent of persons who were exposed through an HIV-infected unit of blood became infected. So we know that blood-to-blood contact is a very efficient way that HIV is spread. On the other hand, many health care workers are splashed with blood or bloody body fluids and this type of exposure has caused very few occurrences of HIV infection. Researchers know how HIV is spread and the ways that people can help protect themselves from being exposed to HIV. If you have questions about HIV infection and AIDS, please call the CDC National AIDS Hotline at the tollfree number, 1-800-342-2437. If you wish to write to CDC regarding this subject, please write to the CDC National AIDS Clearinghouse, Post Office Box 6003, Rockville, Maryland, 20849-6003. _________________________________________________________________ Back to HIV/AIDS Information Return to HIV/AIDS Information Back to DHAP home page GO BACK TO DHAP HOME PAGE (with graphics) (text only) _________________________________________________________________ Last Updated: June 13, 1996 Updated By: Technical Information Activity email: hivmail at cidhiv1.em.cdc.gov From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 24 21:22:17 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 21:22:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32E99854.32B8@gte.net> Cynthia H. Brown wrote: > Beauty, flames and censorship are all in the eyes of the beholder. > However, by providing both "raw" and "cooked" versions of the list, Sandy > is allowing readers to choose for themselves whether or not they want > someone else's filters applied to their mailbox. Personally, I choose to > press the "Delete" key myself. > Agreed, and said private individual can do as s/he sees fit. My only > objection is that the moderated version has the same name as the original > list (sounds like Rogers Cable's recent attempt at "Costs More Unless You > Speak Up Now" channels). I apologize for intruding, Cynthia, but I have a question about "doing as s/he sees fit". For example, what is the list? Is it the equipment, is it the software that runs on the equipment, or is it the contents of the list (my writings, your writings, etc.)? If I had to rank them, I would rank the contents as being more important than the equipment or the software. That said, how can those contents be considered the property of the list owner/manager to do with as they see fit? I do understand that they have the right to manage the list as they see fit, and to move the messages into whatever buckets seem appropriate, but your phrasing suggested more to me, and I'm puzzled by it. From proff at iq.org Fri Jan 24 22:01:40 1997 From: proff at iq.org (Julian Assange) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 22:01:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: language drift Message-ID: <199701250559.QAA11354@profane.iq.org> One of my projects involves tracking language drift; i.e the relative change in word frequency on the internet as time goes by. This is useful for predicting concept movement, and the anglisization rates of non-English language countries. Now, one day while browsing the frequencies from the 10 billion word corpus, what do I see? God 2,177,242 America 2,178,046 designed 2,181,106 five 2,189,194 December 2,190,028 ;) -Julian Assange From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 24 23:24:09 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 23:24:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: testing email from airport kiosk Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970124172459.005ade48@popd.ix.netcom.com> An update on the SF airport kiosk email machines: Judging from the headers, there _is_ a Linux machine driving the laptops, and there's a Metricom ricochet modem providing the communications path - interesting alternative to wires, and I guess they don't mind having the extra radio waves in the airport. It does support anonymous email, in that you can type in any email address you want, and it doesn't seem to mind. In addition to limited web, telnet, and outgoing email, it lets you retrieve email with POP3. Doesn't seem to be a way to get it to run a program, though :-) --------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from linux.quickaid.com (root at www.quickaid.com [204.188.26.11]) by ixmail4.ix.netcom.com (8.7.5/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id VAA18934; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:59:22 -0800 (PST) From: johndoe at airport.sf.na Received: from SFO-00-6.ricochet.net ([204.254.16.39]) by linux.quickaid.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA22004 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:00:13 -0800 Message-Id: <199701230600.WAA22004 at linux.quickaid.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:58:40 To: stewarts at ix.netcom.com Subject: testing email from airport kiosk X-Mailer: QuickAID Kiosk who am i # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 24 23:25:49 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 23:25:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970124212455.005ade48@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 07:38 PM 1/23/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >> We here all know that this is right but it's obvious that >> the language is sliding towards Internet = Web. Most people > >Typical modern American attitude, getting it right is too much work so >let's lower the benchmark so anyone can be 'right'. >You'll be supporting Ebonics next. One of the points of the Ebonics program is to recognize that other people don't always speak the same way you do, and that if you want to communicate with them, you'll be more successful if you realize it, understand when they're talking in their dialect, and if you're going to talk back to them in yours, remember to translate on occasion. _Regardless_ of whose dialect is "right" (of course on technical issues, we technical people are right, but if you've got the hacker nature, treat it as a problem in social engineering.......) Speaker to Marketers From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 00:33:09 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 00:33:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: PSS_sst Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970124215147.00640df8@popd.ix.netcom.com> # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 00:34:50 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 00:34:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [No Subject:] Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970124215958.0063f008@popd.ix.netcom.com> Hi! It's useful to include a subject line in email so people can decide whether to read it and have more context for it, though calling yourself "fuck you" will probably deter a few people. There are lots of anarchists on the net; you can run into some good discussions on Usenet on several newsgroups with "anarchy" or "anarchism" in the titles. Rec.caves has good underground material...... As far as decryption tools goes, they're pretty closely related to encryption algorithms. There's been a discussion, probably on cryptography at c2.org (subscribe via cryptography-request at c2.org) though maybe it was on cypherpunks, about designing a screen-saver DES-cracker. At 11:47 PM 1/23/97 EST, fuck you wrote: >If anyone has any text files on the following topics please send them. I >have many files if any one else needs them. > >PGP >Making decryption tools >Anarchy >Satan >Anything underground > > > # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Sat Jan 25 01:55:42 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:55:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Comments Message-ID: <199701250955.BAA23530@toad.com> All comments on my article will be welcome and replied to. From wcampbel at peganet.com Sat Jan 25 01:55:49 1997 From: wcampbel at peganet.com (Bill Campbell) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:55:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anyone have info on foreign "ITARS" Message-ID: <199701250955.BAA23545@toad.com> Does anyone have any pointers to info about the import/export restrictions on encryption products in various countries. I know any such summary would be very dynamic, but perhaps there's something out there. Thanks! =Bill= From no_one at nowhere.org Sat Jan 25 01:56:52 1997 From: no_one at nowhere.org (no_one at nowhere.org) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:56:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) Message-ID: <199701250956.BAA23557@toad.com> In article <199701250026.QAA13770 at toad.com>, ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) wrote: > Much drivel about AIDS deleted. > > > One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the > > man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier > > #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died > > The correct term is 'Patient 0'. And the CDC is the Centers for Disease Control; and it has since found many, many prior cases of AIDS. These three minor errors are indicative of Attila's reliability of the subject. Of course, no one at CDC or NIH believes any of this crap; it was tired a decade ago. ObCrypto? How to implement RL anonymity protocols for medical treatment? (Of course I'm stretching it - but "carriers" were the *first* horseman. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sat Jan 25 01:57:06 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:57:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) Message-ID: <199701250957.BAA23606@toad.com> Forwarded message: > From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 22:06:53 1997 > Subject: Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) > Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 22:57:52 EST > > YOU ARE BOTH WRONG THE CORRECT TERM IS INDEX CASE > >The correct term is 'Patient 0'. You are welcome to contact the CDC in Georgia and correct their terminology. I am shure they would appreciate it. http://www.cdc.gov/ Their webpage search capability is temporarily down so you might have to talk to a real person, Center for Disease Control and Prevention 1600 Clifton Rd., NE. Atlanta, GA 30333 404-639-3311 Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From azur at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 01:57:07 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:57:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: greed and the internet Message-ID: <199701250957.BAA23607@toad.com> > The Internet will no no longer be the peoples net, and the > commercial greedies are establishing a faster, more secure > network with controlled access points; leaving the common man's > access in the mud, still paying the exorbitant rates on a pay > before play basis. That, and it gives control of information to > the government --which, as we all know. is 'heavenly white' > -above sin. > Rather than being forced by pressures from the market, smaller ISPs appear to be holding their own and in many cases thriving. A significant number of them have begun to form their own cooperatives to operate mini-NAPs, mosty to aggregate local traffic and reduce unnecessary traffic to the NAPs. It isn't too far a stretch to envision that should this practive become commonplace, these smaller ISPs could band together to create their own Net overlay, bypassing the NAPs. This trend could spell trouble for gov't agencies expecting to monitor Net traffic from only a few convenient locations (i.e., NAPs). --Steve From hugh at ecotone.toad.com Sat Jan 25 01:57:11 1997 From: hugh at ecotone.toad.com (Hugh Daniel) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:57:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <199701250957.BAA23608@toad.com> FYI: >From: jsp at betz.biostr.washington.edu >Sent: Friday, January 24, 1997 2:31 PM >Subject: Meanwhile, back in the Free World... > > >Encrypted Email For Finns, Swedes, Danes > by Sami Kuusela > > 4:43 pm PST 23 Jan 97 - While keeping a watchful eye on the emerging > American encryption policy, Scandinavian countries are embarking > on a joint project to implement the first international email security > service. > > Nordic Post Security Service (NPSS) - involving Finland, Norway, > Sweden, and Denmark - hopes to provide secure email, and > officials say that soon every Nordic citizen can walk into the > nearest post office and sign up for it. > > But no matter the success of the secure email system, the NPSS > project is a clear sign that, unlike the United States, Northern > Europe is moving forward with exporting encryption technology > across national barriers. > > "Finnish policy has not been to start with regulations and fear of > Net issues," says Anu Lamberg, the head of the Information > Network Unit in the Finnish Ministry of Transport and > Communications. "The American discussion on this matter has > been funny to watch, but I hope nobody in Europe or Finland starts > to question the very basics of democracy." > > Based on PGP, with no "third-party" key holder, the Nordic system > uses unbreakable RSA-algorithm encryption with a 1024-bit key. > > However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a > smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their > computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of > Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers > will become standard on computers in Scandinavia. "It is a really > big help for users, who don't have to remember dozens of > passwords when using different kind of services," Andler says. > > The project has been moderately successful in Finland - the first > Nordic country to offer the secure email - as the system isn't any > more difficult to use than a standard email program. All the user > has to do is click "send." > > For project developers, using strong crypto was never an issue. > "From the very beginning we've been basing this on strong crypto," > says Vesa-Pekka Moilanen, technical director for Finland Post, and > mastermind of the email project. "At first, the customers are going > to be mainly professionals," he says, "but quite soon private > individuals will start using it." But the use of secure email probably > won't be widespread until 1998 - if then. > > "If strong crypto is banned it's going to have major effects on the > development of information society," says Risto Siilasmaa, the > CEO and president of DataFellows, one of the only makers of > encryption programs in Finland. The Finnish government awarded > DataFellows "most innovative company" honors in 1996. "But > nobody is going to limit strong crypto. I haven't met a single > leading Nordic official who says otherwise." > > One question, though: What if a Nordic citizen enters the United > States with the email program installed on his or her laptop? For > now, Nordic officials are only beginning to contemplate the > ramifications. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sat Jan 25 01:57:13 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:57:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm Message-ID: <199701250957.BAA23609@toad.com> _________________________________________________________________ OVERVIEW OF HIV/AIDS _________________________________________________________________ Some important facts about the evidence that HIV causes AIDS are: * Tests for HIV antibody in persons with AIDS show that they are infected with the virus. * HIV has been isolated from persons with AIDS and grown in pure culture. * Studies of blood transfusion recipients before 1985 documented the transmission of HIV to previously uninfected persons who subsequently developed AIDS. Before the discovery of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus that causes AIDS, epidemiologic studies of AIDS patients' sex partners and AIDS cases occurring in blood transfusion recipients before 1985 clearly showed that the underlying cause of AIDS was an infectious agent. Infection with HIV has been the only common factor shared by persons with AIDS throughout the world, including homosexual men, transfusion recipients, persons with hemophilia, sex partners of infected persons, children born to infected women, and health care workers who were infected with HIV while on the job, mainly by being stuck with a needle used on an HIV-infected patient. Although we know that HIV is the cause of AIDS, much remains to be known about exactly how HIV causes the immune system to break down. Scientists are constantly discovering more information about HIV and AIDS. These discoveries help people learn how to stop transmission of the virus and help people infected with HIV to live longer, healthier lives. One important question to answer is why some people exposed to HIV become infected and others do not. Scientists believe it is most likely because of how infectious the other person is and how they are exposed. For example, more than 90 percent of persons who were exposed through an HIV-infected unit of blood became infected. So we know that blood-to-blood contact is a very efficient way that HIV is spread. On the other hand, many health care workers are splashed with blood or bloody body fluids and this type of exposure has caused very few occurrences of HIV infection. Researchers know how HIV is spread and the ways that people can help protect themselves from being exposed to HIV. If you have questions about HIV infection and AIDS, please call the CDC National AIDS Hotline at the tollfree number, 1-800-342-2437. If you wish to write to CDC regarding this subject, please write to the CDC National AIDS Clearinghouse, Post Office Box 6003, Rockville, Maryland, 20849-6003. _________________________________________________________________ Back to HIV/AIDS Information Return to HIV/AIDS Information Back to DHAP home page GO BACK TO DHAP HOME PAGE (with graphics) (text only) _________________________________________________________________ Last Updated: June 13, 1996 Updated By: Technical Information Activity email: hivmail at cidhiv1.em.cdc.gov From aaron at herringn.com Sat Jan 25 01:57:22 1997 From: aaron at herringn.com (aaron at herringn.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:57:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: <199701250957.BAA23610@toad.com> Presented in a "this will help 911" context. Still disconcerting. [...] Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls have been given additional incentive with a Federal Communications Commission order that all cell phone service companies have location programs in place by the year 2001. [...] http://cnn.com/US/9701/22/911.rescue/index.html From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 01:57:29 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:57:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homosexuality Message-ID: <199701250957.BAA23611@toad.com> Lou Zer writes: > Does any one know of any other good mailing Lists either with crypto or > anything underground Perhaps we should start an unmoderated list and call it "cypherpunks". Or create alt.cypherpunks. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From frissell at panix.com Sat Jan 25 01:58:46 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:58:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) Message-ID: <199701250958.BAA23620@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 06:11 PM 1/24/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > >Forwarded message: > >> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 97 21:33:41 +0000 >> From: "Attila T. Hun" >> Subject: Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive > >Much drivel about AIDS deleted. > >> One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the >> man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier >> #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died > >The correct term is 'Patient 0'. > > Also he was an Air Canada steward. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMul7M4VO4r4sgSPhAQHe8wP+KB2rk12gJJJozsNH5FKKOi6Gnk5zdggf N91N/3rOa6c0ZQFdDD9xE887pJe6wl3qER1S9OMeXMemG2J3RuCLWnIGBNcHAN0z FAMezugL832jzGRwy5ARTNnOYzq3DtgTQpynpo9atZjPMumyI+QQ7Qec8SOO9Nyc VnG2L9UL2zg= =QN46 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Sat Jan 25 01:58:47 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:58:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <854185258.62147.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > I would like to start a thread to discuss the moderation and rejection > policy. No doubt we all would but such threads may, without recourse to proper moderation, all be thrown into cypherpunks-flames if Sandy believes they will be critical of him. (prove me wrong Sandy, send this to the moderated list). > My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks > on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous > remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames > mailing list. I don`t think I read the article (even though I subscribe to the unmoderated list), can you forward me a copy. As I understand it though, from other comentaries, it was junked because it was in response to a message by Dimitri who, given that it is Sandy that is moderating the list, is no doubt filtered by different criteria than anyone else on the list, in my opinion a censorous and fascist restraint as Dimitri has recently been posting more crypto relevant material, besides which whatever the content of his posts they should be open to review before a decision is made on if they are to be junked or not. > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. Yes Sandy, please enlighten us, what is the criterion you use to moderate the list if not crypto-relevancy. I suspect an element of self preservation and protection of the list fuhrer and diktat maker John Gilmore (who, until the disgraceful incident with Dimitri commanded some respect on this list). > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > the current readership. I don`t think this is the point, John Gilmore is free to appoint whoever he wants to moderate his list, he is free to censor all messages which criticise him and his censorship, however, subscribers to the list should be told they are being censored on these grounds and not on some facade of "crypto relevancy" or another thin veil drawn weakly over content based censorship to protect a certain class of list members. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From tekmasta at global.california.com Sat Jan 25 01:58:48 1997 From: tekmasta at global.california.com (tekmasta at global.california.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:58:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail Message-ID: <199701250958.BAA23623@toad.com> At 02:37 PM 1/24/97 -0800, you wrote: >On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, fuck you wrote: > >> Are their any H/ P/ V/ A/ C ers on this list?? > > Yes. > >Genocide >Head of the Genocide2600 Group > > >============================================================================ > **Coming soon! www.Genocide2600.com! > ____________________ > *---===| |===---* > *---===| Genocide |===---* "You can be a king or a street > *---===| 2600 |===---* sweeper, but everyone dances with the > *---===|__________________|===---* Grim Reaper." > >Email: gen2600 at aracnet.com Web: http://www.aracnet.com/~gen2600 > >^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. > It is by the Mountain Dew that the thoughts acquire speed, > the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. > It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. >=========================================================================== ===== try my site too http://gcwp.com/fadedimage can anyone help me out with getting pgp working... I just got 2.6.2 excutable the freeware one and its for dos... I need to get one that works with eudora or netscape.... please help! ,_ ,. .`.--- . ,-,-,-. ,---. .---. |_ / | ,-| |__ ,-|.`,| | | ,-.| -' ,-.,'\___ | /~~|-.| |,| | || | ; | .,-|| ,-'|-' \ | ,' `-'`-'`^---`-'' ' `-'`-^`---| `-' `---' ' ,-.| `-+' ,-. . .,-. . . . ,-_/,.,--. | | ,-.,-| | | ,-.,-|,-.,-.,-.,-.,-.. .,-.,-| ' |_|/| | | | .| || | | | .| || ||-'| | || | || || || | /| | | \| `--^-'' '`-' `--^-'' '`-'`-'' `-|' `-'`-'' '`-' `' `'`--\ ,| `' -= http://gcwp.com/fadedimage =- From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Sat Jan 25 01:58:48 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 01:58:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <199701250958.BAA23622@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "David E. Smith" writes: > 7. Secure sensitive files. > To keep sensitive or confidential information safe, store it > on a Zip disk and use your Zip Tools software to assign a > password that must be used in order to read from or write to > the disk. At work, you can protect sensitive information > such as personnel files, company directories, and product > plans and designs. At home, you can secure personal > information such as tax records, budgets, and computerized > checkbooks. FWIW (not much), Iomega claims that it can't recover the data on a password-protected disk. However, they do export those things, so I doubt it's strong. Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMumJOskz/YzIV3P5AQHLZAL+MJhEH/aCbB9BX5R4nY4BIRBOGZw8socG 39D0q+UT8sS3YsMaeL6GqfEo04lsnQwAUWtI0I8/FcqYlWVGxwsOAboK3BZmJz40 y3/GmUz5dUpz0PctKbGYYQj/w6pbt/6z =mv67 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 02:10:45 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 02:10:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: PSS_sst Message-ID: <199701251010.CAA23794@toad.com> # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From proff at iq.org Sat Jan 25 02:10:58 1997 From: proff at iq.org (Julian Assange) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 02:10:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: language drift Message-ID: <199701251010.CAA23802@toad.com> One of my projects involves tracking language drift; i.e the relative change in word frequency on the internet as time goes by. This is useful for predicting concept movement, and the anglisization rates of non-English language countries. Now, one day while browsing the frequencies from the 10 billion word corpus, what do I see? God 2,177,242 America 2,178,046 designed 2,181,106 five 2,189,194 December 2,190,028 ;) -Julian Assange From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 02:11:35 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 02:11:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701251011.CAA23818@toad.com> At 07:38 PM 1/23/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >> We here all know that this is right but it's obvious that >> the language is sliding towards Internet = Web. Most people > >Typical modern American attitude, getting it right is too much work so >let's lower the benchmark so anyone can be 'right'. >You'll be supporting Ebonics next. One of the points of the Ebonics program is to recognize that other people don't always speak the same way you do, and that if you want to communicate with them, you'll be more successful if you realize it, understand when they're talking in their dialect, and if you're going to talk back to them in yours, remember to translate on occasion. _Regardless_ of whose dialect is "right" (of course on technical issues, we technical people are right, but if you've got the hacker nature, treat it as a problem in social engineering.......) Speaker to Marketers From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 02:11:38 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 02:11:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701251011.CAA23822@toad.com> Cynthia H. Brown wrote: > Beauty, flames and censorship are all in the eyes of the beholder. > However, by providing both "raw" and "cooked" versions of the list, Sandy > is allowing readers to choose for themselves whether or not they want > someone else's filters applied to their mailbox. Personally, I choose to > press the "Delete" key myself. > Agreed, and said private individual can do as s/he sees fit. My only > objection is that the moderated version has the same name as the original > list (sounds like Rogers Cable's recent attempt at "Costs More Unless You > Speak Up Now" channels). I apologize for intruding, Cynthia, but I have a question about "doing as s/he sees fit". For example, what is the list? Is it the equipment, is it the software that runs on the equipment, or is it the contents of the list (my writings, your writings, etc.)? If I had to rank them, I would rank the contents as being more important than the equipment or the software. That said, how can those contents be considered the property of the list owner/manager to do with as they see fit? I do understand that they have the right to manage the list as they see fit, and to move the messages into whatever buckets seem appropriate, but your phrasing suggested more to me, and I'm puzzled by it. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 02:11:54 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 02:11:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: [No Subject:] Message-ID: <199701251011.CAA23842@toad.com> Hi! It's useful to include a subject line in email so people can decide whether to read it and have more context for it, though calling yourself "fuck you" will probably deter a few people. There are lots of anarchists on the net; you can run into some good discussions on Usenet on several newsgroups with "anarchy" or "anarchism" in the titles. Rec.caves has good underground material...... As far as decryption tools goes, they're pretty closely related to encryption algorithms. There's been a discussion, probably on cryptography at c2.org (subscribe via cryptography-request at c2.org) though maybe it was on cypherpunks, about designing a screen-saver DES-cracker. At 11:47 PM 1/23/97 EST, fuck you wrote: >If anyone has any text files on the following topics please send them. I >have many files if any one else needs them. > >PGP >Making decryption tools >Anarchy >Satan >Anything underground > > > # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 02:11:56 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 02:11:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: testing email from airport kiosk Message-ID: <199701251011.CAA23844@toad.com> An update on the SF airport kiosk email machines: Judging from the headers, there _is_ a Linux machine driving the laptops, and there's a Metricom ricochet modem providing the communications path - interesting alternative to wires, and I guess they don't mind having the extra radio waves in the airport. It does support anonymous email, in that you can type in any email address you want, and it doesn't seem to mind. In addition to limited web, telnet, and outgoing email, it lets you retrieve email with POP3. Doesn't seem to be a way to get it to run a program, though :-) --------------------------------- Return-Path: Received: from linux.quickaid.com (root at www.quickaid.com [204.188.26.11]) by ixmail4.ix.netcom.com (8.7.5/SMI-4.1/Netcom) id VAA18934; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:59:22 -0800 (PST) From: johndoe at airport.sf.na Received: from SFO-00-6.ricochet.net ([204.254.16.39]) by linux.quickaid.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id WAA22004 for ; Wed, 22 Jan 1997 22:00:13 -0800 Message-Id: <199701230600.WAA22004 at linux.quickaid.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jan 1997 21:58:40 To: stewarts at ix.netcom.com Subject: testing email from airport kiosk X-Mailer: QuickAID Kiosk who am i # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From whgiii at amaranth.com Sat Jan 25 03:05:43 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 03:05:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list In-Reply-To: <199701241411.GAA25271@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701250508.FAA01408@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701241411.GAA25271 at toad.com>, on 01/24/97 at 09:09 AM, Toto said: > I would like to point out, however, that anyone who has had their >posts 'sorted' into the 'flames list' is now a 'known flamer', as >evidenced by the fact that their post has been designated a 'flame' >on a list run by a champion of free speech on the electronic >frontier. Intresting.... Does a single flame make a flamer?? I have in the past been involved in heated arguments on just about every list/newsgroup I have been involved in. :) I think this goes back to the topic of reputation capital. IMHO the occational message that get's droped into the 'flames list' would have little effect on ones reputation. While a complete ban all of ones posting or even a majority of ones posts making it to the 'flames list' could/would have a detrimtal effect. Hmmmm... Actually there could be an intresting side affect of a moderated list to a posters reputation. Lets take the following example: John Doe likes posting rants & flames 90% of the time. The other 10% of the time he posts intelegent messages. Now on an un-moderated list a majority of subscribers would get tierd of his rants, write him off as a kook and kill-file him. His 10% of intelegent posts would be lost in the 90% of noise and his reputation would be adversly effected within the group. Now on a moderated list the 90% of rants & flames would never be seen by the list only the other 10%. His would wind up having a much higher reputation among the group compaired to if all his posts were seen. I am not quite sure how to judge this effect. Should one take into account the kooky behavior of a poster when veiwing his 'non kooky' posts? Does moderation have a detrimental effect to establishing a reputation based system for a group (how would Don Woods reputation faired if his rant's on OTP's & ISP had been filtered out?) > It is obvious that some of the more intuitively intelligent list >members are aware of this, as is indicated by the nervous fear with >which they 'explain why' their post is crypto-relevant. IMHO this is sheepish though I have noticed it before moderation started. If I have somthing to post to the list I see no reason to justify why I am posting it. This post I am making now has zero crypto-relevance and I make no appoligies for it. Do I think it is relevant to the list? Yes otherwise I would not have posted it. Either way no explination for the post is needed. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: See the Future; See OS/2. Be the Future; Run OS/2. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMunqw49Co1n+aLhhAQEhUQQAikxVlOQuCQuNq2DoZgIhj85RvfaEOkvO 6QqoecASeunSyvh5gtXH+p6n3kq6i/NLAUwcmPYUtkdpKdPaRk4/OkhTVGNuVEHM eEQroUNNJ02g+42Gz9vEm2ZtWxWC9zAdIbmY/Hnw6SUyW/jgJKWNadd8Nh2HQYxV CXMUpweNbdg= =8pqg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jeremey at veriweb.com Sat Jan 25 03:23:37 1997 From: jeremey at veriweb.com (Jeremey Barrett) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 03:23:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mailcrypt nym.alias.net support Message-ID: <199701251117.DAA10089@descartes.veriweb.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For those of you who use mailcrypt (Emacs-PGP interface) for email, I have hacked in support for pseudonyms ala nym.alias.net. In fact, the code has nym.alias.net hardcoded for now. I'm gonna add more stuff, but I'm just letting this out as is. This patch affects mailcrypt.el and mc-remail.el. I made these changes to mailcrypt 3.4, so your mileage may vary on other versions. I did this after the C2 party tonight, so typos and bugs are possible. Please email me if bugs are found. "This value is not configureable" does not qualify, I know it's not configureable yet. (BTW there are a couple functions not used, I was doing it one way, then changed my way of thinking, but the code is ok so I left it.) Installing it: o cd to your lisp directory o cat /path/to/the/patch | patch -p0, or something similar (You will need to pgp this message before extracting the patch to get rid of the leading "- " on some lines.) o recompile the .el files, ala: emacs -batch -f batch-byte-compile mc-remail.el emacs -batch -f batch-byte-compile mailcrypt.el Using it: o You _must_ have a remailer chain defined. This does not work with a single remailer (though a chain of length 1 might work). o Compose a message or reply as normal. Once you are done (the message would go out without nyms or remailers or anything if you hit C-c C-c), hit C-c / n. o The first question asks for a remailer chain, it will do completions. o The second question asks for the name of your nym. This is assumed to be @nym.alias.net, DO NOT include @nym.alias.net. If your nym is jimbob at nym.alias.net, just answer jimbob. This does not do completions at the moment. Putting your nym in your .emacs file is a bit weird anyway. o You will be asked for a signature for your nym's private key. o The message will be rewritten to send at nym.alias.net and then to the remailer chain you chose. o Send it. Hack the code at will, if you make significant enhancements, please email patches to me. Of course there is no warranty of any sort, if it blows up your machine you're out a machine. I will put this on my web page (http://www.veriweb.com/people/jeremey) for those that prefer that. Ok, here's the patch: - ---------------------------------cut here----------------------------------- *** mailcrypt.el Tue Oct 10 12:33:45 1995 - --- /usr/home/jeremey/PGP/mailcrypt-3.4/mailcrypt.el Sat Jan 25 02:45:27 1997 *************** *** 51,56 **** - --- 51,57 ---- (autoload 'mc-sign "mc-toplev" nil t) (autoload 'mc-insert-public-key "mc-toplev" nil t) (autoload 'mc-remailer-encrypt-for-chain "mc-remail" nil t) + (autoload 'mc-remailer-encrypt-for-nym "mc-remail" nil t) (autoload 'mc-remailer-insert-response-block "mc-remail" nil t) (autoload 'mc-remailer-insert-pseudonym "mc-remail" nil t) *************** *** 101,107 **** (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/b" 'mc-remailer-insert-response-block) (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/p" ! 'mc-remailer-insert-pseudonym))) (easy-menu-define mc-read-mode-menu (if mc-xemacs-p nil (list mc-read-mode-map)) - --- 102,110 ---- (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/b" 'mc-remailer-insert-response-block) (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/p" ! 'mc-remailer-insert-pseudonym) ! (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/n" ! 'mc-remailer-encrypt-for-nym))) (easy-menu-define mc-read-mode-menu (if mc-xemacs-p nil (list mc-read-mode-map)) *** mc-remail.el Wed Oct 4 15:45:56 1995 - --- /usr/home/jeremey/PGP/mailcrypt-3.4/mc-remail.el Sat Jan 25 02:44:16 1997 *************** *** 378,383 **** - --- 378,401 ---- (re-search-forward "^$" nil 'move) (cons (copy-marker start) (copy-marker (point))))))) + (defun mc-find-nym-from-header (name subject &optional insert) + ;; Find the header with a "::" immediately after the + ;; mail-header-separator. Return region enclosing header. Optional + ;; arg INSERT means insert the header if it does not exist already. + (save-excursion + (goto-char (point-min)) + (re-search-forward + (concat "^" (regexp-quote mail-header-separator) "\n")) + (if (or (and (looking-at "From") (forward-line 1)) + (and insert + (progn + (insert-before-markers + (concat "From: " name "\nTo: \nSubject:" subject "\n\n")) + (forward-line -1)))) + (let ((start (point))) + (re-search-forward "^$" nil 'move) + (cons (copy-marker start) (copy-marker (point))))))) + (defun mc-find-hash-header (&optional insert) (save-excursion (goto-char (point-min)) *************** *** 400,411 **** - --- 418,442 ---- (defsubst mc-replace-main-field (field replacement) (mc-replace-field field replacement (mc-find-main-header t))) + (defsubst mc-nuke-main-field (field) + (mc-nuke-field field (mc-find-main-header t))) + (defsubst mc-replace-hash-field (field replacement) (mc-replace-field field replacement (mc-find-hash-header t))) (defsubst mc-replace-colon-field (field replacement) (mc-replace-field field replacement (mc-find-colon-header t))) + (defsubst mc-insert-nym-header (replacement) + (mc-find-nym-from-header replacement + (cdr (car (mc-get-fields "Subject" + (mc-find-main-header)))) t) + (mc-replace-main-field "To" "send at nym.alias.net") + (mc-nuke-main-field "Cc") + (mc-nuke-main-field "Organization") + (mc-nuke-main-field "Subject") + (mc-nuke-main-field "From")) + (defun mc-recipient-is-remailerp () (let ((to (mc-get-fields "To" (mc-find-main-header)))) (and to *************** *** 516,521 **** - --- 547,568 ---- (setq pseudonym (concat pseudonym " "))) (mc-replace-colon-field "From" pseudonym))) + (defun mc-remailer-insert-nym-nym () + "Insert pseudonym as a From field in the hash-mark header. + + See the documentation for the variable `mc-remailer-pseudonyms' for + more information." + (interactive) + (let ((completion-ignore-case t) + pseudonym) + (setq pseudonym + (cond ((null mc-remailer-pseudonyms) + (read-from-minibuffer "Pseudonym: ")) + (t + (completing-read "Pseudonym: " + (mapcar 'list mc-remailer-pseudonyms))))) + (mc-insert-nym-header pseudonym))) + ;;}}} ;;{{{ Mixmaster support (defvar mc-mixmaster-path nil *************** *** 730,735 **** - --- 777,826 ---- (error "Unable to encrypt message to %s" (mc-remailer-userid remailer))))) + (defun mc-rewrite-for-nym-internal (nym &optional pause) + ;; Rewrite the current mail buffer for nym.alias.net. This + ;; includes pulling down the To: and Subject: headers, changing + ;; the To: header, and encrypting to send at nym.alias.net and signing + ;; with the nym's key. This should be used only as part of + ;; mc-rewrite-for-nym since it will subsequently chain the message + ;; through a set of remailers. + (let ((addr "send at nym.alias.net") + (main-header (mc-find-main-header))) + + ;; Move "Subject" lines down. + (goto-char (cdr main-header)) + (forward-line 1) + (mapcar + (function (lambda (f) (insert (car f) ":" (cdr f)))) + (mc-get-fields "Subject" main-header t)) + (insert "\n") + + ;; Move "To" lines down. + (goto-char (cdr main-header)) + (forward-line 1) + (mapcar + (function (lambda (f) (insert (car f) ":" (cdr f)))) + (mc-get-fields "To" main-header t)) + + ;; Insert "From" for nym.alias.net + (goto-char (cdr main-header)) + (forward-line 1) + (insert (concat "From: " nym "\n")) + + (goto-char (car main-header)) + (insert "To: send at nym.alias.net\n") + + (if pause + (let ((cursor-in-echo-area t)) + (message "SPC to encrypt for %s : " addr) + (read-char-exclusive))) + (setq main-header (mc-find-main-header)) + (goto-char (cdr main-header)) + (forward-line 1) + (let ((mc-encrypt-for-me nil)) + (mc-encrypt-message "send at nym.alias.net" nil (point) nil + (concat nym "@nym.alias.net") t)))) + (defun mc-rewrite-for-chain (chain &optional pause) ;; Rewrite the current buffer for a chain of remailers. ;; CHAIN must be in canonical form. *************** *** 744,749 **** - --- 835,856 ---- (mc-rewrite-for-remailer (car chain) pause) (mc-rewrite-for-mixmaster chain pause))))) + (defun mc-rewrite-for-nym (nym chain &optional pause) + ;; Rewrite the current buffer for nym.alias.net through a + ;; chain of remailers. CHAIN must be in canonical form. + ;; nym is assumed to be the nym's name WITHOUT @nym.alias.net on it. + (let (rest) + (if mc-mixmaster-path + (setq rest (mc-mixmaster-skip chain)) + (setq rest chain)) + (if (null chain) nil + (mc-rewrite-for-nym-internal nym pause) + (mc-rewrite-for-chain + (if (eq rest chain) (cdr rest) rest) pause) + (if (eq rest chain) + (mc-rewrite-for-remailer (car chain) pause) + (mc-rewrite-for-mixmaster chain pause))))) + (defun mc-unparse-chain (chain) ;; Unparse CHAIN into a string suitable for printing. (if (null chain) *************** *** 782,787 **** - --- 889,926 ---- (cdr (assoc chain-name chains)) chains)) (mc-rewrite-for-chain chain pause) + (if chain + (save-excursion + (set-buffer buffer) + (erase-buffer) + (insert "Rewritten for chain `" chain-name "':\n\n" + (mc-unparse-chain chain)) + (message "Done. See %s buffer for details." mc-buffer-name))))) + + ;;}}} + + (defun mc-remailer-encrypt-for-nym (&optional pause) + "Encrypt message for a nym server, to be resent, prompting for chain to use. + + With \\[universal-argument], pause before each encryption." + (interactive "P") + (let ((chains (mc-remailer-make-chains-alist)) + (buffer (get-buffer-create mc-buffer-name)) + chain-name chain nym) + (mc-nuke-field "CC") + (mc-nuke-field "Organization") + (mc-disallow-field "FCC") + (mc-disallow-field "BCC") + (setq chain-name + (completing-read + "Choose a remailer or chain: " chains nil 'strict-match)) + (setq nym + (read-from-minibuffer "Pseudonym: ")) + (setq chain + (mc-remailer-canonicalize-chain + (cdr (assoc chain-name chains)) + chains)) + (mc-rewrite-for-nym nym chain pause) (if chain (save-excursion (set-buffer buffer) - ---------------------------------cut here----------------------------------- - -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Jeremey Barrett Senior Software Engineer jeremey at veriweb.com VeriWeb Internet Corp. http://www.veriweb.com/ PGP Key fingerprint = 3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80 DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64 PGP Public Key: http://www.veriweb.com/people/jeremey/pgpkey.txt "less is more." -- Mies van de Rohe. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBMunrci/fy+vkqMxNAQHpQQQAkN8wQ+/65qsN4326gFRmEMjcwQH1mj2v /WZGnxyB2ADYlF0AMXfU60NzUO31KZzEbbOu8oX2I0KptXrDGiLYoQ6uerw/W441 1B4uAd2pEztqWwfwyYmLj57meQWJw1IjH7AuF0Mz9NJ7OLEWq+H5CC9w4zwo6u1/ nTrWv396Y6Q= =jpyn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 04:35:16 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 04:35:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypher-Oops! Message-ID: <32EA1A85.48D4@sk.sympatico.ca> I was just wondering if the CypherPunks list is now the only list that has an Administrative introduction for list members that could not be posted in full to the list-proper, as it contains a flame against an individual. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 04:37:01 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 04:37:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <854185258.62147.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: <32EA17E4.6E23@sk.sympatico.ca> paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > John Gilmore is free to appoint > whoever he wants to moderate his list, he is free to censor all > messages which criticise him and his censorship, however, subscribers > to the list should be told they are being censored on these grounds > and not on some facade of "crypto relevancy" or another thin veil > drawn weakly over content based censorship to protect a certain class > of list members. It became rather glaringly obvious after moderation was announced that class structure would be the defining feature of moderation. Those who felt themselves to be in the 'upper class' made no bones about it. Toto From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 04:40:29 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 04:40:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: testing email from airport kiosk In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970124172459.005ade48@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: Bill Stewart writes: > An update on the SF airport kiosk email machines: ... > It does support anonymous email, in that you can type in > any email address you want, and it doesn't seem to mind. > In addition to limited web, telnet, and outgoing email, > it lets you retrieve email with POP3. Doesn't seem to be a way > to get it to run a program, though :-) My immediate guess would be that everyone using it gets videotaped, then all activity is logged, and that the LEAs are waiting for some idiot to use it to retrieve kiddie porn and/or terrorist bobm-making instructions. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 04:42:12 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 04:42:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701251011.CAA23843@toad.com> Message-ID: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk writes: > > I would like to start a thread to discuss the moderation and rejection > > policy. > > No doubt we all would but such threads may, without recourse to proper > moderation, all be thrown into cypherpunks-flames if Sandy believes > they will be critical of him. (prove me wrong Sandy, send this to the > moderated list). Nope - Sandy tossed Paul's article to cypherpunks-flames, just like he tossed a recent article pointing out that he's lying outright about his moderation policies. > > My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks > > on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous > > remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames > > mailing list. > > I don`t think I read the article (even though I subscribe to the > unmoderated list), can you forward me a copy. > As I understand it though, from other comentaries, it was junked > because it was in response to a message by Dimitri who, given that it > is Sandy that is moderating the list, is no doubt filtered by > different criteria than anyone else on the list, in my opinion a > censorous and fascist restraint as Dimitri has recently been posting > more crypto relevant material, besides which whatever the content of > his posts they should be open to review before a decision is made on > if they are to be junked or not. Has Paul reversed his previous pro-censorship stand and decided to learn something about crypto from people who actually know some? > > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > > criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. > > Yes Sandy, please enlighten us, what is the criterion you use to > moderate the list if not crypto-relevancy. I suspect an element of > self preservation and protection of the list fuhrer and diktat maker > John Gilmore (who, until the disgraceful incident with Dimitri > commanded some respect on this list). I used to respect Gilmore until this series of incidents (unsubscribing me, turning list moderated). Now I only have disdain for him. > > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > > the current readership. > > I don`t think this is the point, John Gilmore is free to appoint > whoever he wants to moderate his list, he is free to censor all > messages which criticise him and his censorship, however, subscribers > to the list should be told they are being censored on these grounds > and not on some facade of "crypto relevancy" or another thin veil > drawn weakly over content based censorship to protect a certain class > of list members. Quite a few people have expressed interest in re-creating an unmoderated cypherpunks list at another site if Gilmore decided to stick to his "moderation experiment". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 05:00:18 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 05:00:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list In-Reply-To: <199701250508.FAA01408@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: <1X831D24w165w@bwalk.dm.com> "William H. Geiger III" writes: > > It is obvious that some of the more intuitively intelligent list > >members are aware of this, as is indicated by the nervous fear with > >which they 'explain why' their post is crypto-relevant. > > IMHO this is sheepish though I have noticed it before moderation started. > > If I have somthing to post to the list I see no reason to justify why I am > posting it. This post I am making now has zero crypto-relevance and I make > no appoligies for it. Do I think it is relevant to the list? Yes otherwise > I would not have posted it. Either way no explination for the post is needed. Sandy is irrelevant. Why should we care if he tosses an article to cyphepunks-flames or to the censored list? Just subscribe to cypherpunks-unedited and ignore Sandy. If Gilmore persists in his disgraceful behavior, create an unmoderated list elsewhere. I think a lot of intelligent people have been wasting too much time and energy analyzing the behavior of a twit who simply doesn't deserve the attention his moderation effort has been getting. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 05:20:17 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 05:20:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypher-Oops! In-Reply-To: <32EA1A85.48D4@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: Toto writes: > I was just wondering if the CypherPunks list is now the only list > that has an Administrative introduction for list members that could > not be posted in full to the list-proper, as it contains a flame > against an individual. The admin blurb flames L.Detweiller, a noted cryptographer hated by J.Gilmore and T.May because he exposed their lies and hypocricy. Flames directed at "non-persons" are allowed on the censored mailing list. Responses from the victims of the slander, any any critical discussion of the moderation policy are tossed to cypherpunks-flames. If you don't like it, start your own unmoderated list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 05:30:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 05:30:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701250958.BAA23620@toad.com> Message-ID: <0D031D28w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Duncan Frissell writes: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > At 06:11 PM 1/24/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > > > >Forwarded message: > > > >> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 97 21:33:41 +0000 > >> From: "Attila T. Hun" > >> Subject: Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive > > > >Much drivel about AIDS deleted. > > > >> One of the saddest commentaries on the entire problem is the > >> man, a Pan-American flight steward, who was identified as carrier > >> #1 by the Communicable Disease Center (CDC) in Atlanta; he died > > > >The correct term is 'Patient 0'. > > Also he was an Air Canada steward. I said we shouldn't waste time analyzing the moderator twit's irrelevant actions, but I do want to point out how amusing this is: Sandy sends all the rebuttals of "homophobic" posts to the censored list, while junking the "homophobic" posts themselves. Of course, none of this homosexual garbage is crypto-relevant, but it was submitted by the "right people". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From shamrock at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 05:42:38 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 05:42:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970125053419.006c8b54@192.100.81.136> At 06:29 PM 1/24/97 -0800, Hugh Daniel wrote: > FYI: >>From: jsp at betz.biostr.washington.edu [...] >> However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a >> smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their >> computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of >> Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers >> will become standard on computers in Scandinavia. [...] Interesting piece of trivia: I recently talked with a fellow from Intel. They are looking to purchase keyboards with smartcard readers built in. They hope to get them at $30/piece from suppliers in Asia. The lot size? 10 million. That's a lot of smartcard readers. Even for Intel. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From shamrock at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 05:42:40 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 05:42:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970125053810.006c4a7c@192.100.81.136> At 06:54 PM 1/24/97 -0800, tekmasta at global.california.com wrote: >can anyone help me out with getting pgp working... I just got 2.6.2 >excutable the freeware one and its for dos... I need to get one that works >with eudora or netscape.... please help! You want PGPMail. A free, full strength, beta is available at http://www.pgp.com/ PGPMail offers single click integration with Eudora. I use it myself. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From gtaylor at gil.com.au Sat Jan 25 05:58:57 1997 From: gtaylor at gil.com.au (Greg Taylor) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 05:58:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anyone have info on foreign "ITARS" Message-ID: <199701251357.XAA02371@iccu6.ipswich.gil.com.au> Bill Campbell wrote: >Does anyone have any pointers to info about the import/export >restrictions on encryption products in various countries. I know any >such summary would be very dynamic, but perhaps there's something >out there. The Australian regulations are available at: CUSTOMS (PROHIBITED EXPORTS) REGULATIONS - SCHEDULE 13 http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/cer439/sch13.html and: AUSTRALIAN CONTROLS ON THE EXPORT OF DEFENCE AND STRATEGIC GOODS: http://www.adfa.oz.au/DOD/al/iic/excontrl/excohome.htm Crypto software comes under Part 3, Category 5/2 of these regulations. (These documents are in MS Word format) ADFA, for those who are not aware, is the Australian Defence Force Academy, the major tertiary training institute for the defence forces. I have an extract of the key clauses of these regulations if anyone is interested. Briefly, the Australian regulations ban cryptography exports, claiming responsibilities as a party to the Wassenaar Arrangement, although the actual details of the latter regarding crypto seem obscure. However, an export license can be obtained on application to the Defence Ministry. The conditions of such a license are not openly stated, and at least one Australian software company has been refused a license. It would seem that even "public domain" software such as PGP is covered here. Ironically, the international version of PGP is available from the ADFA site at: ftp://ftp.adfa.oz.au/pub/security/pgp263i/ The government attitude to crypto policy generally in Australia is much more relaxed than in the USA. There is a recognition of business and personal need for strong crypto and that a balance needs to be sought between those needs and that of the law enforcement community. Although key escrow has been raised as an issue in some circles, it has not formed part of any government policy as yet. Greg Taylor EFA Crypto Committee From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Sat Jan 25 06:14:07 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 06:14:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [No Subject:] In-Reply-To: <199701251011.CAA23842@toad.com> Message-ID: <19970125.091136.3254.4.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> On Sat, 25 Jan 1997 00:30:57 -0800 Bill Stewart writes: >Hi! It's useful to include a subject line in email so people >can decide whether to read it and have more context for it, >though calling yourself "fuck you" will probably deter a few people. >There are lots of anarchists on the net; you can run into some good >discussions on Usenet on several newsgroups with "anarchy" or >"anarchism" >in the titles. Rec.caves has good underground material...... You missed the hole point. You read that BECAUSE their was no header, if it was ANARCHY you would have just deleted it. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 06:40:11 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 06:40:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: PSS_sst In-Reply-To: <199701251010.CAA23794@toad.com> Message-ID: Bill Stewart writes: > > > # Thanks; Bill > # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com > # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp > # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) This is another example of Sandy's odd-ball moderation policy. Bill Stewart mistakenly cc:d the whole cypherpunks when he requested a document from jya's 'bot. Because Bill Stewart is part of the "in" crowd, his submission was distributed to the censored list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 06:40:17 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 06:40:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701250957.BAA23606@toad.com> Message-ID: Jim Choate writes: > > Forwarded message: > > > From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Fri Jan 24 22:06:53 1997 > > Subject: Re: Homo/bi/sexuals Most Destructive (fwd) > > Date: Fri, 24 Jan 1997 22:57:52 EST > > > > YOU ARE BOTH WRONG THE CORRECT TERM IS INDEX CASE > > > >The correct term is 'Patient 0'. > > You are welcome to contact the CDC in Georgia and correct their terminology. > I am shure they would appreciate it. > > http://www.cdc.gov/ > > Their webpage search capability is temporarily down so you might have to > talk to a real person, > > Center for Disease Control and Prevention > 1600 Clifton Rd., NE. > Atlanta, GA 30333 > 404-639-3311 > > Jim Choate > CyberTects > ravage at ssz.com I ask the moderator to explain why all these "breeder-bashing" flames are posted to the censored list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 06:40:19 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 06:40:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: Toto writes: > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > > John Gilmore is free to appoint > > whoever he wants to moderate his list, he is free to censor all > > messages which criticise him and his censorship, however, subscribers > > to the list should be told they are being censored on these grounds > > and not on some facade of "crypto relevancy" or another thin veil > > drawn weakly over content based censorship to protect a certain class > > of list members. > > It became rather glaringly obvious after moderation was announced > that class structure would be the defining feature of moderation. > Those who felt themselves to be in the 'upper class' made no > bones about it. That's a very insightful obeservation. "Cypher punks" are not opposed to the system. They don't want to change the existing social order. They want to join the upper class and enjoy its privileges (such as privacy and anonymity). They don't want to extend these privileges to the "hoi polloi" (unwashed masses). Jim Bell is a boor, but he had some very interesting ideas that upset the "cypher punk" crowd because he advocates dismantling the system they hope to join one day. This reminds me of a U.S. populist politician from the 1930's whose name I forgot, who advocated expropriating individual wealth above $5M. Why did his disenfranchised supporters want to leave the rich with $5M? Because each one hoped one day to have the $5M. Here's the $64K question: if you were approached by a LEA and offered a huge consulting fee to help break a code to obtain evidence in a criminal case, would you do it? I suspect most "cypher punks" would agree both for the money and for the glory, but no one would ask them because very few people on this list can break codes. :-) [No I would not, irrespective of the fee and the nature of the case.] --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 06:50:07 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 06:50:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [No Subject:] In-Reply-To: <19970125.091136.3254.4.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> Message-ID: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) writes: > > On Sat, 25 Jan 1997 00:30:57 -0800 Bill Stewart > writes: > >Hi! It's useful to include a subject line in email so people > >can decide whether to read it and have more context for it, > >though calling yourself "fuck you" will probably deter a few people. > >There are lots of anarchists on the net; you can run into some good > >discussions on Usenet on several newsgroups with "anarchy" or > >"anarchism" > >in the titles. Rec.caves has good underground material...... > > You missed the hole point. You read that BECAUSE their was no header, if > it was ANARCHY you would have just deleted it. A logical conclusion is that rather than specifying no subject header, you must specify one that's most likely to get the readers to read it, not necessarily related to the contents. I suggest the subject $$$ MANE.MONEY.FAST $$$ unless you do write about John Gilmore's PGP MLM scam. P.S. Is the "hole point" another nickname for Sandy's orifice? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 06:50:10 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 06:50:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm In-Reply-To: <199701250957.BAA23609@toad.com> Message-ID: Jim Choate writes: > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > OVERVIEW OF HIV/AIDS > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Some important facts about the evidence that HIV causes AIDS are: > > * Tests for HIV antibody in persons with AIDS show that they are > infected with the virus. > > > > * HIV has been isolated from persons with AIDS and grown in pure > culture. > > > > * Studies of blood transfusion recipients before 1985 documented the > transmission of HIV to previously uninfected persons who > subsequently developed AIDS. > > > > Before the discovery of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), the virus > that causes AIDS, epidemiologic studies of AIDS patients' sex partners > and AIDS cases occurring in blood transfusion recipients before 1985 > clearly showed that the underlying cause of AIDS was an infectious > agent. Infection with HIV has been the only common factor shared by > persons with AIDS throughout the world, including homosexual men, > transfusion recipients, persons with hemophilia, sex partners of > infected persons, children born to infected women, and health care > workers who were infected with HIV while on the job, mainly by being > stuck with a needle used on an HIV-infected patient. > > > > Although we know that HIV is the cause of AIDS, much remains to be > known about exactly how HIV causes the immune system to break down. > Scientists are constantly discovering more information about HIV and > AIDS. These discoveries help people learn how to stop transmission of > the virus and help people infected with HIV to live longer, healthier > lives. One important question to answer is why some people exposed to > HIV become infected and others do not. Scientists believe it is most > likely because of how infectious the other person is and how they are > exposed. For example, more than 90 percent of persons who were exposed > through an HIV-infected unit of blood became infected. So we know that > blood-to-blood contact is a very efficient way that HIV is spread. On > the other hand, many health care workers are splashed with blood or > bloody body fluids and this type of exposure has caused very few > occurrences of HIV infection. Researchers know how HIV is spread and > the ways that people can help protect themselves from being exposed to > HIV. > > > > If you have questions about HIV infection and AIDS, please call the > CDC National AIDS Hotline at the tollfree number, 1-800-342-2437. If > you wish to write to CDC regarding this subject, please write to the > CDC National AIDS Clearinghouse, Post Office Box 6003, Rockville, > Maryland, 20849-6003. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Back to HIV/AIDS Information Return to HIV/AIDS Information > > Back to DHAP home page GO BACK TO DHAP HOME PAGE > > (with graphics) > (text only) > > > > > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > Last Updated: June 13, 1996 > Updated By: Technical Information Activity > email: hivmail at cidhiv1.em.cdc.gov > Why are the homos forwarding the web pages to the mailing list, and why does the moderator post every piece of "breeder-bashing" trash to the censored list, while rejecting whatever he deems "homophobic"? [For the record, I have serious doubts whether the HIV virus causes AIDS.] --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Sat Jan 25 07:32:13 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 07:32:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: HELLO Message-ID: <19970125.102915.11966.4.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> Is ESDES a good program? From Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com Sat Jan 25 07:54:25 1997 From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com (Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 07:54:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: encrypt_1.html Message-ID: <199701251609.LAA28394@linux.nycmetro.com> Reuters New Media [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Texas Instruments Posts Loss, Stock Soars Next Story: FCC Chief Asks If Policy Should Focus On Internet _________________________________________________________________ Friday January 24 10:08 AM EST US Senator Will Reintroduce Encryption Export Bill WASHINGTON - Sen. Conrad Burns will reintroduce next week his measure to substantially eliminate export restrictions on computer encoding technology, a spokesman for the Senator says. "We are aiming for the 28th (of January) and it will be the same bill as last year," Matt Raymond, spokesman for the Montana Republican, said. President Clinton signed an executive order in November slightly relaxing export controls on encryption technology -- computer programs that use mathematical formulas to scramble information and render it unreadable without a password or software "key." But many in Congress and the computer industry have said the new Clinton policy did not go far enough to lift the Cold War era export limits that classified most encryption programs as munitions. Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved _________________________________________________________________ ________________________ ___________ Help _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Texas Instruments Posts Loss, Stock Soars Next Story: FCC Chief Asks If Policy Should Focus On Internet _________________________________________________________________ [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Reuters Limited Questions or Comments From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 07:55:31 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 07:55:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypher-Oops! Message-ID: <199701251555.HAA28047@toad.com> I was just wondering if the CypherPunks list is now the only list that has an Administrative introduction for list members that could not be posted in full to the list-proper, as it contains a flame against an individual. Toto From whgiii at amaranth.com Sat Jan 25 07:55:42 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 07:55:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701251555.HAA28055@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701241411.GAA25271 at toad.com>, on 01/24/97 at 09:09 AM, Toto said: > I would like to point out, however, that anyone who has had their >posts 'sorted' into the 'flames list' is now a 'known flamer', as >evidenced by the fact that their post has been designated a 'flame' >on a list run by a champion of free speech on the electronic >frontier. Intresting.... Does a single flame make a flamer?? I have in the past been involved in heated arguments on just about every list/newsgroup I have been involved in. :) I think this goes back to the topic of reputation capital. IMHO the occational message that get's droped into the 'flames list' would have little effect on ones reputation. While a complete ban all of ones posting or even a majority of ones posts making it to the 'flames list' could/would have a detrimtal effect. Hmmmm... Actually there could be an intresting side affect of a moderated list to a posters reputation. Lets take the following example: John Doe likes posting rants & flames 90% of the time. The other 10% of the time he posts intelegent messages. Now on an un-moderated list a majority of subscribers would get tierd of his rants, write him off as a kook and kill-file him. His 10% of intelegent posts would be lost in the 90% of noise and his reputation would be adversly effected within the group. Now on a moderated list the 90% of rants & flames would never be seen by the list only the other 10%. His would wind up having a much higher reputation among the group compaired to if all his posts were seen. I am not quite sure how to judge this effect. Should one take into account the kooky behavior of a poster when veiwing his 'non kooky' posts? Does moderation have a detrimental effect to establishing a reputation based system for a group (how would Don Woods reputation faired if his rant's on OTP's & ISP had been filtered out?) > It is obvious that some of the more intuitively intelligent list >members are aware of this, as is indicated by the nervous fear with >which they 'explain why' their post is crypto-relevant. IMHO this is sheepish though I have noticed it before moderation started. If I have somthing to post to the list I see no reason to justify why I am posting it. This post I am making now has zero crypto-relevance and I make no appoligies for it. Do I think it is relevant to the list? Yes otherwise I would not have posted it. Either way no explination for the post is needed. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: See the Future; See OS/2. Be the Future; Run OS/2. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMunqw49Co1n+aLhhAQEhUQQAikxVlOQuCQuNq2DoZgIhj85RvfaEOkvO 6QqoecASeunSyvh5gtXH+p6n3kq6i/NLAUwcmPYUtkdpKdPaRk4/OkhTVGNuVEHM eEQroUNNJ02g+42Gz9vEm2ZtWxWC9zAdIbmY/Hnw6SUyW/jgJKWNadd8Nh2HQYxV CXMUpweNbdg= =8pqg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jeremey at veriweb.com Sat Jan 25 07:55:47 1997 From: jeremey at veriweb.com (Jeremey Barrett) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 07:55:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mailcrypt nym.alias.net support Message-ID: <199701251555.HAA28063@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For those of you who use mailcrypt (Emacs-PGP interface) for email, I have hacked in support for pseudonyms ala nym.alias.net. In fact, the code has nym.alias.net hardcoded for now. I'm gonna add more stuff, but I'm just letting this out as is. This patch affects mailcrypt.el and mc-remail.el. I made these changes to mailcrypt 3.4, so your mileage may vary on other versions. I did this after the C2 party tonight, so typos and bugs are possible. Please email me if bugs are found. "This value is not configureable" does not qualify, I know it's not configureable yet. (BTW there are a couple functions not used, I was doing it one way, then changed my way of thinking, but the code is ok so I left it.) Installing it: o cd to your lisp directory o cat /path/to/the/patch | patch -p0, or something similar (You will need to pgp this message before extracting the patch to get rid of the leading "- " on some lines.) o recompile the .el files, ala: emacs -batch -f batch-byte-compile mc-remail.el emacs -batch -f batch-byte-compile mailcrypt.el Using it: o You _must_ have a remailer chain defined. This does not work with a single remailer (though a chain of length 1 might work). o Compose a message or reply as normal. Once you are done (the message would go out without nyms or remailers or anything if you hit C-c C-c), hit C-c / n. o The first question asks for a remailer chain, it will do completions. o The second question asks for the name of your nym. This is assumed to be @nym.alias.net, DO NOT include @nym.alias.net. If your nym is jimbob at nym.alias.net, just answer jimbob. This does not do completions at the moment. Putting your nym in your .emacs file is a bit weird anyway. o You will be asked for a signature for your nym's private key. o The message will be rewritten to send at nym.alias.net and then to the remailer chain you chose. o Send it. Hack the code at will, if you make significant enhancements, please email patches to me. Of course there is no warranty of any sort, if it blows up your machine you're out a machine. I will put this on my web page (http://www.veriweb.com/people/jeremey) for those that prefer that. Ok, here's the patch: - ---------------------------------cut here----------------------------------- *** mailcrypt.el Tue Oct 10 12:33:45 1995 - --- /usr/home/jeremey/PGP/mailcrypt-3.4/mailcrypt.el Sat Jan 25 02:45:27 1997 *************** *** 51,56 **** - --- 51,57 ---- (autoload 'mc-sign "mc-toplev" nil t) (autoload 'mc-insert-public-key "mc-toplev" nil t) (autoload 'mc-remailer-encrypt-for-chain "mc-remail" nil t) + (autoload 'mc-remailer-encrypt-for-nym "mc-remail" nil t) (autoload 'mc-remailer-insert-response-block "mc-remail" nil t) (autoload 'mc-remailer-insert-pseudonym "mc-remail" nil t) *************** *** 101,107 **** (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/b" 'mc-remailer-insert-response-block) (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/p" ! 'mc-remailer-insert-pseudonym))) (easy-menu-define mc-read-mode-menu (if mc-xemacs-p nil (list mc-read-mode-map)) - --- 102,110 ---- (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/b" 'mc-remailer-insert-response-block) (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/p" ! 'mc-remailer-insert-pseudonym) ! (define-key mc-write-mode-map "\C-c/n" ! 'mc-remailer-encrypt-for-nym))) (easy-menu-define mc-read-mode-menu (if mc-xemacs-p nil (list mc-read-mode-map)) *** mc-remail.el Wed Oct 4 15:45:56 1995 - --- /usr/home/jeremey/PGP/mailcrypt-3.4/mc-remail.el Sat Jan 25 02:44:16 1997 *************** *** 378,383 **** - --- 378,401 ---- (re-search-forward "^$" nil 'move) (cons (copy-marker start) (copy-marker (point))))))) + (defun mc-find-nym-from-header (name subject &optional insert) + ;; Find the header with a "::" immediately after the + ;; mail-header-separator. Return region enclosing header. Optional + ;; arg INSERT means insert the header if it does not exist already. + (save-excursion + (goto-char (point-min)) + (re-search-forward + (concat "^" (regexp-quote mail-header-separator) "\n")) + (if (or (and (looking-at "From") (forward-line 1)) + (and insert + (progn + (insert-before-markers + (concat "From: " name "\nTo: \nSubject:" subject "\n\n")) + (forward-line -1)))) + (let ((start (point))) + (re-search-forward "^$" nil 'move) + (cons (copy-marker start) (copy-marker (point))))))) + (defun mc-find-hash-header (&optional insert) (save-excursion (goto-char (point-min)) *************** *** 400,411 **** - --- 418,442 ---- (defsubst mc-replace-main-field (field replacement) (mc-replace-field field replacement (mc-find-main-header t))) + (defsubst mc-nuke-main-field (field) + (mc-nuke-field field (mc-find-main-header t))) + (defsubst mc-replace-hash-field (field replacement) (mc-replace-field field replacement (mc-find-hash-header t))) (defsubst mc-replace-colon-field (field replacement) (mc-replace-field field replacement (mc-find-colon-header t))) + (defsubst mc-insert-nym-header (replacement) + (mc-find-nym-from-header replacement + (cdr (car (mc-get-fields "Subject" + (mc-find-main-header)))) t) + (mc-replace-main-field "To" "send at nym.alias.net") + (mc-nuke-main-field "Cc") + (mc-nuke-main-field "Organization") + (mc-nuke-main-field "Subject") + (mc-nuke-main-field "From")) + (defun mc-recipient-is-remailerp () (let ((to (mc-get-fields "To" (mc-find-main-header)))) (and to *************** *** 516,521 **** - --- 547,568 ---- (setq pseudonym (concat pseudonym " "))) (mc-replace-colon-field "From" pseudonym))) + (defun mc-remailer-insert-nym-nym () + "Insert pseudonym as a From field in the hash-mark header. + + See the documentation for the variable `mc-remailer-pseudonyms' for + more information." + (interactive) + (let ((completion-ignore-case t) + pseudonym) + (setq pseudonym + (cond ((null mc-remailer-pseudonyms) + (read-from-minibuffer "Pseudonym: ")) + (t + (completing-read "Pseudonym: " + (mapcar 'list mc-remailer-pseudonyms))))) + (mc-insert-nym-header pseudonym))) + ;;}}} ;;{{{ Mixmaster support (defvar mc-mixmaster-path nil *************** *** 730,735 **** - --- 777,826 ---- (error "Unable to encrypt message to %s" (mc-remailer-userid remailer))))) + (defun mc-rewrite-for-nym-internal (nym &optional pause) + ;; Rewrite the current mail buffer for nym.alias.net. This + ;; includes pulling down the To: and Subject: headers, changing + ;; the To: header, and encrypting to send at nym.alias.net and signing + ;; with the nym's key. This should be used only as part of + ;; mc-rewrite-for-nym since it will subsequently chain the message + ;; through a set of remailers. + (let ((addr "send at nym.alias.net") + (main-header (mc-find-main-header))) + + ;; Move "Subject" lines down. + (goto-char (cdr main-header)) + (forward-line 1) + (mapcar + (function (lambda (f) (insert (car f) ":" (cdr f)))) + (mc-get-fields "Subject" main-header t)) + (insert "\n") + + ;; Move "To" lines down. + (goto-char (cdr main-header)) + (forward-line 1) + (mapcar + (function (lambda (f) (insert (car f) ":" (cdr f)))) + (mc-get-fields "To" main-header t)) + + ;; Insert "From" for nym.alias.net + (goto-char (cdr main-header)) + (forward-line 1) + (insert (concat "From: " nym "\n")) + + (goto-char (car main-header)) + (insert "To: send at nym.alias.net\n") + + (if pause + (let ((cursor-in-echo-area t)) + (message "SPC to encrypt for %s : " addr) + (read-char-exclusive))) + (setq main-header (mc-find-main-header)) + (goto-char (cdr main-header)) + (forward-line 1) + (let ((mc-encrypt-for-me nil)) + (mc-encrypt-message "send at nym.alias.net" nil (point) nil + (concat nym "@nym.alias.net") t)))) + (defun mc-rewrite-for-chain (chain &optional pause) ;; Rewrite the current buffer for a chain of remailers. ;; CHAIN must be in canonical form. *************** *** 744,749 **** - --- 835,856 ---- (mc-rewrite-for-remailer (car chain) pause) (mc-rewrite-for-mixmaster chain pause))))) + (defun mc-rewrite-for-nym (nym chain &optional pause) + ;; Rewrite the current buffer for nym.alias.net through a + ;; chain of remailers. CHAIN must be in canonical form. + ;; nym is assumed to be the nym's name WITHOUT @nym.alias.net on it. + (let (rest) + (if mc-mixmaster-path + (setq rest (mc-mixmaster-skip chain)) + (setq rest chain)) + (if (null chain) nil + (mc-rewrite-for-nym-internal nym pause) + (mc-rewrite-for-chain + (if (eq rest chain) (cdr rest) rest) pause) + (if (eq rest chain) + (mc-rewrite-for-remailer (car chain) pause) + (mc-rewrite-for-mixmaster chain pause))))) + (defun mc-unparse-chain (chain) ;; Unparse CHAIN into a string suitable for printing. (if (null chain) *************** *** 782,787 **** - --- 889,926 ---- (cdr (assoc chain-name chains)) chains)) (mc-rewrite-for-chain chain pause) + (if chain + (save-excursion + (set-buffer buffer) + (erase-buffer) + (insert "Rewritten for chain `" chain-name "':\n\n" + (mc-unparse-chain chain)) + (message "Done. See %s buffer for details." mc-buffer-name))))) + + ;;}}} + + (defun mc-remailer-encrypt-for-nym (&optional pause) + "Encrypt message for a nym server, to be resent, prompting for chain to use. + + With \\[universal-argument], pause before each encryption." + (interactive "P") + (let ((chains (mc-remailer-make-chains-alist)) + (buffer (get-buffer-create mc-buffer-name)) + chain-name chain nym) + (mc-nuke-field "CC") + (mc-nuke-field "Organization") + (mc-disallow-field "FCC") + (mc-disallow-field "BCC") + (setq chain-name + (completing-read + "Choose a remailer or chain: " chains nil 'strict-match)) + (setq nym + (read-from-minibuffer "Pseudonym: ")) + (setq chain + (mc-remailer-canonicalize-chain + (cdr (assoc chain-name chains)) + chains)) + (mc-rewrite-for-nym nym chain pause) (if chain (save-excursion (set-buffer buffer) - ---------------------------------cut here----------------------------------- - -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Jeremey Barrett Senior Software Engineer jeremey at veriweb.com VeriWeb Internet Corp. http://www.veriweb.com/ PGP Key fingerprint = 3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80 DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64 PGP Public Key: http://www.veriweb.com/people/jeremey/pgpkey.txt "less is more." -- Mies van de Rohe. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBMunrci/fy+vkqMxNAQHpQQQAkN8wQ+/65qsN4326gFRmEMjcwQH1mj2v /WZGnxyB2ADYlF0AMXfU60NzUO31KZzEbbOu8oX2I0KptXrDGiLYoQ6uerw/W441 1B4uAd2pEztqWwfwyYmLj57meQWJw1IjH7AuF0Mz9NJ7OLEWq+H5CC9w4zwo6u1/ nTrWv396Y6Q= =jpyn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Sat Jan 25 08:10:29 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:10:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: HELLO Message-ID: <199701251610.IAA28150@toad.com> Is ESDES a good program? From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Sat Jan 25 08:10:36 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:10:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: [No Subject:] Message-ID: <199701251610.IAA28175@toad.com> On Sat, 25 Jan 1997 00:30:57 -0800 Bill Stewart writes: >Hi! It's useful to include a subject line in email so people >can decide whether to read it and have more context for it, >though calling yourself "fuck you" will probably deter a few people. >There are lots of anarchists on the net; you can run into some good >discussions on Usenet on several newsgroups with "anarchy" or >"anarchism" >in the titles. Rec.caves has good underground material...... You missed the hole point. You read that BECAUSE their was no header, if it was ANARCHY you would have just deleted it. From shamrock at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 08:10:40 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:10:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail Message-ID: <199701251610.IAA28183@toad.com> At 06:54 PM 1/24/97 -0800, tekmasta at global.california.com wrote: >can anyone help me out with getting pgp working... I just got 2.6.2 >excutable the freeware one and its for dos... I need to get one that works >with eudora or netscape.... please help! You want PGPMail. A free, full strength, beta is available at http://www.pgp.com/ PGPMail offers single click integration with Eudora. I use it myself. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 08:10:40 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:10:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701251610.IAA28182@toad.com> paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > John Gilmore is free to appoint > whoever he wants to moderate his list, he is free to censor all > messages which criticise him and his censorship, however, subscribers > to the list should be told they are being censored on these grounds > and not on some facade of "crypto relevancy" or another thin veil > drawn weakly over content based censorship to protect a certain class > of list members. It became rather glaringly obvious after moderation was announced that class structure would be the defining feature of moderation. Those who felt themselves to be in the 'upper class' made no bones about it. Toto From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 08:23:51 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:23:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: testing email from airport kiosk Message-ID: <199701251623.IAA28381@toad.com> Bill Stewart writes: > An update on the SF airport kiosk email machines: ... > It does support anonymous email, in that you can type in > any email address you want, and it doesn't seem to mind. > In addition to limited web, telnet, and outgoing email, > it lets you retrieve email with POP3. Doesn't seem to be a way > to get it to run a program, though :-) My immediate guess would be that everyone using it gets videotaped, then all activity is logged, and that the LEAs are waiting for some idiot to use it to retrieve kiddie porn and/or terrorist bobm-making instructions. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From shamrock at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 08:23:57 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:23:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <199701251623.IAA28390@toad.com> At 06:29 PM 1/24/97 -0800, Hugh Daniel wrote: > FYI: >>From: jsp at betz.biostr.washington.edu [...] >> However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a >> smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their >> computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of >> Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers >> will become standard on computers in Scandinavia. [...] Interesting piece of trivia: I recently talked with a fellow from Intel. They are looking to purchase keyboards with smartcard readers built in. They hope to get them at $30/piece from suppliers in Asia. The lot size? 10 million. That's a lot of smartcard readers. Even for Intel. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com Sat Jan 25 08:23:59 1997 From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com (Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:23:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: encrypt_1.html Message-ID: <199701251623.IAA28393@toad.com> Reuters New Media [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Texas Instruments Posts Loss, Stock Soars Next Story: FCC Chief Asks If Policy Should Focus On Internet _________________________________________________________________ Friday January 24 10:08 AM EST US Senator Will Reintroduce Encryption Export Bill WASHINGTON - Sen. Conrad Burns will reintroduce next week his measure to substantially eliminate export restrictions on computer encoding technology, a spokesman for the Senator says. "We are aiming for the 28th (of January) and it will be the same bill as last year," Matt Raymond, spokesman for the Montana Republican, said. President Clinton signed an executive order in November slightly relaxing export controls on encryption technology -- computer programs that use mathematical formulas to scramble information and render it unreadable without a password or software "key." But many in Congress and the computer industry have said the new Clinton policy did not go far enough to lift the Cold War era export limits that classified most encryption programs as munitions. Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved _________________________________________________________________ ________________________ ___________ Help _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Texas Instruments Posts Loss, Stock Soars Next Story: FCC Chief Asks If Policy Should Focus On Internet _________________________________________________________________ [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Reuters Limited Questions or Comments From gtaylor at gil.com.au Sat Jan 25 08:25:40 1997 From: gtaylor at gil.com.au (Greg Taylor) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:25:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anyone have info on foreign "ITARS" Message-ID: <199701251625.IAA28444@toad.com> Bill Campbell wrote: >Does anyone have any pointers to info about the import/export >restrictions on encryption products in various countries. I know any >such summary would be very dynamic, but perhaps there's something >out there. The Australian regulations are available at: CUSTOMS (PROHIBITED EXPORTS) REGULATIONS - SCHEDULE 13 http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_reg/cer439/sch13.html and: AUSTRALIAN CONTROLS ON THE EXPORT OF DEFENCE AND STRATEGIC GOODS: http://www.adfa.oz.au/DOD/al/iic/excontrl/excohome.htm Crypto software comes under Part 3, Category 5/2 of these regulations. (These documents are in MS Word format) ADFA, for those who are not aware, is the Australian Defence Force Academy, the major tertiary training institute for the defence forces. I have an extract of the key clauses of these regulations if anyone is interested. Briefly, the Australian regulations ban cryptography exports, claiming responsibilities as a party to the Wassenaar Arrangement, although the actual details of the latter regarding crypto seem obscure. However, an export license can be obtained on application to the Defence Ministry. The conditions of such a license are not openly stated, and at least one Australian software company has been refused a license. It would seem that even "public domain" software such as PGP is covered here. Ironically, the international version of PGP is available from the ADFA site at: ftp://ftp.adfa.oz.au/pub/security/pgp263i/ The government attitude to crypto policy generally in Australia is much more relaxed than in the USA. There is a recognition of business and personal need for strong crypto and that a balance needs to be sought between those needs and that of the law enforcement community. Although key escrow has been raised as an issue in some circles, it has not formed part of any government policy as yet. Greg Taylor EFA Crypto Committee From sandfort at crl.com Sat Jan 25 08:25:45 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:25:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: TEST--FLAMES Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, We are still working out the bugs. This message is SUPPOSED to go only to the unedited list and the flames list. If it shows up on the moderated list, we have a bug. I'd like to have a couple of you (Bill Stewart? Lucky Green?) let me know so we can trace down the problem and get it corrected. Thanks, S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From sandfort at crl.com Sat Jan 25 08:25:47 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:25:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: TEST--MODERATED Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, We are still working out the bugs. This message is SUPPOSED to go only to the unedited list and the moderated list. If it shows up on the flames list, we have a bug. I'd like to have a couple of you (Toto? Dale Thorn?) let me know so we can trace down the problem and get it corrected. Thanks, S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From adam at homeport.org Sat Jan 25 08:43:58 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:43:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks In-Reply-To: <199701250958.BAA23622@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701251640.LAA17410@homeport.org> Paul Kocher announced that he has cracked it, and can recover data quickly. He is not publishing details of the break. Adam Jeremiah A Blatz wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. | "David E. Smith" writes: | > 7. Secure sensitive files. | > To keep sensitive or confidential information safe, store it | > on a Zip disk and use your Zip Tools software to assign a | > password that must be used in order to read from or write to | > the disk. At work, you can protect sensitive information | > such as personnel files, company directories, and product | > plans and designs. At home, you can secure personal | > information such as tax records, budgets, and computerized | > checkbooks. | | FWIW (not much), Iomega claims that it can't recover the data on a | password-protected disk. However, they do export those things, so I | doubt it's strong. | | Jer | | "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew | why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -- End of PGP signed section. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From sandfort at crl2.crl.com Sat Jan 25 08:55:41 1997 From: sandfort at crl2.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:55:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: TEST--MODERATED Message-ID: <199701251655.IAA28657@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, We are still working out the bugs. This message is SUPPOSED to go only to the unedited list and the moderated list. If it shows up on the flames list, we have a bug. I'd like to have a couple of you (Toto? Dale Thorn?) let me know so we can trace down the problem and get it corrected. Thanks, S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From adam at homeport.org Sat Jan 25 08:55:54 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 08:55:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <199701251655.IAA28677@toad.com> Paul Kocher announced that he has cracked it, and can recover data quickly. He is not publishing details of the break. Adam Jeremiah A Blatz wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. | "David E. Smith" writes: | > 7. Secure sensitive files. | > To keep sensitive or confidential information safe, store it | > on a Zip disk and use your Zip Tools software to assign a | > password that must be used in order to read from or write to | > the disk. At work, you can protect sensitive information | > such as personnel files, company directories, and product | > plans and designs. At home, you can secure personal | > information such as tax records, budgets, and computerized | > checkbooks. | | FWIW (not much), Iomega claims that it can't recover the data on a | password-protected disk. However, they do export those things, so I | doubt it's strong. | | Jer | | "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew | why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -- End of PGP signed section. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From wiseleo at juno.com Sat Jan 25 09:12:40 1997 From: wiseleo at juno.com (Leonid S Knyshov) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 09:12:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail In-Reply-To: <199701250958.BAA23623@toad.com> Message-ID: <19970125.090725.11470.1.wiseleo@juno.com> >try my site too http://gcwp.com/fadedimage > >can anyone help me out with getting pgp working... I just got 2.6.2 >excutable the freeware one and its for dos... I need to get one that >works >with eudora or netscape.... please help! Well the obvious answer is to RTFM (Note: F is for fine) on DOS version, its quite big. Also you seem to need Win PGP shell of some sort so that you won't have to type those commands, i memorised my commands on the 3rd day of usage so no big deal about shells. And then you cat'n'paste the code into your e-mail. In some cases you can set it up as a spell checker ;) Later. From wiseleo at juno.com Sat Jan 25 09:12:44 1997 From: wiseleo at juno.com (Leonid S Knyshov) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 09:12:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks In-Reply-To: <199701250958.BAA23622@toad.com> Message-ID: <19970125.090725.11470.2.wiseleo@juno.com> >"David E. Smith" writes: >> 7. Secure sensitive files. >> To keep sensitive or confidential information safe, store it >> on a Zip disk and use your Zip Tools software to assign a >> password that must be used in order to read from or write to >> the disk. At work, you can protect sensitive information >> such as personnel files, company directories, and product >> plans and designs. At home, you can secure personal >> information such as tax records, budgets, and computerized >> checkbooks. > >FWIW (not much), Iomega claims that it can't recover the data on a >password-protected disk. However, they do export those things, so I >doubt it's strong. Well, I think one way to find out is to create 2 identical zip disks and encrypt them with different passwords. Then do sector by sector compare and see where the beast is hiding at :) Leo. From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Sat Jan 25 09:18:20 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 09:18:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970125090712.01bef148@mail.teleport.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a >> smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their >> computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of >> Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers >> will become standard on computers in Scandinavia. "It is a really >> big help for users, who don't have to remember dozens of >> passwords when using different kind of services," Andler says. Didn't HP have a GAKed smartcard they were pushing? I wonder if anyone is going to make assurances that no one is spliting the keys with the soundman... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMuo9reQCP3v30CeZAQFl+gf+JXHoo2WAenGiHQuEFQcaxiAZ6SPQJE/K PSBUqgksy+tcvcr8JsLGkkIDZLrJ9B0LaVp2wbbZY2j6YtcsGCgBW0WLXeXbKJve e0L8epy1GHWPO3d8peiI4InnZaXWM815+TSI2aUDX+NBLMNIkX6/k4muwQtW6KAo ysApcbxBWeyARWklyL3pCQyYRulPhtiPjlQ3g8dFVjx3PUhOmdTuK7rjCNo502MO quXS07kkUFYhn53Mej4r90NZ88awdCKjytsDcIYVTZxY8sBanZ4Qux0OYGvwqfyr fY2Hfd4GFBw/6FPLHn2IWD9AH5O7TudPOC4SAiLTymBGDct8vtBBUg== =fF/v -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From wiseleo at juno.com Sat Jan 25 09:25:36 1997 From: wiseleo at juno.com (Leonid S Knyshov) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 09:25:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: your mail Message-ID: <199701251725.JAA28987@toad.com> >try my site too http://gcwp.com/fadedimage > >can anyone help me out with getting pgp working... I just got 2.6.2 >excutable the freeware one and its for dos... I need to get one that >works >with eudora or netscape.... please help! Well the obvious answer is to RTFM (Note: F is for fine) on DOS version, its quite big. Also you seem to need Win PGP shell of some sort so that you won't have to type those commands, i memorised my commands on the 3rd day of usage so no big deal about shells. And then you cat'n'paste the code into your e-mail. In some cases you can set it up as a spell checker ;) Later. From wiseleo at juno.com Sat Jan 25 09:25:45 1997 From: wiseleo at juno.com (Leonid S Knyshov) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 09:25:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <199701251725.JAA28995@toad.com> >"David E. Smith" writes: >> 7. Secure sensitive files. >> To keep sensitive or confidential information safe, store it >> on a Zip disk and use your Zip Tools software to assign a >> password that must be used in order to read from or write to >> the disk. At work, you can protect sensitive information >> such as personnel files, company directories, and product >> plans and designs. At home, you can secure personal >> information such as tax records, budgets, and computerized >> checkbooks. > >FWIW (not much), Iomega claims that it can't recover the data on a >password-protected disk. However, they do export those things, so I >doubt it's strong. Well, I think one way to find out is to create 2 identical zip disks and encrypt them with different passwords. Then do sector by sector compare and see where the beast is hiding at :) Leo. From DataETRsch at aol.com Sat Jan 25 09:50:36 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 09:50:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Public Key Partners Message-ID: <970125125001_1659050229@emout02.mail.aol.com> Hello, Do you know of a way I can contact Public Key Partners by e-mail or phone? Thanks. Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From DataETRsch at aol.com Sat Jan 25 09:55:31 1997 From: DataETRsch at aol.com (DataETRsch at aol.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 09:55:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Public Key Partners Message-ID: <199701251755.JAA29412@toad.com> Hello, Do you know of a way I can contact Public Key Partners by e-mail or phone? Thanks. Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos President DataET Research Data Engineering Technologies From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Sat Jan 25 09:55:35 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 09:55:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <199701251755.JAA29418@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a >> smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their >> computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of >> Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers >> will become standard on computers in Scandinavia. "It is a really >> big help for users, who don't have to remember dozens of >> passwords when using different kind of services," Andler says. Didn't HP have a GAKed smartcard they were pushing? I wonder if anyone is going to make assurances that no one is spliting the keys with the soundman... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMuo9reQCP3v30CeZAQFl+gf+JXHoo2WAenGiHQuEFQcaxiAZ6SPQJE/K PSBUqgksy+tcvcr8JsLGkkIDZLrJ9B0LaVp2wbbZY2j6YtcsGCgBW0WLXeXbKJve e0L8epy1GHWPO3d8peiI4InnZaXWM815+TSI2aUDX+NBLMNIkX6/k4muwQtW6KAo ysApcbxBWeyARWklyL3pCQyYRulPhtiPjlQ3g8dFVjx3PUhOmdTuK7rjCNo502MO quXS07kkUFYhn53Mej4r90NZ88awdCKjytsDcIYVTZxY8sBanZ4Qux0OYGvwqfyr fY2Hfd4GFBw/6FPLHn2IWD9AH5O7TudPOC4SAiLTymBGDct8vtBBUg== =fF/v -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 10:20:03 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 10:20:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970124212455.005ade48@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32EA4EA8.7894@gte.net> Bill Stewart wrote: > At 07:38 PM 1/23/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > One of the points of the Ebonics program is to recognize that > other people don't always speak the same way you do, and that > if you want to communicate with them, you'll be more successful > if you realize it, understand when they're talking in their dialect, I could agree with "some of the points" of the Ebonics program were it not for the fact of the hidden points. Unbeknownst to most folks, supporting a program on any erstwhile points will give support to the program on *all* points. One specific example: When I worked for Firestone corporate from 1970 to 1981, we were bullied into giving to the United Fund. (BTW, I learned how much my boss was making by reading the punches on the IBM cards.) The one bone they tossed us was we could specify which worthy causes our personal contribution would go towards. The trick was, if a certain greater-than-expected number of people specified a Catholic charity, for example, more funds would then be moved into the other charities to balance that out. Presumably those funds would come from those folks who hadn't declared a designee. In my view, once the contributors' specific designations were made, the remaining undesignated contributions should have been split across the designees according to the original percentages declared in the U.F. literature. Anything else would be a farce. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 10:32:31 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 10:32:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EA5194.7A53@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Jim Choate writes: > [For the record, I have serious doubts whether the HIV virus causes AIDS.] Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune problems. From jya at pipeline.com Sat Jan 25 11:17:16 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 11:17:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: US Info Supremacy Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970125191205.006fe378@pop.pipeline.com> >From Financial Times 26 January: "Defence experts in both the US and western Europe have commented recently that the US forces' lead in information technology is growing to the point where Washington may question the military usefulness of allies." Pointers to these comments would be appreciated. Further, if the speculation of US supremacist go-it-alone policy is correct, how might this affect: 1. US crypto export policy. 2. Crypto czar Aarons' role in promoting global GAK. 3. Other nation's suspicion of the US and its technological prowess, caused, for example, by the NSA's avowed intention to surveil all the world's communcation, and if encrypted to crack it at any cost. 4. Increasing isolation of the US from foreign innovation and talent -- the imperialist incest decline. 5. The future of treaties such as US/UK/AUS, NATO, SEATO, and the like for intel-sharing and crypto control. Two observations: One, last year's NRC crypto report said that strong crypto should not be a problem, and that other, unidentified, technologies should be supported instead to assure domestic and national security. Two, the recent InfoWar-Defense report has been criticized as unduly alarmist, because the US has sufficient means (Perry and others claim) to protect against information attacks. One NCSC commentator on talk.politics.crypto said that the IW-D techie panelists were out of touch, unlike Stewart Baker, a lawyer! Hence, it might be worth considering that both the NRC report and the IW-D reports are diversionary, disinformation to conceal US true capabilities -- strengths and weaknesses. Moreover, the crypto debate itself might be diversionary from other more crucial information defense technology -- for surveilling, sifting, interpreting, analyzing, decrypting, mining and securely storing. As well as offensive means to counterattack US communications attackers. Or, turning the matter one more time, perhaps crypto is in fact the heart of the national security problem and the avowed other, unidentified, more crucial, technology is a sham to mislead about US and other government's true weaknesses. The Commerce Control List is almost incoherent in trying to definitively regulate advancing technology. Paranoia may be increasing among governments due to the crypto debate and related issues of information security, such that each may, like the US is allegedly doing, retreating to within its own technological borders, while at the same time engaging in PsyWar about threats, defenses and offenses. Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons. From MAILER-DAEMON at cts.com Sat Jan 25 11:21:31 1997 From: MAILER-DAEMON at cts.com (MAILER-DAEMON at cts.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 11:21:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: mail failed, returning to sender Message-ID: |------------------------- Message log follows: -------------------------| no valid recipients were found for this message |------------------------- Failed addresses follow: ---------------------| ... unknown user |------------------------- Message text follows: ------------------------| Received: from joker.cts.com(really [204.216.216.196]) by mailhub.cts.com via smail with smtp id for ; Sat, 25 Jan 97 11:21:22 -0800 (PST) (Smail-3.1.92 1996-Mar-19 #3 built 1996-Apr-21) Received: from king.cts.com (root at king.cts.com [198.68.168.21]) by joker.cts.com (8.7.4/8.7.3) with SMTP id LAA07307 for ; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 11:21:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from Alpha.remcan.ca by king.cts.com with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #20) id m0voDf6-0019wPC; Sat, 25 Jan 97 11:21 PST Received: from shawn by Alpha.remcan.ca via SMTP (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI.AUTO) for id NAA11439; Sat, 25 Jan 1997 13:15:19 -0500 Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970125132102.009c1e80 at toad.com> X-Sender: cypherpunks at toad.com (Unverified) X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 13:21:12 -0600 To: pal at king.cts.com From: "cypherpunks at toad.com" Subject: Re: Extra Income Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" FUCK YOU SPAMMER >*********************************************************************** >Our Research Has Indicated That The Following >Message Will Be Of Interest To You. >*********************************************************************** > >Imagine what you can do with... > > UP TO $800.00 A WEEK EXTRA INCOME! > Here's How To Get Started > > Let me tell you which companies to contact so you can start to > receive your checks. They can be $200.00, $400.00, even $800.00 per > week, depending on what you do. You can earn this excellent income > right at home. And you work only when you want to. > > My name is Henry Summers. I investigate income opportunities > that are advertised in magazines or by mail or are listed in home work > directories and other sources. > > Then I talk to people who are actually using these opportunities. I ask > how much money they make... and whether they enjoy the work. This helps > me direct you to the best opportunities that are available today. Ones that > people are using right now to earn all the money they want. > > Get Paid For Stuffing Envelopes. > No Fees. Nothing To Buy. > > This easy work is very appealing, but most people do not know > how to get it. That's because so many of the envelope stuffing programs > being advertised are not what you expect. And you don't find that out > until after you send in your money. > > Let me tell you the real facts. With true envelope stuffing... > > * You do not need to pay any fee or buy any materials to get started. > * You do not do any advertising or handle any orders. > * All printing, postage, and mailing lists are supplied free by > the companies that pay you. > * Your pay is based entirely on how many envelopes you complete. > > Rosie Martinez is an example of someone who earns money stuffing > envelopes. The company delivers all the materials right to her door. > She stuffs the envelopes, seals them, and applies the mailing labels > and postage stamps that are supplied. Then she gets paid for every > envelope completed. > > Rosie says, "I'm retired, and I enjoy having something to do. > I usually watch television while I work. The > home shopping shows are much more fun now > that I have money to spend." > > If you'd like to do this kind of work, just follow the directions in > Chapter 3 of my book "Real Home Income". Or try any of the other > opportunities covered. > > Hundreds of companies are ready to help you make money. I'll > tell you what each one has available now. > > Choose the kind of work you like and write to the companies who > offer it. Pick any you want. You can work as an independent contractor for > as many companies as you have time for. > > There are no qualifications to meet, so you will not be turned > down. I guarantee it. If you don't like one company or you want to make > more money, there are plenty of others you can try. > > Get Paid For Assembling Miniatures > > Gina Walker of Texas likes to assemble miniature furniture for doll houses. > All the necessary materials are supplied by the company that > pays her. She puts them together and sends them back to the company. > > Everything is conveniently handled by mail and UPS. The company > sends her a nice pay check for each batch she completes. > > Gina says: "I really like the work, and the extra money helps > pay my bills. I'm glad I found out about these companies." > > You can get paid the same way. And you don't have to make miniatures. > You can choose from many other types of work. You can sew baby > bonnets, assemble beaded jewelry, crochet doll clothes, make wooden > items, assemble stuffed animals, paint figurines, weave rattan reed, > and many more. > > You get the names and addresses of over 50 companies that will pay >for things you make or assemble at home. No experience is required, >and it makes no difference where you live. > > Almost all the companies supply the needed materials. Just do the >work and get paid for each batch you send back. Wouldn't you like to >get those pay checks? I'll show you how to get started fast. > >How I Made $800.00 Per Week After Losing My Job > > I became interested in home income opportunities several years >ago when I lost my job. I sent for dozens of money making offers. Most >were totally worthless. Others did not appeal to me. > > But circular mailing caught my interest... and it actually >worked. In just six weeks, I was making over $800.00 a week working >part time at home. It was better than my previous job. I soon paid off >my bills and bought a new car. > > Yet that was only the beginning. As I learned more about it and >tried different things, the money poured in even faster. It made a >huge difference when I applied certain secrets that are used by the >experts. I was amazed at how profitable it could be. > > In "Real Home Income" you'll learn how to use those secrets >yourself. I'll tell you which companies to contact to get started. >I'll show you some simple steps you can take to double your income >without doing any more work. > > If you want, you can do all of this without handling any >orders. Your name and address does not have to appear on anything you >mail. You just mail circulars for companies and receive nice fat >checks from them. > > With my proven methods, you can soon be earning more money than >you ever imagined. Just follow my directions, and you can start >receiving checks from the same companies I do. > >Receive One Dollar For Each Envelope You Stuff. >Envelopes Come To You Already Stamped And Addressed. > > This easy work is advertised by over thirty- five companies. But >they require that you pay $25.00 to $45.00 to register in their >program. And then the program seldom turns out to be what you'd >expect. > > That's where my book can help out. I describe the three kinds of >mail programs that pay one dollar per envelope. But there is only ONE >that I recommend. Not only is it more profitable overall, but you >don't have to pay any fee to do it. Not even a dollar. Read about "The >World's Best Dollar- Per- Envelope Program" in Chapter 4. > >How To Avoid Disappointment > > So many worthless offers are commonly advertised that many >people give up before they come across a good one. That won't happen >to you when you have my book. > > It tells you exactly how to recognize and avoid worthless >offers. The most common ripoffs are covered in detail. This knowledge > can save you a great deal of time and money. > > You can then take advantage of the many practical, down- to- >earth opportunities that are described. Ones that enable you to start >making money fast. Even just one extra source of income can make a big >difference in your standard of living. > >Start To Earn Money In 48 Hours > > When you get the book, look over the many excellent >opportunities. Each listing includes a brief description of what is >offered. Write to the companies you like and request an application >form. They have openings right now, and they'll be happy to get you >started. > > You can begin to make money even faster if you choose one of the >programs or plans that the book describes in detail. I'll tell you >everything you need to know to get started. By taking a few simple >steps, you can already be making money just 48 hours after you receive >the book. > >Unlimited No Nonsense Guarantee > > "Real Home Income" costs just $29.95 plus $3.00 for postage and >handling. I'm so confident you can make the money I've talked about >that I back it with a lifetime, money- back guarantee. If at any time >you feel the book has not helped you make all the money you want, just >send it back. I'll promptly send you a full refund of everything you >paid, including postage and tax. > > Start to enjoy more income and a better life as soon as >possible. Please complete the order form and mail it today. >Everything will be rushed to you by first class mail. > > > Sincerely, > Henry Summers > > P.S. I've recently discovered an amazingly profitable > opportunity. One person I talked to made $20,000 in his > first six weeks... working right at home in his spare > time. It is not multi- level marketing. I've never seen > anything like it before. I'l give you a toll free number > to call so you can get started. > > > > Please Print and Mail This Order Form > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------- > SUMMERS PUBLICATIONS # 30516 > 1010 Calle Cordillera, P.O. Box 3127 > San Clemente, CA 92672 > > ( ) Yes, I would like to get started. Please rush me > "Real Home Income" under your lifetime money- > back guarantee. Enclosed is $29.95 plus $3.00 for > postage and handling. $32.95 total. (If you live in > California, please send $34.95) > > Name____________________________________________ > > Address___________________________________________ > > City, State, Zip_____________________________________ > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- > > > From sales at quantcom.com Sat Jan 25 11:26:41 1997 From: sales at quantcom.com (Sid Westcott) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 11:26:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Add To Your Monthly Income!! Message-ID: <19273401602854@quantcom.com> Enclosed is the information you requested from Quantum Communications regarding bulk Email advertising services: Contact Info: Quantum Communications 6 Laurel Lane Stratham, NH 03885 603-772-4096 603-772-7297 fax staff at quantcom.com (general email) sales at quantcom.com(sales) cusserv at quantcom.com (customer service) http://www.quantcom.com Quantum Communications Proudly presents: BULK E-MAIL ADVERTISING SERVICE! Would you like to offer YOUR product or service to potential customers via E-mail? Consider the advantages of sending your marketing letter ALONE or Co-op to MILLIONS of persons directly via E-mail: + NO sharing of space in a cluttered publication + NO being buried amidst 100 other postcards in a card deck + NO wondering if your prospects will see/read your offer + NO having to fight for your prospect's attention + NO price-shopping, having your offering compared to others nearby it + EXTREMELY COST EFFECTIVE - as low as .009 cents per letter!! + Your piece/letter goes out ALONE or Co-op, depending on YOUR needs and budget + Everyone reads their Email! + NO need to wait for a publication date! We mail according to YOUR timetable, and all mail reaches the target within 1 day! Bulk Email is the perfect way to reach new prospects! Our state-of-the-art servers and proprietary software allow us to send your offering to MILLIONS of fresh prospects. All names on our list have been sent a test letter, enabling us to delete undeliverables and persons who do not wish to receive unsolicited Email advertisements. Therefore, all the prospects we send YOUR offering to are responsive, quality prospects! As part of our standard service package, we also provide the following: + An autoresponder,which allows a prospect to simply click reply and instantly receive a complete package of detailed further information via Email from your company (up to 20 pages in length!) + A unique Email address to which inquiries for your offering are forwarded, allowing you to build up your own database of hot prospects. + Complete design/copy assistance based on your goals and objectives We offer a service package designed to fit every need and budget! Choose either General Bulk (your letter sent ALONE), Co-op Bulk (your ad sent with others), or Targeted Bulk (custom-built lists to YOUR specs). Consider the benefits of using Quantum Communications for sending your bulk email advertising: * Highest quality list of hot prospects! * Largest database (over 5 million, mostly online service members, NOT newsgroup posters)! * Lowest rates in the industry! * FREE features included such as autoresponders, email forwarding, and copy design assistance! * No-Nonsense response rate guarantee! * 100% approved FINANCING. No one turned down! * Top-notch customer service. The best in the industry, as our references will confirm! * Targeted lists available, custom built for YOUR project! Rate Card: ___________________________________________________ Bulk Email Advertising Service Stand Alone Ad, up to 40 lines of text: $299 per 100,000, in even lots of 100,000 ____________________________________________________ Co-Op Bulk Email Advertising Service THE "MEGA-MAILER" Sent to our full database of 5 million hot prospects! Sent with other ads, up to 5 lines of text: $599 6-10 lines of text: $849 lines are 70 characters (spaces count) long number of pieces 5 MILLION _____________________________________________________ Targeted Bulk Email Stand Alone Ad, up to 40 lines of text: under 10,000 9.0 cents per piece 10,000 to 25,000 8.5 cents per piece 25,000 to 50,000 8 cents per piece over 50,000 7.5 cents per piece *Contact us with areas to target and we will quote you a price. ______________________________________________________ PAYMENT TERMS: 10 % Prepay Discount for 100% pre-pay OR FINANCING- NO Credit check. ALL APPROVED! 50% down, balance broken up into 2 equal monthly installments. EFT only ( drawn on US bank account ) for financing. _____________________________________________________ No-Nonsense Response Rate Guarantee: There are many scams alive on the Internet. Although the Net represents the greatest opportunity for a business to expand and grow that has ever existed, dozens of "snake-oil" purveyers prey on such businesspeople daily. Bulk Email Advertising is, in effect, the grass-roots basis at the foundation of all Net advertising. It is effective, economical, fast, relatively inexpensive (in comparison with other media, sometimes almost ridiculously so); in short - it works! The only glitch with this new advertising media is the con artists, as we have mentioned. Quantum Communications is committed to providing a quality service to advertisers at a reasonable price. No, we do not offer to supposedly send out a billion email ads for $39. No legitimate company can afford to promise that AND actually do it. Unfortunately, by the time most advertisers find that out, they have lost their money. We believe, instead, in guaranteeing our responses at a minimum level so each and every advertiser can rest assured that their money is well spent. We guarantee the following minimum responses to your advertising piece. If the responses do not reach the minimum amount, we will continue to include your piece in our co-op (if it was a co-op), or we will continue to mail the piece by itself, in sufficient amounts until the minimum responses are reached. These replies are only the POSITIVE responses and inquiries. Flames or negative replies, etc. are filtered by us, and you never see them! (they of course are NOT counted towards your minimum response guarantee). Minimum Responses: General Bulk Email: 100 replies per 200k pieces sent "MEGA-MAILER" Co-Op Bulk Email: 200 replies Targeted Bulk Email: 150 replies per 5,000 pieces sent (3.%!) As you will notice, this fixes the MAXIMUM cost PER REPLY at $2-3. Knowing how much each reply will cost you AT THE MOST allows you to plan your marketing budget and plan for success! This also causes us to take extra care when helping to examine your ad copy and suggest any revisions. Professional ad copy design is available for a surcharge of $80 per hour. We have a stake in making sure you succeed! We have many references who will vouch for our resolve and character as a company. Please feel free to call and speak with them. Also, feel free to either email us ( staff at quantcom.com) or call our offices at (603) 772-4096 and speak with us at any time Mon-Fri, 9AM to 7PM EST PAYMENT FOR SERVICES: We accept personal and business checks and money orders. We DO NOT accept credit cards at this time. If you would like to utilize your credit card, we recommend you get a cash advance from the card and deposit the funds into your personal or business chec IMPORTANT NOTE: All payments remitted must be in U.S. funds, drawn on a U.S. bank. EFT's must be drawn on an account in a U.S. bank. International customers outside the U.S. may either send an international bank money order (cashiers/bank cheque) drawn on their bank in U.S. dollars (by postal mail/overnight mail), or may have funds wired directly to our U.S. bank account. Email or call TO PLACE AN ORDER: Please make sure and include all of the information listed below, plus your ad copy (unless you are requesting we design it for you) and autoresponder copy, if needed (again, unless we are designing it for you). You may place an order in one of four ways: 1) Call our sales dept at (603) 772-4096. One of our sales reps will be happy to assist you, answer your questions, and help you get started. 2) Email us your phone # and best time to call, and one of our representatives will call you. 3) Send us an email with the following information included. Be sure and include ALL information. If anything is unclear, please feel free to email us (staff at quantcom.com) or call our sales dept. Also be sure and include ad copy and autoresponder copy, in 4) Print out the following "Needed information" form, and fill it out. Then fax it to us at 603-772-4096, or send it via postal (snail) mail to: Quantum Communications, 6 Laurel Lane , Stratham, NH, 03885 (optionally, you may include a regular check/money order. Your Email advertising will be sent within 10 business days. We can handle staggered or variable send schedules but in all cases require 10 days lead time. You will be sent a copy of your mailing when it is sent so you will know that it has been sent. Needed information for Processing of ad form order via email/fax: Name: Contact: Postal Address: City,State,Zip: Voice Phone #: Fax Phone #: Email Address: Services Ordered: (General Bulk / Targeted Bulk / MEGA-MAILER) How many recipients? Do you need us to design ad copy? (y/n) * If yes, there is an $80 surcharge for professional ad copy design, plus $80 per hour for autoresponse copy design Total Price: Referred by: Do you need an autoresponder? Do you have a preference of email alias? (whatyouwant at quantcom.com) *** Make sure Ad Copy and Autoresponder copy are included or attached*** Before filling out the payment info, please decide how you will be addressing the payment terms. See the section above on prices for available terms. Payment Info: The following information is all located on the face of your check. Please realize that providing the information electronically is no different than sending a paper check. When a paper check is sent, all the same account numbers are visible. Account name: Bank Name,City,& State: Amount:$ Check #: Authorized Signature: Transit #: (also referred to as the ABA routing number, this is the group of numbers which is usually in the lower left portion of the check and is enclosed in funny looking brackets that look like this |: The number is exactly 9 digits long.) Account # : (Another group of numbers on the bottom edge of the check, should be the rest of the numbers there besides the transit #. The check # should be part of this grouping also. ) *** If you have any questions about which numbers are which, simply call your bank and ask them what your account # and transit # (or ABA routing #) are.*** From sales at quantcom.com Sat Jan 25 11:28:43 1997 From: sales at quantcom.com (Sid Westcott) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 11:28:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Add To Your Monthly Income!! Message-ID: <19273486702855@quantcom.com> Quantum Communications Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Direct Email Marketing Contents: 1) What are your minimum orders? 2) Why can't I just do mailings myself? 3) What about Floodgate and other similar software mailing programs? 4) What if I have my own list? 5) What about the other Email Advertising companies? 6) What is the legal status of Email Advertising? 7) What about blocking by AOL? 8) What is "flame-filtering"/"Email Aliasing" ? Will anyone see my real Email address or complain to my provider? 9) What is an "autoresponder"? 10) What about ad copy design? 11) What about proof-of-mailing? 12) What is the "response rate guarantee"? How does it work? 13) What is your mail sending capacity? 14) What is the average lead time before my ad can be sent? 15) What type of mailing should I do? (Bulk stand-alone, MEGA-MAILER co-op, Targeted mail) 16) What categories are available for targeted lists? 17) Do you have sub-agent opportunities? 18) What is your list like, where are the names from, how big is it, how do you maintain it, etc? 19) What about undeliverables? 20) Contact Info 1) What are your minimum orders? Our minimum orders are 5,000 pieces for targeted mailings (in even lots of 5,000), 100,000 pieces for stand-alone bulk mailings (in even lots of 100,000), and 5 MILLION for the MEGA-MAILER co-op mailing (the full 5 million is the only size). As long as y our order is for at least the minimum amount of pieces, and in even lot sizes, you may stagger the actual sendings any way you wish (50,000 per week, etc.). Note, however, that the MEGA-MAILER is only sent once per week and is sent to the full 5 million address list. The reason we have minimums at all is due to the fact that the majority of our cost in terms of man-hours comes as a result of setting up a mailing, and so we cannot spend the time and money to setup too small a job. 2) Why can't I just do mailings myself? Technically, you can. For practical purposes, you can't. There are three reasons why it is implausible to even attempt to do your own Email Advertising: 1) Every single internet service provider on the planet will shut down your account. You will not even get 1000 pieces of mail out, and you will be shut down, because some uptight, self-appointed net-cops will complain to your provider. Do not kid your self. It WILL happen. Sending unsolicited commercial Email of any type is a violation of virtually every ISP's Terms of Service. Even if your ISP tells you it's OK (which will not happen 99% of the time), they will very quickly change their tune after th eir technical people receive a mailbox full of angry mail (commonly referred to as flames). When your account is cancelled, you will NOT get a refund, and, worse yet, you won't even be able to retrieve your replies! 2) A very large technical capacity is required to send bulk Email. You MIGHT be able to send 5,000 or so pieces of mail per hour, with a 28.8 modem, except that with dial-up internet connections, there are always dropped connections and so you can neve r be sure your mail went out unless you constantly sit and monitor the mailings all day and night, and send very small pieces at a time. 3) In order to have a list of addresses to send to, you have two choices: either spend months collecting names, or purchase an over-used list from a list vendor, who has sold the same list to dozens of others, who will bomb the list into uselessness. I n addition, most lists are so old that the names are 40% undeliverable, or from newsgroups, which are the WORST kinds of people to solicit. These three factors make it a practical impossibility to actually do your own bulk Email advertising, even though the vendors of the bulk Email software will not tell you this. The reason we do not have these hassles is because Quantum Communications IS OUR OWN INTERNET PROVIDER. We do not purchase service from anyone, and Email advertising is our only business! We have our own in-house servers, high-speed T-1 connections to the Internet, and full-time technical and customer service staff, yet our only customers are advertisers! Our lists are constantly maintained, updated, and cleansed, and are ONLY from high-quality sources. We DO NOT sell our names, or let anyone see them. See Question 18 for more on our lists. 3) What about Floodgate and other similar software mailing programs? Those programs can actually be fairly useful for extracting Email addresses and if you would like to build your own lists to your own specifications, that is an option (See Question 4 "What if I have my own list?"). However, building mailing lists is an EXTREMELY time-consuming and monotonous task, not to mention expensive in on-line charges. In addition, having these software programs will not help in the least in the sending issues you need to consider (See Question #2, above). We handle all aspects o f the mailing process, leaving you free to concentrate on your business! 4) What if I have my own list? We are fully able to use your list and send your mail to it. The price is 50% of what it would normally be. We simply have you Email or ftp your list to us, with ad copy (and autoresponse copy, if necessary). 5) What about the other Email Advertising companies? There is some competition in Direct Email marketing for your advertising dollar, and we have never purported to be the cheapest. We simply are the best. Most of the other "cheapo" companies who claim to offer a zillion pieces sent for $39, or some simil ar lowball deal, are quite frankly, scams. No legitimate company can afford all of the hardware, software, and personnel that a true advertising company like ours posesses, without charging a reasonable fee for providing of the service. Most of the low-r ent Email marketing companies are here-today, gone tomorrow. Perhaps gone with your money. Almost certainly gone without providing the actual service you paid for. Many of them look great until you investigate them further. Try calling them and getting a real live person on the phone. Or try asking them some of the questions referred to in this document. Most will disappear when you start asking serious questions. Or try asking for references. Good luck. There are so many fly-by night operators and snak e-oil salesmen on the 'net, it is hard to know what to believe. But the basic truths in business hold true. You should be able to call and get a live person on the phone, you should be able to check references and ask pointed questions, you should have a ccess to customer service and technical support, and you should be able to get a clear understanding of who you are dealing with, and how they do business. One mailing with us and you will be convinced that we truly are the cadillac of the industry. 6) What is the legal status of Email Advertising? Direct Email Advertising and solicitation is legal. It always has been. There are many self-styled legal eagles who dislike Email solicitation, and they will sometimes misquote federal statutes which apply to sending of unsolicited FAXES. There has never been a higher-court ruling supporting this supposed link between Email and unsolicited FAX. It is highly unlikely that such a ruling will EVER occur. If it does, we of course will need to adjust our business practices to stay in accordance with the law. However, at the present time, and for the foreseeable future in our opinion, Email solicita tion is just as legal as postal mail solicitation. The only real negative point which anti-Email advertising people address is that SOME people pay for their connect time at a timed/metered rate. Thus, the milliseconds which it takes to download an unsol icited piece of mail does cost the recipient (albeit tiny fractions of a penny). However, almost all ISP's (even America Online) have moved, or will be forced by competition to move, to an unlimited time rate structure. Therefore, this will no longer be an issue, and the persons who oppose Email advertising will have no legs to stand on. As this happens, Email advertising will become exactly like postal mail solicitation ( it is actually LESS intrusive than postal junk mail), and therefore we believe i t will NOT be regulated or legislated against. As a side note, we do provide a very clear, brief disclaimer at the header of ALL of our mailings which gives quick, simple removal instructions for persons who do not want to be on our lists. We act on all such requests immediately. In fact, it is an a utomated process. We do not want to be sending mail to unwilling recipients any more than they wish to receive it. 7) What about blocking by AOL? America Online has recently taken to blocking Email solicitations to it's members by certain Email Advertising companies. These companies are the ones who had been abusing their power, and had in fact been over-mailing (sending multiple pieces to the sam e recipients PER DAY). The most well-known of these companies was Cyber-Promotions. We feel that since we only send mail no more than 3 times per week to any single recipient, AOL is unlikely to begin blocking our transmissions. We also could take counte rmeasures technically and send to them again if necessary. However, our list only consists of about 25% AOL members, and that percentage is shrinking, as most of our newer names are coming from indepedent ISP sources (see Question # 18), so a blockage, w hile unlikely, would not affect us in the least in any event. Incidentally, we find it interesting that AOL does not apparently mind soliciting it's members (one cannot be online with them without getting at least 3 pop-up ads PER SESSION), they simply d on't want others soliciting their members without compensating THEM. 8) What is "flame-filtering"/"Email Aliasing" ? Will anyone see my real Email address or complain to my provider? Flames are the hate mail which is a part of Email soliciting today. Flame filtering is the automated filtering process we use to ensure that replies forwarded to you (by us) are only positive, serious inquiries, requests for information, orders, etc. We assign customers an Email alias at OUR domain. We are the only ones who know your REAL Email address. We then have all replies to your advertising sent to the alias we have assigned you so that we can filter out flames, then forward the "good" replies to you. No one can complain to your ISP, because as far as anyone knows, WE are your ISP (and we of course will not pay any attention, except to promptly remove them from our lists). In this way, you are totally insulated and protected, while still getting all "good" replies! Good replies are forwarded to you automatically as they come in. There is NO lag time or waiting. 9) What is an "autoresponder"? An Autoresponder is just an Email alias which we can have prospects who see your advertising respond to. When the response hits the autoresponder, it kicks back an automatic text file reply via Email, which is typically a more detailed package of informa tion (up to 20 pages) regarding your product or service. This effectively helps you weed out the "tire-kickers", so you are free to concentrate on fulfilling orders and more serious requests. A typical procedure is for a small "teaser" ad to be sent, wi th an autoresponder as the reply-to address. In the autoresponse text, you would typically include another Email alias for orders or more serious or specific questions. 10) What about ad copy design? We do have a copy editor on staff who is available to either write your copy from scratch or revise existing copy you already have. This is usually a wise investment, because the copy can be reused many times in different mailings, it will be done by a s easoned professional with over 10 years of experience in copywriting, and the actual copy is more than anything the key difference between success and failure when doing an Email marketing campaign. Think about it. Email is text only. No graphics, no mov ing pictures, sounds or colors. The content is all-important. Charges are $80 per hour, with typical costs being 1/2 hour for a revision, 1 hour for a small ad design, and 3 or more hours for design of ad copy plus autoresponse copy. 11) What about proof-of-mailing? When sending mail via the US Postal Service, a proof of mailing receipt is provided. There is no such counterpart in the world of Email. Although you will receive confirmation of your mailing once it is sent, the best way to become comfortable with deali ng with us is by first talking with our references, then by doing a single mailing to see what we can do for you. Once you have done business with us you will agree that we deliver exactly what we promise. Our minimum response rate guarantee is further e vidence of this, and renders the question of a proof of mailing as somewhat moot. We do actually have a log of all sent mail which is generated by our mailing software, but we only disclose the log under extenuating circumstances, and for a fee of $50 pe r 100,000 pieces sent, as it lists every mail sent, which discloses our list. 12) What is the "response rate guarantee"? How does it work? Our unique "response rate guarantee" is a clear indication of not only our rock-solid commitment to each and every advertiser, but also of our belief in direct Email advertising as a marketing medium. We know of no other advertising agency (Email or othe rwise) who actually GUARANTEES a minimum number of responses. Our guarantee is the following: 1) If you do not receive AT LEAST the minimum guaranteed responses from your Email Advertising, we will send on your behalf again, and again, and again..until you get the minimum amount! 2) You must allow 10 business days from the date your mailing was completed and you received confirmation, before requesting a remailing. 3) Of course, only positive, interested replies are counted towards your guaranteed minimum. 4) For this guarantee to apply, we must be able to verify the amount of replies you receive, so your ad must direct interested persons to an autoresponder or Email alias which we provide. 5) Any remailings are done on the same scale and amount as the original mailing, but to different recipients (except for the MEGA-MAILER or targeted lists)). 6) You must request a remailing by sending an Email to our customer service department, or by calling our office (ask to speak to customer service). We do not monitor replies automatically and automatically resend. 7) You may, at no charge, alter your original advertisement in any way you wish, as long as it is the same type of mailing as the original (targeted must be to the same group), and the same length as paid for in the original. Optionally, you may have t he ad revised professionally by us (See Question # 10). The Minimum responses guaranteed are as follows. We have had to make the numbers guaranteed purposefully low, because we extend this guarantee to ALL advertisers, regardless of whether or not they have effective ad copy or an appealing product or service . We of course strive for much higher responses for everyone, but is helpful to know that there is a "safety net", just in case. MINIMUMS: GENERAL STAND-ALONE BULK: 100 REPLIES PER 200,000 PIECES SENT TARGETED BULK: 150 REPLIES PER 5,000 PIECES SENT MEGA-MAILER: 200 REPLIES This allows advertisers to plan on a maximum cost per inquiry, which can be essential when planning a marketing budget. This guarantee, more than any other single factor, shows that Quantum Communications is a cut above the rest in the world of Marketing and Advertising! 13) What is your mail sending capacity? We have the technical capacity to send over 2 million pieces of mail per day. We have invested heavily in hardware, software, and high-speed mail transmission facilities to be able to achieve this capacity. We can handle your job, large or small. 14) What is the average lead time before my ad can be sent? The current lead time is 7-10 business days. This allows time for your ad copy to be submitted and for any revisions you may have before the mailing date. We actually work very hard to keep the lead times to a minimum, however, there has been a very high demand for Email advertising services, and it has been difficult just keeping up. If you have a special need to expedite an order, call or Email our customer service department, and we will make every effort to accomodate you. 15) What type of mailing should I do? (Bulk stand-alone, MEGA-MAILER co-op, Targeted mail) This depends entirely on your product or service. If you have a product or service which has a broad-based appeal, it is definetely better to send to a larger group of people. If you have an offering which you think needs 20-30 lines to entice people or grab their interest, then you need a stand-alone (the MEGA-MAILER is not for you). If you are announcing a website and just want mass exposure to 5 MILLION people, the MEGA-MAILER is just the thing. Of course, if you are trying to reach a select group, y ou need to have a targeted mailing. You may Email or call our sales department and a sales representative will be happy to assist you in selecting the right type of mailing to suit your offering. 16) What categories are available for targeted lists? We custom build all of our targeted lists from scratch, and 90% of our targeted lists are never re-used. We are able to build a custom-designed list to YOUR specifications. So, in other words, you tell US what the category is, or the demographics of the persons or businesses you are trying to reach. We then get an estimate from our List staff for approximately how many names we will commit to being able to find. Our sales staff will work with you on this issue. Of course, it is always a much lower volum e of names than a normal bulk list, but we have seen response rates of over 5% when mailing a targeted group! 17) Do you have sub-agent opportunities? Yes we do. We are currently accepting sub-agents who wish to promote and re-sell our services, or simply send us referrals. For a copy of our agent registration kit via Email, send an Email to agent at quantcom.com 18) What is your list like, where are the names from, how big is it, how do you maintain it, etc? Our Lists department is continually extracting fresh names for our lists from many sources. The sources include the membership directories of all the major online services (AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, Delphi, MSN), plus the "white pages" Email databases su ch as 411, IAF, etc. We NEVER extract names from newsgroups, except to build targeted lists. We NEVER send mail to Listserv's, .edu's, .gov's, etc. We automatically delete removal requests immediately, as well as undeliverables. We add 400,000 to 800,000 fresh addresses each week. For these reasons, we feel that we have a super-high quality database, which consists of over 6 MILLION addresses. This high list quality is another feature of our service, and boosts response rates dramatically over our compe titors. Although we add addresses constantly, and are attempting to reach 10 MILLION addresses by 2nd quarter of 1997, it is difficult because we lose about 10% of our database each week to removal requests and undeliverables. 19) What about undeliverables? We are consistently losing about 10% of our list each week to undeliverables and removal requests (combined). In order to somewhat compensate our advertisers for this, without incurring all the logistical nightmares we would have to endure if we tried to account for removals and undeliverables for each particular mailing, we send 110% of the actual order amount as a general rule. For example, if you paid for 100,000 we send 110,000. This approach has worked very well for our customers. Also note that th is becomes a less significant issue when the minimum response guarantee is taken into account. Contact Info: Quantum Communications 6 Laurel Lane Stratham, NH 03885 (603) 772-4096 (603) 772-7297 fax general correspondence: staff at quantcom.com sales: sales at quantcom.com customer service: cusserv at quantcom.com http://www.quantcom.com From sales at quantcom.com Sat Jan 25 11:28:47 1997 From: sales at quantcom.com (Sid Westcott) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 11:28:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Remarkable Income Opportunity!! Message-ID: <19293503002867@quantcom.com> Enclosed is the information you requested from Quantum Communications regarding bulk Email advertising services: Contact Info: Quantum Communications 6 Laurel Lane Stratham, NH 03885 603-772-4096 603-772-7297 fax staff at quantcom.com (general email) sales at quantcom.com(sales) cusserv at quantcom.com (customer service) http://www.quantcom.com Quantum Communications Proudly presents: BULK E-MAIL ADVERTISING SERVICE! Would you like to offer YOUR product or service to potential customers via E-mail? Consider the advantages of sending your marketing letter ALONE or Co-op to MILLIONS of persons directly via E-mail: + NO sharing of space in a cluttered publication + NO being buried amidst 100 other postcards in a card deck + NO wondering if your prospects will see/read your offer + NO having to fight for your prospect's attention + NO price-shopping, having your offering compared to others nearby it + EXTREMELY COST EFFECTIVE - as low as .009 cents per letter!! + Your piece/letter goes out ALONE or Co-op, depending on YOUR needs and budget + Everyone reads their Email! + NO need to wait for a publication date! We mail according to YOUR timetable, and all mail reaches the target within 1 day! Bulk Email is the perfect way to reach new prospects! Our state-of-the-art servers and proprietary software allow us to send your offering to MILLIONS of fresh prospects. All names on our list have been sent a test letter, enabling us to delete undeliverables and persons who do not wish to receive unsolicited Email advertisements. Therefore, all the prospects we send YOUR offering to are responsive, quality prospects! As part of our standard service package, we also provide the following: + An autoresponder,which allows a prospect to simply click reply and instantly receive a complete package of detailed further information via Email from your company (up to 20 pages in length!) + A unique Email address to which inquiries for your offering are forwarded, allowing you to build up your own database of hot prospects. + Complete design/copy assistance based on your goals and objectives We offer a service package designed to fit every need and budget! Choose either General Bulk (your letter sent ALONE), Co-op Bulk (your ad sent with others), or Targeted Bulk (custom-built lists to YOUR specs). Consider the benefits of using Quantum Communications for sending your bulk email advertising: * Highest quality list of hot prospects! * Largest database (over 5 million, mostly online service members, NOT newsgroup posters)! * Lowest rates in the industry! * FREE features included such as autoresponders, email forwarding, and copy design assistance! * No-Nonsense response rate guarantee! * 100% approved FINANCING. No one turned down! * Top-notch customer service. The best in the industry, as our references will confirm! * Targeted lists available, custom built for YOUR project! Rate Card: ___________________________________________________ Bulk Email Advertising Service Stand Alone Ad, up to 40 lines of text: $299 per 100,000, in even lots of 100,000 ____________________________________________________ Co-Op Bulk Email Advertising Service THE "MEGA-MAILER" Sent to our full database of 5 million hot prospects! Sent with other ads, up to 5 lines of text: $599 6-10 lines of text: $849 lines are 70 characters (spaces count) long number of pieces 5 MILLION _____________________________________________________ Targeted Bulk Email Stand Alone Ad, up to 40 lines of text: under 10,000 9.0 cents per piece 10,000 to 25,000 8.5 cents per piece 25,000 to 50,000 8 cents per piece over 50,000 7.5 cents per piece *Contact us with areas to target and we will quote you a price. ______________________________________________________ PAYMENT TERMS: 10 % Prepay Discount for 100% pre-pay OR FINANCING- NO Credit check. ALL APPROVED! 50% down, balance broken up into 2 equal monthly installments. EFT only ( drawn on US bank account ) for financing. _____________________________________________________ No-Nonsense Response Rate Guarantee: There are many scams alive on the Internet. Although the Net represents the greatest opportunity for a business to expand and grow that has ever existed, dozens of "snake-oil" purveyers prey on such businesspeople daily. Bulk Email Advertising is, in effect, the grass-roots basis at the foundation of all Net advertising. It is effective, economical, fast, relatively inexpensive (in comparison with other media, sometimes almost ridiculously so); in short - it works! The only glitch with this new advertising media is the con artists, as we have mentioned. Quantum Communications is committed to providing a quality service to advertisers at a reasonable price. No, we do not offer to supposedly send out a billion email ads for $39. No legitimate company can afford to promise that AND actually do it. Unfortunately, by the time most advertisers find that out, they have lost their money. We believe, instead, in guaranteeing our responses at a minimum level so each and every advertiser can rest assured that their money is well spent. We guarantee the following minimum responses to your advertising piece. If the responses do not reach the minimum amount, we will continue to include your piece in our co-op (if it was a co-op), or we will continue to mail the piece by itself, in sufficient amounts until the minimum responses are reached. These replies are only the POSITIVE responses and inquiries. Flames or negative replies, etc. are filtered by us, and you never see them! (they of course are NOT counted towards your minimum response guarantee). Minimum Responses: General Bulk Email: 100 replies per 200k pieces sent "MEGA-MAILER" Co-Op Bulk Email: 200 replies Targeted Bulk Email: 150 replies per 5,000 pieces sent (3.%!) As you will notice, this fixes the MAXIMUM cost PER REPLY at $2-3. Knowing how much each reply will cost you AT THE MOST allows you to plan your marketing budget and plan for success! This also causes us to take extra care when helping to examine your ad copy and suggest any revisions. Professional ad copy design is available for a surcharge of $80 per hour. We have a stake in making sure you succeed! We have many references who will vouch for our resolve and character as a company. Please feel free to call and speak with them. Also, feel free to either email us ( staff at quantcom.com) or call our offices at (603) 772-4096 and speak with us at any time Mon-Fri, 9AM to 7PM EST PAYMENT FOR SERVICES: We accept personal and business checks and money orders. We DO NOT accept credit cards at this time. If you would like to utilize your credit card, we recommend you get a cash advance from the card and deposit the funds into your personal or business chec IMPORTANT NOTE: All payments remitted must be in U.S. funds, drawn on a U.S. bank. EFT's must be drawn on an account in a U.S. bank. International customers outside the U.S. may either send an international bank money order (cashiers/bank cheque) drawn on their bank in U.S. dollars (by postal mail/overnight mail), or may have funds wired directly to our U.S. bank account. Email or call TO PLACE AN ORDER: Please make sure and include all of the information listed below, plus your ad copy (unless you are requesting we design it for you) and autoresponder copy, if needed (again, unless we are designing it for you). You may place an order in one of four ways: 1) Call our sales dept at (603) 772-4096. One of our sales reps will be happy to assist you, answer your questions, and help you get started. 2) Email us your phone # and best time to call, and one of our representatives will call you. 3) Send us an email with the following information included. Be sure and include ALL information. If anything is unclear, please feel free to email us (staff at quantcom.com) or call our sales dept. Also be sure and include ad copy and autoresponder copy, in 4) Print out the following "Needed information" form, and fill it out. Then fax it to us at 603-772-4096, or send it via postal (snail) mail to: Quantum Communications, 6 Laurel Lane , Stratham, NH, 03885 (optionally, you may include a regular check/money order. Your Email advertising will be sent within 10 business days. We can handle staggered or variable send schedules but in all cases require 10 days lead time. You will be sent a copy of your mailing when it is sent so you will know that it has been sent. Needed information for Processing of ad form order via email/fax: Name: Contact: Postal Address: City,State,Zip: Voice Phone #: Fax Phone #: Email Address: Services Ordered: (General Bulk / Targeted Bulk / MEGA-MAILER) How many recipients? Do you need us to design ad copy? (y/n) * If yes, there is an $80 surcharge for professional ad copy design, plus $80 per hour for autoresponse copy design Total Price: Referred by: Do you need an autoresponder? Do you have a preference of email alias? (whatyouwant at quantcom.com) *** Make sure Ad Copy and Autoresponder copy are included or attached*** Before filling out the payment info, please decide how you will be addressing the payment terms. See the section above on prices for available terms. Payment Info: The following information is all located on the face of your check. Please realize that providing the information electronically is no different than sending a paper check. When a paper check is sent, all the same account numbers are visible. Account name: Bank Name,City,& State: Amount:$ Check #: Authorized Signature: Transit #: (also referred to as the ABA routing number, this is the group of numbers which is usually in the lower left portion of the check and is enclosed in funny looking brackets that look like this |: The number is exactly 9 digits long.) Account # : (Another group of numbers on the bottom edge of the check, should be the rest of the numbers there besides the transit #. The check # should be part of this grouping also. ) *** If you have any questions about which numbers are which, simply call your bank and ask them what your account # and transit # (or ABA routing #) are.*** From sales at quantcom.com Sat Jan 25 11:30:33 1997 From: sales at quantcom.com (Sid Westcott) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 11:30:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: A Remarkable Income Opportunity!! Message-ID: <19293594102868@quantcom.com> Quantum Communications Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Direct Email Marketing Contents: 1) What are your minimum orders? 2) Why can't I just do mailings myself? 3) What about Floodgate and other similar software mailing programs? 4) What if I have my own list? 5) What about the other Email Advertising companies? 6) What is the legal status of Email Advertising? 7) What about blocking by AOL? 8) What is "flame-filtering"/"Email Aliasing" ? Will anyone see my real Email address or complain to my provider? 9) What is an "autoresponder"? 10) What about ad copy design? 11) What about proof-of-mailing? 12) What is the "response rate guarantee"? How does it work? 13) What is your mail sending capacity? 14) What is the average lead time before my ad can be sent? 15) What type of mailing should I do? (Bulk stand-alone, MEGA-MAILER co-op, Targeted mail) 16) What categories are available for targeted lists? 17) Do you have sub-agent opportunities? 18) What is your list like, where are the names from, how big is it, how do you maintain it, etc? 19) What about undeliverables? 20) Contact Info 1) What are your minimum orders? Our minimum orders are 5,000 pieces for targeted mailings (in even lots of 5,000), 100,000 pieces for stand-alone bulk mailings (in even lots of 100,000), and 5 MILLION for the MEGA-MAILER co-op mailing (the full 5 million is the only size). As long as y our order is for at least the minimum amount of pieces, and in even lot sizes, you may stagger the actual sendings any way you wish (50,000 per week, etc.). Note, however, that the MEGA-MAILER is only sent once per week and is sent to the full 5 million address list. The reason we have minimums at all is due to the fact that the majority of our cost in terms of man-hours comes as a result of setting up a mailing, and so we cannot spend the time and money to setup too small a job. 2) Why can't I just do mailings myself? Technically, you can. For practical purposes, you can't. There are three reasons why it is implausible to even attempt to do your own Email Advertising: 1) Every single internet service provider on the planet will shut down your account. You will not even get 1000 pieces of mail out, and you will be shut down, because some uptight, self-appointed net-cops will complain to your provider. Do not kid your self. It WILL happen. Sending unsolicited commercial Email of any type is a violation of virtually every ISP's Terms of Service. Even if your ISP tells you it's OK (which will not happen 99% of the time), they will very quickly change their tune after th eir technical people receive a mailbox full of angry mail (commonly referred to as flames). When your account is cancelled, you will NOT get a refund, and, worse yet, you won't even be able to retrieve your replies! 2) A very large technical capacity is required to send bulk Email. You MIGHT be able to send 5,000 or so pieces of mail per hour, with a 28.8 modem, except that with dial-up internet connections, there are always dropped connections and so you can neve r be sure your mail went out unless you constantly sit and monitor the mailings all day and night, and send very small pieces at a time. 3) In order to have a list of addresses to send to, you have two choices: either spend months collecting names, or purchase an over-used list from a list vendor, who has sold the same list to dozens of others, who will bomb the list into uselessness. I n addition, most lists are so old that the names are 40% undeliverable, or from newsgroups, which are the WORST kinds of people to solicit. These three factors make it a practical impossibility to actually do your own bulk Email advertising, even though the vendors of the bulk Email software will not tell you this. The reason we do not have these hassles is because Quantum Communications IS OUR OWN INTERNET PROVIDER. We do not purchase service from anyone, and Email advertising is our only business! We have our own in-house servers, high-speed T-1 connections to the Internet, and full-time technical and customer service staff, yet our only customers are advertisers! Our lists are constantly maintained, updated, and cleansed, and are ONLY from high-quality sources. We DO NOT sell our names, or let anyone see them. See Question 18 for more on our lists. 3) What about Floodgate and other similar software mailing programs? Those programs can actually be fairly useful for extracting Email addresses and if you would like to build your own lists to your own specifications, that is an option (See Question 4 "What if I have my own list?"). However, building mailing lists is an EXTREMELY time-consuming and monotonous task, not to mention expensive in on-line charges. In addition, having these software programs will not help in the least in the sending issues you need to consider (See Question #2, above). We handle all aspects o f the mailing process, leaving you free to concentrate on your business! 4) What if I have my own list? We are fully able to use your list and send your mail to it. The price is 50% of what it would normally be. We simply have you Email or ftp your list to us, with ad copy (and autoresponse copy, if necessary). 5) What about the other Email Advertising companies? There is some competition in Direct Email marketing for your advertising dollar, and we have never purported to be the cheapest. We simply are the best. Most of the other "cheapo" companies who claim to offer a zillion pieces sent for $39, or some simil ar lowball deal, are quite frankly, scams. No legitimate company can afford all of the hardware, software, and personnel that a true advertising company like ours posesses, without charging a reasonable fee for providing of the service. Most of the low-r ent Email marketing companies are here-today, gone tomorrow. Perhaps gone with your money. Almost certainly gone without providing the actual service you paid for. Many of them look great until you investigate them further. Try calling them and getting a real live person on the phone. Or try asking them some of the questions referred to in this document. Most will disappear when you start asking serious questions. Or try asking for references. Good luck. There are so many fly-by night operators and snak e-oil salesmen on the 'net, it is hard to know what to believe. But the basic truths in business hold true. You should be able to call and get a live person on the phone, you should be able to check references and ask pointed questions, you should have a ccess to customer service and technical support, and you should be able to get a clear understanding of who you are dealing with, and how they do business. One mailing with us and you will be convinced that we truly are the cadillac of the industry. 6) What is the legal status of Email Advertising? Direct Email Advertising and solicitation is legal. It always has been. There are many self-styled legal eagles who dislike Email solicitation, and they will sometimes misquote federal statutes which apply to sending of unsolicited FAXES. There has never been a higher-court ruling supporting this supposed link between Email and unsolicited FAX. It is highly unlikely that such a ruling will EVER occur. If it does, we of course will need to adjust our business practices to stay in accordance with the law. However, at the present time, and for the foreseeable future in our opinion, Email solicita tion is just as legal as postal mail solicitation. The only real negative point which anti-Email advertising people address is that SOME people pay for their connect time at a timed/metered rate. Thus, the milliseconds which it takes to download an unsol icited piece of mail does cost the recipient (albeit tiny fractions of a penny). However, almost all ISP's (even America Online) have moved, or will be forced by competition to move, to an unlimited time rate structure. Therefore, this will no longer be an issue, and the persons who oppose Email advertising will have no legs to stand on. As this happens, Email advertising will become exactly like postal mail solicitation ( it is actually LESS intrusive than postal junk mail), and therefore we believe i t will NOT be regulated or legislated against. As a side note, we do provide a very clear, brief disclaimer at the header of ALL of our mailings which gives quick, simple removal instructions for persons who do not want to be on our lists. We act on all such requests immediately. In fact, it is an a utomated process. We do not want to be sending mail to unwilling recipients any more than they wish to receive it. 7) What about blocking by AOL? America Online has recently taken to blocking Email solicitations to it's members by certain Email Advertising companies. These companies are the ones who had been abusing their power, and had in fact been over-mailing (sending multiple pieces to the sam e recipients PER DAY). The most well-known of these companies was Cyber-Promotions. We feel that since we only send mail no more than 3 times per week to any single recipient, AOL is unlikely to begin blocking our transmissions. We also could take counte rmeasures technically and send to them again if necessary. However, our list only consists of about 25% AOL members, and that percentage is shrinking, as most of our newer names are coming from indepedent ISP sources (see Question # 18), so a blockage, w hile unlikely, would not affect us in the least in any event. Incidentally, we find it interesting that AOL does not apparently mind soliciting it's members (one cannot be online with them without getting at least 3 pop-up ads PER SESSION), they simply d on't want others soliciting their members without compensating THEM. 8) What is "flame-filtering"/"Email Aliasing" ? Will anyone see my real Email address or complain to my provider? Flames are the hate mail which is a part of Email soliciting today. Flame filtering is the automated filtering process we use to ensure that replies forwarded to you (by us) are only positive, serious inquiries, requests for information, orders, etc. We assign customers an Email alias at OUR domain. We are the only ones who know your REAL Email address. We then have all replies to your advertising sent to the alias we have assigned you so that we can filter out flames, then forward the "good" replies to you. No one can complain to your ISP, because as far as anyone knows, WE are your ISP (and we of course will not pay any attention, except to promptly remove them from our lists). In this way, you are totally insulated and protected, while still getting all "good" replies! Good replies are forwarded to you automatically as they come in. There is NO lag time or waiting. 9) What is an "autoresponder"? An Autoresponder is just an Email alias which we can have prospects who see your advertising respond to. When the response hits the autoresponder, it kicks back an automatic text file reply via Email, which is typically a more detailed package of informa tion (up to 20 pages) regarding your product or service. This effectively helps you weed out the "tire-kickers", so you are free to concentrate on fulfilling orders and more serious requests. A typical procedure is for a small "teaser" ad to be sent, wi th an autoresponder as the reply-to address. In the autoresponse text, you would typically include another Email alias for orders or more serious or specific questions. 10) What about ad copy design? We do have a copy editor on staff who is available to either write your copy from scratch or revise existing copy you already have. This is usually a wise investment, because the copy can be reused many times in different mailings, it will be done by a s easoned professional with over 10 years of experience in copywriting, and the actual copy is more than anything the key difference between success and failure when doing an Email marketing campaign. Think about it. Email is text only. No graphics, no mov ing pictures, sounds or colors. The content is all-important. Charges are $80 per hour, with typical costs being 1/2 hour for a revision, 1 hour for a small ad design, and 3 or more hours for design of ad copy plus autoresponse copy. 11) What about proof-of-mailing? When sending mail via the US Postal Service, a proof of mailing receipt is provided. There is no such counterpart in the world of Email. Although you will receive confirmation of your mailing once it is sent, the best way to become comfortable with deali ng with us is by first talking with our references, then by doing a single mailing to see what we can do for you. Once you have done business with us you will agree that we deliver exactly what we promise. Our minimum response rate guarantee is further e vidence of this, and renders the question of a proof of mailing as somewhat moot. We do actually have a log of all sent mail which is generated by our mailing software, but we only disclose the log under extenuating circumstances, and for a fee of $50 pe r 100,000 pieces sent, as it lists every mail sent, which discloses our list. 12) What is the "response rate guarantee"? How does it work? Our unique "response rate guarantee" is a clear indication of not only our rock-solid commitment to each and every advertiser, but also of our belief in direct Email advertising as a marketing medium. We know of no other advertising agency (Email or othe rwise) who actually GUARANTEES a minimum number of responses. Our guarantee is the following: 1) If you do not receive AT LEAST the minimum guaranteed responses from your Email Advertising, we will send on your behalf again, and again, and again..until you get the minimum amount! 2) You must allow 10 business days from the date your mailing was completed and you received confirmation, before requesting a remailing. 3) Of course, only positive, interested replies are counted towards your guaranteed minimum. 4) For this guarantee to apply, we must be able to verify the amount of replies you receive, so your ad must direct interested persons to an autoresponder or Email alias which we provide. 5) Any remailings are done on the same scale and amount as the original mailing, but to different recipients (except for the MEGA-MAILER or targeted lists)). 6) You must request a remailing by sending an Email to our customer service department, or by calling our office (ask to speak to customer service). We do not monitor replies automatically and automatically resend. 7) You may, at no charge, alter your original advertisement in any way you wish, as long as it is the same type of mailing as the original (targeted must be to the same group), and the same length as paid for in the original. Optionally, you may have t he ad revised professionally by us (See Question # 10). The Minimum responses guaranteed are as follows. We have had to make the numbers guaranteed purposefully low, because we extend this guarantee to ALL advertisers, regardless of whether or not they have effective ad copy or an appealing product or service . We of course strive for much higher responses for everyone, but is helpful to know that there is a "safety net", just in case. MINIMUMS: GENERAL STAND-ALONE BULK: 100 REPLIES PER 200,000 PIECES SENT TARGETED BULK: 150 REPLIES PER 5,000 PIECES SENT MEGA-MAILER: 200 REPLIES This allows advertisers to plan on a maximum cost per inquiry, which can be essential when planning a marketing budget. This guarantee, more than any other single factor, shows that Quantum Communications is a cut above the rest in the world of Marketing and Advertising! 13) What is your mail sending capacity? We have the technical capacity to send over 2 million pieces of mail per day. We have invested heavily in hardware, software, and high-speed mail transmission facilities to be able to achieve this capacity. We can handle your job, large or small. 14) What is the average lead time before my ad can be sent? The current lead time is 7-10 business days. This allows time for your ad copy to be submitted and for any revisions you may have before the mailing date. We actually work very hard to keep the lead times to a minimum, however, there has been a very high demand for Email advertising services, and it has been difficult just keeping up. If you have a special need to expedite an order, call or Email our customer service department, and we will make every effort to accomodate you. 15) What type of mailing should I do? (Bulk stand-alone, MEGA-MAILER co-op, Targeted mail) This depends entirely on your product or service. If you have a product or service which has a broad-based appeal, it is definetely better to send to a larger group of people. If you have an offering which you think needs 20-30 lines to entice people or grab their interest, then you need a stand-alone (the MEGA-MAILER is not for you). If you are announcing a website and just want mass exposure to 5 MILLION people, the MEGA-MAILER is just the thing. Of course, if you are trying to reach a select group, y ou need to have a targeted mailing. You may Email or call our sales department and a sales representative will be happy to assist you in selecting the right type of mailing to suit your offering. 16) What categories are available for targeted lists? We custom build all of our targeted lists from scratch, and 90% of our targeted lists are never re-used. We are able to build a custom-designed list to YOUR specifications. So, in other words, you tell US what the category is, or the demographics of the persons or businesses you are trying to reach. We then get an estimate from our List staff for approximately how many names we will commit to being able to find. Our sales staff will work with you on this issue. Of course, it is always a much lower volum e of names than a normal bulk list, but we have seen response rates of over 5% when mailing a targeted group! 17) Do you have sub-agent opportunities? Yes we do. We are currently accepting sub-agents who wish to promote and re-sell our services, or simply send us referrals. For a copy of our agent registration kit via Email, send an Email to agent at quantcom.com 18) What is your list like, where are the names from, how big is it, how do you maintain it, etc? Our Lists department is continually extracting fresh names for our lists from many sources. The sources include the membership directories of all the major online services (AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, Delphi, MSN), plus the "white pages" Email databases su ch as 411, IAF, etc. We NEVER extract names from newsgroups, except to build targeted lists. We NEVER send mail to Listserv's, .edu's, .gov's, etc. We automatically delete removal requests immediately, as well as undeliverables. We add 400,000 to 800,000 fresh addresses each week. For these reasons, we feel that we have a super-high quality database, which consists of over 6 MILLION addresses. This high list quality is another feature of our service, and boosts response rates dramatically over our compe titors. Although we add addresses constantly, and are attempting to reach 10 MILLION addresses by 2nd quarter of 1997, it is difficult because we lose about 10% of our database each week to removal requests and undeliverables. 19) What about undeliverables? We are consistently losing about 10% of our list each week to undeliverables and removal requests (combined). In order to somewhat compensate our advertisers for this, without incurring all the logistical nightmares we would have to endure if we tried to account for removals and undeliverables for each particular mailing, we send 110% of the actual order amount as a general rule. For example, if you paid for 100,000 we send 110,000. This approach has worked very well for our customers. Also note that th is becomes a less significant issue when the minimum response guarantee is taken into account. Contact Info: Quantum Communications 6 Laurel Lane Stratham, NH 03885 (603) 772-4096 (603) 772-7297 fax general correspondence: staff at quantcom.com sales: sales at quantcom.com customer service: cusserv at quantcom.com http://www.quantcom.com From sales at quantcom.com Sat Jan 25 11:33:41 1997 From: sales at quantcom.com (Sid Westcott) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 11:33:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: ATTENTION HOMEOWNER Message-ID: <19343827602879@quantcom.com> Quantum Communications Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Direct Email Marketing Contents: 1) What are your minimum orders? 2) Why can't I just do mailings myself? 3) What about Floodgate and other similar software mailing programs? 4) What if I have my own list? 5) What about the other Email Advertising companies? 6) What is the legal status of Email Advertising? 7) What about blocking by AOL? 8) What is "flame-filtering"/"Email Aliasing" ? Will anyone see my real Email address or complain to my provider? 9) What is an "autoresponder"? 10) What about ad copy design? 11) What about proof-of-mailing? 12) What is the "response rate guarantee"? How does it work? 13) What is your mail sending capacity? 14) What is the average lead time before my ad can be sent? 15) What type of mailing should I do? (Bulk stand-alone, MEGA-MAILER co-op, Targeted mail) 16) What categories are available for targeted lists? 17) Do you have sub-agent opportunities? 18) What is your list like, where are the names from, how big is it, how do you maintain it, etc? 19) What about undeliverables? 20) Contact Info 1) What are your minimum orders? Our minimum orders are 5,000 pieces for targeted mailings (in even lots of 5,000), 100,000 pieces for stand-alone bulk mailings (in even lots of 100,000), and 5 MILLION for the MEGA-MAILER co-op mailing (the full 5 million is the only size). As long as y our order is for at least the minimum amount of pieces, and in even lot sizes, you may stagger the actual sendings any way you wish (50,000 per week, etc.). Note, however, that the MEGA-MAILER is only sent once per week and is sent to the full 5 million address list. The reason we have minimums at all is due to the fact that the majority of our cost in terms of man-hours comes as a result of setting up a mailing, and so we cannot spend the time and money to setup too small a job. 2) Why can't I just do mailings myself? Technically, you can. For practical purposes, you can't. There are three reasons why it is implausible to even attempt to do your own Email Advertising: 1) Every single internet service provider on the planet will shut down your account. You will not even get 1000 pieces of mail out, and you will be shut down, because some uptight, self-appointed net-cops will complain to your provider. Do not kid your self. It WILL happen. Sending unsolicited commercial Email of any type is a violation of virtually every ISP's Terms of Service. Even if your ISP tells you it's OK (which will not happen 99% of the time), they will very quickly change their tune after th eir technical people receive a mailbox full of angry mail (commonly referred to as flames). When your account is cancelled, you will NOT get a refund, and, worse yet, you won't even be able to retrieve your replies! 2) A very large technical capacity is required to send bulk Email. You MIGHT be able to send 5,000 or so pieces of mail per hour, with a 28.8 modem, except that with dial-up internet connections, there are always dropped connections and so you can neve r be sure your mail went out unless you constantly sit and monitor the mailings all day and night, and send very small pieces at a time. 3) In order to have a list of addresses to send to, you have two choices: either spend months collecting names, or purchase an over-used list from a list vendor, who has sold the same list to dozens of others, who will bomb the list into uselessness. I n addition, most lists are so old that the names are 40% undeliverable, or from newsgroups, which are the WORST kinds of people to solicit. These three factors make it a practical impossibility to actually do your own bulk Email advertising, even though the vendors of the bulk Email software will not tell you this. The reason we do not have these hassles is because Quantum Communications IS OUR OWN INTERNET PROVIDER. We do not purchase service from anyone, and Email advertising is our only business! We have our own in-house servers, high-speed T-1 connections to the Internet, and full-time technical and customer service staff, yet our only customers are advertisers! Our lists are constantly maintained, updated, and cleansed, and are ONLY from high-quality sources. We DO NOT sell our names, or let anyone see them. See Question 18 for more on our lists. 3) What about Floodgate and other similar software mailing programs? Those programs can actually be fairly useful for extracting Email addresses and if you would like to build your own lists to your own specifications, that is an option (See Question 4 "What if I have my own list?"). However, building mailing lists is an EXTREMELY time-consuming and monotonous task, not to mention expensive in on-line charges. In addition, having these software programs will not help in the least in the sending issues you need to consider (See Question #2, above). We handle all aspects o f the mailing process, leaving you free to concentrate on your business! 4) What if I have my own list? We are fully able to use your list and send your mail to it. The price is 50% of what it would normally be. We simply have you Email or ftp your list to us, with ad copy (and autoresponse copy, if necessary). 5) What about the other Email Advertising companies? There is some competition in Direct Email marketing for your advertising dollar, and we have never purported to be the cheapest. We simply are the best. Most of the other "cheapo" companies who claim to offer a zillion pieces sent for $39, or some simil ar lowball deal, are quite frankly, scams. No legitimate company can afford all of the hardware, software, and personnel that a true advertising company like ours posesses, without charging a reasonable fee for providing of the service. Most of the low-r ent Email marketing companies are here-today, gone tomorrow. Perhaps gone with your money. Almost certainly gone without providing the actual service you paid for. Many of them look great until you investigate them further. Try calling them and getting a real live person on the phone. Or try asking them some of the questions referred to in this document. Most will disappear when you start asking serious questions. Or try asking for references. Good luck. There are so many fly-by night operators and snak e-oil salesmen on the 'net, it is hard to know what to believe. But the basic truths in business hold true. You should be able to call and get a live person on the phone, you should be able to check references and ask pointed questions, you should have a ccess to customer service and technical support, and you should be able to get a clear understanding of who you are dealing with, and how they do business. One mailing with us and you will be convinced that we truly are the cadillac of the industry. 6) What is the legal status of Email Advertising? Direct Email Advertising and solicitation is legal. It always has been. There are many self-styled legal eagles who dislike Email solicitation, and they will sometimes misquote federal statutes which apply to sending of unsolicited FAXES. There has never been a higher-court ruling supporting this supposed link between Email and unsolicited FAX. It is highly unlikely that such a ruling will EVER occur. If it does, we of course will need to adjust our business practices to stay in accordance with the law. However, at the present time, and for the foreseeable future in our opinion, Email solicita tion is just as legal as postal mail solicitation. The only real negative point which anti-Email advertising people address is that SOME people pay for their connect time at a timed/metered rate. Thus, the milliseconds which it takes to download an unsol icited piece of mail does cost the recipient (albeit tiny fractions of a penny). However, almost all ISP's (even America Online) have moved, or will be forced by competition to move, to an unlimited time rate structure. Therefore, this will no longer be an issue, and the persons who oppose Email advertising will have no legs to stand on. As this happens, Email advertising will become exactly like postal mail solicitation ( it is actually LESS intrusive than postal junk mail), and therefore we believe i t will NOT be regulated or legislated against. As a side note, we do provide a very clear, brief disclaimer at the header of ALL of our mailings which gives quick, simple removal instructions for persons who do not want to be on our lists. We act on all such requests immediately. In fact, it is an a utomated process. We do not want to be sending mail to unwilling recipients any more than they wish to receive it. 7) What about blocking by AOL? America Online has recently taken to blocking Email solicitations to it's members by certain Email Advertising companies. These companies are the ones who had been abusing their power, and had in fact been over-mailing (sending multiple pieces to the sam e recipients PER DAY). The most well-known of these companies was Cyber-Promotions. We feel that since we only send mail no more than 3 times per week to any single recipient, AOL is unlikely to begin blocking our transmissions. We also could take counte rmeasures technically and send to them again if necessary. However, our list only consists of about 25% AOL members, and that percentage is shrinking, as most of our newer names are coming from indepedent ISP sources (see Question # 18), so a blockage, w hile unlikely, would not affect us in the least in any event. Incidentally, we find it interesting that AOL does not apparently mind soliciting it's members (one cannot be online with them without getting at least 3 pop-up ads PER SESSION), they simply d on't want others soliciting their members without compensating THEM. 8) What is "flame-filtering"/"Email Aliasing" ? Will anyone see my real Email address or complain to my provider? Flames are the hate mail which is a part of Email soliciting today. Flame filtering is the automated filtering process we use to ensure that replies forwarded to you (by us) are only positive, serious inquiries, requests for information, orders, etc. We assign customers an Email alias at OUR domain. We are the only ones who know your REAL Email address. We then have all replies to your advertising sent to the alias we have assigned you so that we can filter out flames, then forward the "good" replies to you. No one can complain to your ISP, because as far as anyone knows, WE are your ISP (and we of course will not pay any attention, except to promptly remove them from our lists). In this way, you are totally insulated and protected, while still getting all "good" replies! Good replies are forwarded to you automatically as they come in. There is NO lag time or waiting. 9) What is an "autoresponder"? An Autoresponder is just an Email alias which we can have prospects who see your advertising respond to. When the response hits the autoresponder, it kicks back an automatic text file reply via Email, which is typically a more detailed package of informa tion (up to 20 pages) regarding your product or service. This effectively helps you weed out the "tire-kickers", so you are free to concentrate on fulfilling orders and more serious requests. A typical procedure is for a small "teaser" ad to be sent, wi th an autoresponder as the reply-to address. In the autoresponse text, you would typically include another Email alias for orders or more serious or specific questions. 10) What about ad copy design? We do have a copy editor on staff who is available to either write your copy from scratch or revise existing copy you already have. This is usually a wise investment, because the copy can be reused many times in different mailings, it will be done by a s easoned professional with over 10 years of experience in copywriting, and the actual copy is more than anything the key difference between success and failure when doing an Email marketing campaign. Think about it. Email is text only. No graphics, no mov ing pictures, sounds or colors. The content is all-important. Charges are $80 per hour, with typical costs being 1/2 hour for a revision, 1 hour for a small ad design, and 3 or more hours for design of ad copy plus autoresponse copy. 11) What about proof-of-mailing? When sending mail via the US Postal Service, a proof of mailing receipt is provided. There is no such counterpart in the world of Email. Although you will receive confirmation of your mailing once it is sent, the best way to become comfortable with deali ng with us is by first talking with our references, then by doing a single mailing to see what we can do for you. Once you have done business with us you will agree that we deliver exactly what we promise. Our minimum response rate guarantee is further e vidence of this, and renders the question of a proof of mailing as somewhat moot. We do actually have a log of all sent mail which is generated by our mailing software, but we only disclose the log under extenuating circumstances, and for a fee of $50 pe r 100,000 pieces sent, as it lists every mail sent, which discloses our list. 12) What is the "response rate guarantee"? How does it work? Our unique "response rate guarantee" is a clear indication of not only our rock-solid commitment to each and every advertiser, but also of our belief in direct Email advertising as a marketing medium. We know of no other advertising agency (Email or othe rwise) who actually GUARANTEES a minimum number of responses. Our guarantee is the following: 1) If you do not receive AT LEAST the minimum guaranteed responses from your Email Advertising, we will send on your behalf again, and again, and again..until you get the minimum amount! 2) You must allow 10 business days from the date your mailing was completed and you received confirmation, before requesting a remailing. 3) Of course, only positive, interested replies are counted towards your guaranteed minimum. 4) For this guarantee to apply, we must be able to verify the amount of replies you receive, so your ad must direct interested persons to an autoresponder or Email alias which we provide. 5) Any remailings are done on the same scale and amount as the original mailing, but to different recipients (except for the MEGA-MAILER or targeted lists)). 6) You must request a remailing by sending an Email to our customer service department, or by calling our office (ask to speak to customer service). We do not monitor replies automatically and automatically resend. 7) You may, at no charge, alter your original advertisement in any way you wish, as long as it is the same type of mailing as the original (targeted must be to the same group), and the same length as paid for in the original. Optionally, you may have t he ad revised professionally by us (See Question # 10). The Minimum responses guaranteed are as follows. We have had to make the numbers guaranteed purposefully low, because we extend this guarantee to ALL advertisers, regardless of whether or not they have effective ad copy or an appealing product or service . We of course strive for much higher responses for everyone, but is helpful to know that there is a "safety net", just in case. MINIMUMS: GENERAL STAND-ALONE BULK: 100 REPLIES PER 200,000 PIECES SENT TARGETED BULK: 150 REPLIES PER 5,000 PIECES SENT MEGA-MAILER: 200 REPLIES This allows advertisers to plan on a maximum cost per inquiry, which can be essential when planning a marketing budget. This guarantee, more than any other single factor, shows that Quantum Communications is a cut above the rest in the world of Marketing and Advertising! 13) What is your mail sending capacity? We have the technical capacity to send over 2 million pieces of mail per day. We have invested heavily in hardware, software, and high-speed mail transmission facilities to be able to achieve this capacity. We can handle your job, large or small. 14) What is the average lead time before my ad can be sent? The current lead time is 7-10 business days. This allows time for your ad copy to be submitted and for any revisions you may have before the mailing date. We actually work very hard to keep the lead times to a minimum, however, there has been a very high demand for Email advertising services, and it has been difficult just keeping up. If you have a special need to expedite an order, call or Email our customer service department, and we will make every effort to accomodate you. 15) What type of mailing should I do? (Bulk stand-alone, MEGA-MAILER co-op, Targeted mail) This depends entirely on your product or service. If you have a product or service which has a broad-based appeal, it is definetely better to send to a larger group of people. If you have an offering which you think needs 20-30 lines to entice people or grab their interest, then you need a stand-alone (the MEGA-MAILER is not for you). If you are announcing a website and just want mass exposure to 5 MILLION people, the MEGA-MAILER is just the thing. Of course, if you are trying to reach a select group, y ou need to have a targeted mailing. You may Email or call our sales department and a sales representative will be happy to assist you in selecting the right type of mailing to suit your offering. 16) What categories are available for targeted lists? We custom build all of our targeted lists from scratch, and 90% of our targeted lists are never re-used. We are able to build a custom-designed list to YOUR specifications. So, in other words, you tell US what the category is, or the demographics of the persons or businesses you are trying to reach. We then get an estimate from our List staff for approximately how many names we will commit to being able to find. Our sales staff will work with you on this issue. Of course, it is always a much lower volum e of names than a normal bulk list, but we have seen response rates of over 5% when mailing a targeted group! 17) Do you have sub-agent opportunities? Yes we do. We are currently accepting sub-agents who wish to promote and re-sell our services, or simply send us referrals. For a copy of our agent registration kit via Email, send an Email to agent at quantcom.com 18) What is your list like, where are the names from, how big is it, how do you maintain it, etc? Our Lists department is continually extracting fresh names for our lists from many sources. The sources include the membership directories of all the major online services (AOL, Compuserve, Prodigy, Delphi, MSN), plus the "white pages" Email databases su ch as 411, IAF, etc. We NEVER extract names from newsgroups, except to build targeted lists. We NEVER send mail to Listserv's, .edu's, .gov's, etc. We automatically delete removal requests immediately, as well as undeliverables. We add 400,000 to 800,000 fresh addresses each week. For these reasons, we feel that we have a super-high quality database, which consists of over 6 MILLION addresses. This high list quality is another feature of our service, and boosts response rates dramatically over our compe titors. Although we add addresses constantly, and are attempting to reach 10 MILLION addresses by 2nd quarter of 1997, it is difficult because we lose about 10% of our database each week to removal requests and undeliverables. 19) What about undeliverables? We are consistently losing about 10% of our list each week to undeliverables and removal requests (combined). In order to somewhat compensate our advertisers for this, without incurring all the logistical nightmares we would have to endure if we tried to account for removals and undeliverables for each particular mailing, we send 110% of the actual order amount as a general rule. For example, if you paid for 100,000 we send 110,000. This approach has worked very well for our customers. Also note that th is becomes a less significant issue when the minimum response guarantee is taken into account. Contact Info: Quantum Communications 6 Laurel Lane Stratham, NH 03885 (603) 772-4096 (603) 772-7297 fax general correspondence: staff at quantcom.com sales: sales at quantcom.com customer service: cusserv at quantcom.com http://www.quantcom.com From sales at quantcom.com Sat Jan 25 11:35:26 1997 From: sales at quantcom.com (Sid Westcott) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 11:35:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: ATTENTION HOMEOWNER Message-ID: <19343737402878@quantcom.com> Enclosed is the information you requested from Quantum Communications regarding bulk Email advertising services: Contact Info: Quantum Communications 6 Laurel Lane Stratham, NH 03885 603-772-4096 603-772-7297 fax staff at quantcom.com (general email) sales at quantcom.com(sales) cusserv at quantcom.com (customer service) http://www.quantcom.com Quantum Communications Proudly presents: BULK E-MAIL ADVERTISING SERVICE! Would you like to offer YOUR product or service to potential customers via E-mail? Consider the advantages of sending your marketing letter ALONE or Co-op to MILLIONS of persons directly via E-mail: + NO sharing of space in a cluttered publication + NO being buried amidst 100 other postcards in a card deck + NO wondering if your prospects will see/read your offer + NO having to fight for your prospect's attention + NO price-shopping, having your offering compared to others nearby it + EXTREMELY COST EFFECTIVE - as low as .009 cents per letter!! + Your piece/letter goes out ALONE or Co-op, depending on YOUR needs and budget + Everyone reads their Email! + NO need to wait for a publication date! We mail according to YOUR timetable, and all mail reaches the target within 1 day! Bulk Email is the perfect way to reach new prospects! Our state-of-the-art servers and proprietary software allow us to send your offering to MILLIONS of fresh prospects. All names on our list have been sent a test letter, enabling us to delete undeliverables and persons who do not wish to receive unsolicited Email advertisements. Therefore, all the prospects we send YOUR offering to are responsive, quality prospects! As part of our standard service package, we also provide the following: + An autoresponder,which allows a prospect to simply click reply and instantly receive a complete package of detailed further information via Email from your company (up to 20 pages in length!) + A unique Email address to which inquiries for your offering are forwarded, allowing you to build up your own database of hot prospects. + Complete design/copy assistance based on your goals and objectives We offer a service package designed to fit every need and budget! Choose either General Bulk (your letter sent ALONE), Co-op Bulk (your ad sent with others), or Targeted Bulk (custom-built lists to YOUR specs). Consider the benefits of using Quantum Communications for sending your bulk email advertising: * Highest quality list of hot prospects! * Largest database (over 5 million, mostly online service members, NOT newsgroup posters)! * Lowest rates in the industry! * FREE features included such as autoresponders, email forwarding, and copy design assistance! * No-Nonsense response rate guarantee! * 100% approved FINANCING. No one turned down! * Top-notch customer service. The best in the industry, as our references will confirm! * Targeted lists available, custom built for YOUR project! Rate Card: ___________________________________________________ Bulk Email Advertising Service Stand Alone Ad, up to 40 lines of text: $299 per 100,000, in even lots of 100,000 ____________________________________________________ Co-Op Bulk Email Advertising Service THE "MEGA-MAILER" Sent to our full database of 5 million hot prospects! Sent with other ads, up to 5 lines of text: $599 6-10 lines of text: $849 lines are 70 characters (spaces count) long number of pieces 5 MILLION _____________________________________________________ Targeted Bulk Email Stand Alone Ad, up to 40 lines of text: under 10,000 9.0 cents per piece 10,000 to 25,000 8.5 cents per piece 25,000 to 50,000 8 cents per piece over 50,000 7.5 cents per piece *Contact us with areas to target and we will quote you a price. ______________________________________________________ PAYMENT TERMS: 10 % Prepay Discount for 100% pre-pay OR FINANCING- NO Credit check. ALL APPROVED! 50% down, balance broken up into 2 equal monthly installments. EFT only ( drawn on US bank account ) for financing. _____________________________________________________ No-Nonsense Response Rate Guarantee: There are many scams alive on the Internet. Although the Net represents the greatest opportunity for a business to expand and grow that has ever existed, dozens of "snake-oil" purveyers prey on such businesspeople daily. Bulk Email Advertising is, in effect, the grass-roots basis at the foundation of all Net advertising. It is effective, economical, fast, relatively inexpensive (in comparison with other media, sometimes almost ridiculously so); in short - it works! The only glitch with this new advertising media is the con artists, as we have mentioned. Quantum Communications is committed to providing a quality service to advertisers at a reasonable price. No, we do not offer to supposedly send out a billion email ads for $39. No legitimate company can afford to promise that AND actually do it. Unfortunately, by the time most advertisers find that out, they have lost their money. We believe, instead, in guaranteeing our responses at a minimum level so each and every advertiser can rest assured that their money is well spent. We guarantee the following minimum responses to your advertising piece. If the responses do not reach the minimum amount, we will continue to include your piece in our co-op (if it was a co-op), or we will continue to mail the piece by itself, in sufficient amounts until the minimum responses are reached. These replies are only the POSITIVE responses and inquiries. Flames or negative replies, etc. are filtered by us, and you never see them! (they of course are NOT counted towards your minimum response guarantee). Minimum Responses: General Bulk Email: 100 replies per 200k pieces sent "MEGA-MAILER" Co-Op Bulk Email: 200 replies Targeted Bulk Email: 150 replies per 5,000 pieces sent (3.%!) As you will notice, this fixes the MAXIMUM cost PER REPLY at $2-3. Knowing how much each reply will cost you AT THE MOST allows you to plan your marketing budget and plan for success! This also causes us to take extra care when helping to examine your ad copy and suggest any revisions. Professional ad copy design is available for a surcharge of $80 per hour. We have a stake in making sure you succeed! We have many references who will vouch for our resolve and character as a company. Please feel free to call and speak with them. Also, feel free to either email us ( staff at quantcom.com) or call our offices at (603) 772-4096 and speak with us at any time Mon-Fri, 9AM to 7PM EST PAYMENT FOR SERVICES: We accept personal and business checks and money orders. We DO NOT accept credit cards at this time. If you would like to utilize your credit card, we recommend you get a cash advance from the card and deposit the funds into your personal or business chec IMPORTANT NOTE: All payments remitted must be in U.S. funds, drawn on a U.S. bank. EFT's must be drawn on an account in a U.S. bank. International customers outside the U.S. may either send an international bank money order (cashiers/bank cheque) drawn on their bank in U.S. dollars (by postal mail/overnight mail), or may have funds wired directly to our U.S. bank account. Email or call TO PLACE AN ORDER: Please make sure and include all of the information listed below, plus your ad copy (unless you are requesting we design it for you) and autoresponder copy, if needed (again, unless we are designing it for you). You may place an order in one of four ways: 1) Call our sales dept at (603) 772-4096. One of our sales reps will be happy to assist you, answer your questions, and help you get started. 2) Email us your phone # and best time to call, and one of our representatives will call you. 3) Send us an email with the following information included. Be sure and include ALL information. If anything is unclear, please feel free to email us (staff at quantcom.com) or call our sales dept. Also be sure and include ad copy and autoresponder copy, in 4) Print out the following "Needed information" form, and fill it out. Then fax it to us at 603-772-4096, or send it via postal (snail) mail to: Quantum Communications, 6 Laurel Lane , Stratham, NH, 03885 (optionally, you may include a regular check/money order. Your Email advertising will be sent within 10 business days. We can handle staggered or variable send schedules but in all cases require 10 days lead time. You will be sent a copy of your mailing when it is sent so you will know that it has been sent. Needed information for Processing of ad form order via email/fax: Name: Contact: Postal Address: City,State,Zip: Voice Phone #: Fax Phone #: Email Address: Services Ordered: (General Bulk / Targeted Bulk / MEGA-MAILER) How many recipients? Do you need us to design ad copy? (y/n) * If yes, there is an $80 surcharge for professional ad copy design, plus $80 per hour for autoresponse copy design Total Price: Referred by: Do you need an autoresponder? Do you have a preference of email alias? (whatyouwant at quantcom.com) *** Make sure Ad Copy and Autoresponder copy are included or attached*** Before filling out the payment info, please decide how you will be addressing the payment terms. See the section above on prices for available terms. Payment Info: The following information is all located on the face of your check. Please realize that providing the information electronically is no different than sending a paper check. When a paper check is sent, all the same account numbers are visible. Account name: Bank Name,City,& State: Amount:$ Check #: Authorized Signature: Transit #: (also referred to as the ABA routing number, this is the group of numbers which is usually in the lower left portion of the check and is enclosed in funny looking brackets that look like this |: The number is exactly 9 digits long.) Account # : (Another group of numbers on the bottom edge of the check, should be the rest of the numbers there besides the transit #. The check # should be part of this grouping also. ) *** If you have any questions about which numbers are which, simply call your bank and ask them what your account # and transit # (or ABA routing #) are.*** From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 12:55:35 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 12:55:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm Message-ID: <199701252055.MAA02651@toad.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Jim Choate writes: > [For the record, I have serious doubts whether the HIV virus causes AIDS.] Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune problems. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 12:55:42 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 12:55:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701252055.MAA02659@toad.com> Bill Stewart wrote: > At 07:38 PM 1/23/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > One of the points of the Ebonics program is to recognize that > other people don't always speak the same way you do, and that > if you want to communicate with them, you'll be more successful > if you realize it, understand when they're talking in their dialect, I could agree with "some of the points" of the Ebonics program were it not for the fact of the hidden points. Unbeknownst to most folks, supporting a program on any erstwhile points will give support to the program on *all* points. One specific example: When I worked for Firestone corporate from 1970 to 1981, we were bullied into giving to the United Fund. (BTW, I learned how much my boss was making by reading the punches on the IBM cards.) The one bone they tossed us was we could specify which worthy causes our personal contribution would go towards. The trick was, if a certain greater-than-expected number of people specified a Catholic charity, for example, more funds would then be moved into the other charities to balance that out. Presumably those funds would come from those folks who hadn't declared a designee. In my view, once the contributors' specific designations were made, the remaining undesignated contributions should have been split across the designees according to the original percentages declared in the U.F. literature. Anything else would be a farce. From jya at pipeline.com Sat Jan 25 12:55:48 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 12:55:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: US Info Supremacy Message-ID: <199701252055.MAA02667@toad.com> >From Financial Times 26 January: "Defence experts in both the US and western Europe have commented recently that the US forces' lead in information technology is growing to the point where Washington may question the military usefulness of allies." Pointers to these comments would be appreciated. Further, if the speculation of US supremacist go-it-alone policy is correct, how might this affect: 1. US crypto export policy. 2. Crypto czar Aarons' role in promoting global GAK. 3. Other nation's suspicion of the US and its technological prowess, caused, for example, by the NSA's avowed intention to surveil all the world's communcation, and if encrypted to crack it at any cost. 4. Increasing isolation of the US from foreign innovation and talent -- the imperialist incest decline. 5. The future of treaties such as US/UK/AUS, NATO, SEATO, and the like for intel-sharing and crypto control. Two observations: One, last year's NRC crypto report said that strong crypto should not be a problem, and that other, unidentified, technologies should be supported instead to assure domestic and national security. Two, the recent InfoWar-Defense report has been criticized as unduly alarmist, because the US has sufficient means (Perry and others claim) to protect against information attacks. One NCSC commentator on talk.politics.crypto said that the IW-D techie panelists were out of touch, unlike Stewart Baker, a lawyer! Hence, it might be worth considering that both the NRC report and the IW-D reports are diversionary, disinformation to conceal US true capabilities -- strengths and weaknesses. Moreover, the crypto debate itself might be diversionary from other more crucial information defense technology -- for surveilling, sifting, interpreting, analyzing, decrypting, mining and securely storing. As well as offensive means to counterattack US communications attackers. Or, turning the matter one more time, perhaps crypto is in fact the heart of the national security problem and the avowed other, unidentified, more crucial, technology is a sham to mislead about US and other government's true weaknesses. The Commerce Control List is almost incoherent in trying to definitively regulate advancing technology. Paranoia may be increasing among governments due to the crypto debate and related issues of information security, such that each may, like the US is allegedly doing, retreating to within its own technological borders, while at the same time engaging in PsyWar about threats, defenses and offenses. Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sat Jan 25 13:28:04 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 13:28:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701252135.PAA16387@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 10:31:49 -0800 > From: Dale Thorn > Subject: Re: overview.htm > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Jim Choate writes: > > > [For the record, I have serious doubts whether the HIV virus causes AIDS.] > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > problems. WOAH Bessie! I had nothing to do with this exchange, and definitely didn't write ANY of the above. Please get me out of there and keep me out of it. I am more than able to speak for myself thank you. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sat Jan 25 13:30:47 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 13:30:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701252138.PAA16394@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 10:19:20 -0800 > From: Dale Thorn > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > Precedence: bulk > > Bill Stewart wrote: > > At 07:38 PM 1/23/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: I most certainly did NOT... > > One of the points of the Ebonics program is to recognize that > > other people don't always speak the same way you do, and that > > if you want to communicate with them, you'll be more successful > > if you realize it, understand when they're talking in their dialect, > > I could agree with "some of the points" of the Ebonics program were > it not for the fact of the hidden points. Unbeknownst to most folks, > supporting a program on any erstwhile points will give support to the > program on *all* points. Looks like Bessie could use a refresher course in: * Getting their sources correct * Using their mail/editing package * Basic rules of courtesy Folks, if you can't get it straight, keep your damn editor buffers empty. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sat Jan 25 14:10:57 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 14:10:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701252210.OAA03633@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 10:19:20 -0800 > From: Dale Thorn > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > Precedence: bulk > > Bill Stewart wrote: > > At 07:38 PM 1/23/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: I most certainly did NOT... > > One of the points of the Ebonics program is to recognize that > > other people don't always speak the same way you do, and that > > if you want to communicate with them, you'll be more successful > > if you realize it, understand when they're talking in their dialect, > > I could agree with "some of the points" of the Ebonics program were > it not for the fact of the hidden points. Unbeknownst to most folks, > supporting a program on any erstwhile points will give support to the > program on *all* points. Looks like Bessie could use a refresher course in: * Getting their sources correct * Using their mail/editing package * Basic rules of courtesy Folks, if you can't get it straight, keep your damn editor buffers empty. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sat Jan 25 14:12:46 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 14:12:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701252212.OAA03646@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 10:31:49 -0800 > From: Dale Thorn > Subject: Re: overview.htm > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Jim Choate writes: > > > [For the record, I have serious doubts whether the HIV virus causes AIDS.] > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > problems. WOAH Bessie! I had nothing to do with this exchange, and definitely didn't write ANY of the above. Please get me out of there and keep me out of it. I am more than able to speak for myself thank you. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From lwp at mail.msen.com Sat Jan 25 14:39:33 1997 From: lwp at mail.msen.com (Lou Poppler) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 14:39:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Voting to require Photo ID in Michigan Message-ID: <1No6yMz2B8IT083yn@mail.msen.com> Late last year, in the final days that Republicans controlled both houses of the Michigan Legislature, they passed a new law requiring citizen-units to show a picture ID in order to vote. This law was signed by Governor John Engler earlier this month. Here I reproduce without permission a news brief from the Lansing State Journal, which gives some reactions to the new law. Particularly interesting to me is the promise of selective enforcement from the Governor's spokesman. ' LAWMAKER SEEKS VOTER LAW REVIEW ' Pontiac -- A Republican lawmaker has asked the U.S. Justice ' Department to review a new state law that will require voters to show ' photo identification to cast ballots. ' Rep. Greg Kaza of Rochester Hills wrote to Attorney General Janet ' Reno this week to seek the review, The Oakland Press reported Thursday. ' The new law requires all voters to have a state photo ID card, such ' as a driver's license or an ID card people receiving public assistance ' are required to have. ' Kaza said Wednesday he wrote to Reno that "Public Act 583 of 1996 ' has the potential to intimidate certain classes of voters, including ' senior citizens, from exercising their democratic right to vote. They ' should not be disenfranchised from exercising their right to vote ' under the United States Constitution." ' Gov. John Engler signed the bill last week. His administration ' says it is needed to protect the integrity of the voting process, but ' critics, mostly Democrats, say it would exclude some people from voting. ' "It is our belief you need an ID in society today," Engler spokesman ' John Truscott said. "And only if you are challenged at the ballot box ' do you have to show an ID." ' Michigan Attorney General Frank Kelley already has been asked to ' issue an opinion on whether the new law is constitutional. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: "We are surrounded by :: Lou Poppler :: insurmountable opportunity." :: http://www.msen.com/~lwp/ :: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -- Pogo (Walt Kelly) From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 14:54:16 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 14:54:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: TEST--MODERATED In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Sandy Sandfort writes: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, "My fellow cocksucker punks," > We are still working out the bugs. This message is SUPPOSED to > go only to the unedited list and the moderated list. If it shows > up on the flames list, we have a bug. I'd like to have a couple > of you (Toto? Dale Thorn?) let me know so we can trace down the > problem and get it corrected. This Sandy bugger is just a front for John Gilmore. Don't {b|f}lame Sandy for censorship, {f|b}lame the man behind him - the list owner. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From attila at primenet.com Sat Jan 25 15:29:51 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 15:29:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals (no_one@nowhere.org) In-Reply-To: <199701250956.BAA23557@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701252329.QAA09472@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701250956.BAA23557 at toad.com>, on 01/24/97 at 10:53 PM, no_one at nowhere.org gurgled: + And the CDC is the Centers for Disease Control; and it has since +found many, many prior cases of AIDS. These three minor errors are +indicative of Attila's reliability of the subject. Of course, no one +at CDC or NIH believes any of this crap; it was tired a decade ago. A man is known by the company he keeps; floating nyms are the mark of a coward; why not just wear the mark of the beast? ... no_one at nowhere.org's utterance is an average pronouncement by a prototypical megalomaniacal, hedonistic cypherpunk who on days of lesser grandeur, humour, or importance corrects spelling and grammatical errors --unlike the standards you apparently set for yourself? I claim neither a medical degree nor the trade of a medical reporter; the information presented was solely an illustration of an unfortunate circumstance for both the AIDS victim and society as a whole. As to the current relevance of the AIDS victim (who, for that matter, may even have been an urban legend after a few historical rewrites) in today's revisionist politically correct special- interest social cauldron as promulgated by the mass hysterimedia (an environment which can, and has, rewritten the words of Thomas Jefferson to accommodate the current social agenda), the point is not only lost; it is mute, along with the truth --both your perceived truth and the historical truth. --attila == "you probably will not be last, you may not be next, but you are certainly too late to have been first. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMuqW2704kQrCC2kFAQE9MAQAluz6aLri1igCl8a/hE5clOQIyL3TjTG8 tzHHzEEQ4AzU4qtA2UiCSX1Y3eWAd4X/yL09C9HYrCzw9nRZHb0nBObw4+FGtU5L +vGuWOOAnhh4xJsiDOqYMNIGKftteFWpT1CG9M4C+n/DfNiHzfQV/HlX/Az8j4iP ovE04U/DpKI= =IAdt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From lwp at mail.msen.com Sat Jan 25 15:40:46 1997 From: lwp at mail.msen.com (Lou Poppler) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 15:40:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Voting to require Photo ID in Michigan Message-ID: <199701252340.PAA04730@toad.com> Late last year, in the final days that Republicans controlled both houses of the Michigan Legislature, they passed a new law requiring citizen-units to show a picture ID in order to vote. This law was signed by Governor John Engler earlier this month. Here I reproduce without permission a news brief from the Lansing State Journal, which gives some reactions to the new law. Particularly interesting to me is the promise of selective enforcement from the Governor's spokesman. ' LAWMAKER SEEKS VOTER LAW REVIEW ' Pontiac -- A Republican lawmaker has asked the U.S. Justice ' Department to review a new state law that will require voters to show ' photo identification to cast ballots. ' Rep. Greg Kaza of Rochester Hills wrote to Attorney General Janet ' Reno this week to seek the review, The Oakland Press reported Thursday. ' The new law requires all voters to have a state photo ID card, such ' as a driver's license or an ID card people receiving public assistance ' are required to have. ' Kaza said Wednesday he wrote to Reno that "Public Act 583 of 1996 ' has the potential to intimidate certain classes of voters, including ' senior citizens, from exercising their democratic right to vote. They ' should not be disenfranchised from exercising their right to vote ' under the United States Constitution." ' Gov. John Engler signed the bill last week. His administration ' says it is needed to protect the integrity of the voting process, but ' critics, mostly Democrats, say it would exclude some people from voting. ' "It is our belief you need an ID in society today," Engler spokesman ' John Truscott said. "And only if you are challenged at the ballot box ' do you have to show an ID." ' Michigan Attorney General Frank Kelley already has been asked to ' issue an opinion on whether the new law is constitutional. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: "We are surrounded by :: Lou Poppler :: insurmountable opportunity." :: http://www.msen.com/~lwp/ :: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: -- Pogo (Walt Kelly) From attila at primenet.com Sat Jan 25 16:17:48 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:17:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: who the "fuck" am I? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701260017.RAA11394@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 01/25/97 at 12:32 PM, aga said: +Which Attila the Hun is this? +Is this the rec.nude guy? +-aga response -------------- I will not say "what is 'rec.nude'" but I have never been there; isn't that the one for nudists camps or some such? never been much into worrying about what I wore, or making the statement I did not! I always thought a little mystery was good for both sides: she knows not if I have a small dick, I know not if she has no tits; la, la, la.. .. as to multiple "Attila the Hun" accounts, I probably have as good as any original stake on the name as far as the net goes: --Bell Labs hung it on me in the mid 70s when I was doing some contract work on the unix kernal for Western Electric for the spook show. The name stuck, and why bother to change? Other than the fact the nudist might be a real loser, I could care less about a nym; there are multiple users on other nyms (for all we know, Tim May is a nym and the name is common); you can usually guess by context who is who. how many of us have actually seen each other face to face (who would want to )? so, in most cases, real names are no different than nyms in a make believe world. now, all that being said... it has been asked... "who the fuck are you?" to which I reply: "...good choice of expletives." "nobody, I guess; "well, let's see... "I have a Piled higher and Deeper in Information Techniques from Zuerich (undergrad at Harvard in dual honors physical chemistry); "I have been around since before the dawn of arpanet, probably even longer than TCMay; in fact, I was born before Franklin D. Roosevelt dusted off Wendell L. Willkie; "...but I've never held a 'job;' "I have personally coded more than a few 250,000+ line packages, which made me quite comfortable at one time, even if more than one did go down the black hole (along with countless other projects like the bit-slice hardware and firmware to replace B3500s in missle silos); "I have been the hatchet man in numerous high tech recoveries; "I have been detained for crypto offenses by the Feds; "I have been detained for 'treasonable' technology export; "I have been charged; "...a long time ago, in a land far, far away, there was more than one tour in the Corps' "deep-deep black" special operations; the battalion commanding officer for the 'Let's kill 'em all' vacant eyes, the misfits; "a combat chopper pilot; "an instrument rated multi-engine pilots license; "a rider of a 102 in. 115+ mph qtr. miler hawg on the street; "plus a few other reasons to guarantee an autobiography found on the fiction shelf." while playing Hotel California: So, who the 'fuck' am I? Just another aging 300 lb gorilla, long haired hippie, California freak, with yet another loud outlaw chopper. "Oh, yeah, I forgot, I hold a license to practice before the court in a couple European countries (not that I would waste my time...)." "So, who am I, really? "Nobody, I guess, just attila!" == "you probably will not be last, you may not be next, but you are certainly too late to have been first. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMuqidr04kQrCC2kFAQGiqgQAqu6qHbbX61IkM0YBXnFAZ2divzWvWPWB vt/+BHXq55PHmAPq1m2v5Yf0Jnam03abm4hFkvQLFtCg05i8bRaU5L8QiWyJJ3z0 wtMrDKF9VqRtSDhSwUoVwS2affnUUViE4GPBjezNCnuTtwHQ0fr7vgqq8IUr8q4I dDLp/VCMniE= =9nng -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 16:20:05 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:20:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701252135.PAA16387@einstein> Message-ID: Jim Choate writes: > > > Jim Choate writes: > > > > > [For the record, I have serious doubts whether the HIV virus causes AIDS. > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > problems. > > WOAH Bessie! Jim and Dale, I agree. Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From shamrock at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 16:21:13 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:21:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970125155133.00683d28@192.100.81.136> At 11:40 AM 1/25/97 -0500, Adam Shostack wrote: > >Paul Kocher announced that he has cracked it, and can recover data >quickly. He is not publishing details of the break. Why? -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From azur at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 16:41:40 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:41:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Public Key Partners Message-ID: >Hello, > >Do you know of a way I can contact Public Key Partners by e-mail or phone? >Thanks. > >Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos >President >DataET Research >Data Engineering Technologies PKP is really just a holding/licensing company. Last time I heard Bob Fougner was still legal council to PKP. You should be able to contact him through Cylink Corp. (800) 600-5858. -- Steve P.S. Tell him hello from me. From markm at voicenet.com Sat Jan 25 16:49:27 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:49:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... In-Reply-To: <199701250957.BAA23610@toad.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 24 Jan 1997 aaron at herringn.com wrote: > Presented in a "this will help 911" context. Still disconcerting. > > [...] > Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls > have been given additional incentive with a Federal Communications > Commission order that all cell phone service companies have location > programs in place by the year 2001. > [...] I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to triangulate every call. The primary motivation for this is almost certainly "location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMuqrJizIPc7jvyFpAQEmsAf+KysBgt9xRDg/Wp0yJ+jTBEwueVMZu0vB z9KtEOQDLCZkd7bzzIeJwjXochpA5fqlXetP/pRyAT058ewE2OEYz3SgK2zwz3s/ LRTFHRAIdj4f/+7PTKx6LvoN4NPvKOssqZ4KpX/YYNm/pHhe7eKCY8uV2AEXnoxz bfs6FgLDYhEtdBYhQGhSbRUgl0MrdW6crmEredavCkZCuqf6G6YOZ7PB1kGK3ZlH QqIkcDrV2RewY738KuKRb1xsQJHtSC8hgchM6eYY6qpac0BkpQLESo4777wv/5/a oDMP/ubR8cXokEzQgmhRo8eeHCXBJ8tiKOkKzstkTAdSGOONlc9ttQ== =j7WP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From attila at primenet.com Sat Jan 25 16:55:30 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 16:55:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Homo/bi/sexuals (no_one@nowhere.org) Message-ID: <199701260055.QAA05799@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701250956.BAA23557 at toad.com>, on 01/24/97 at 10:53 PM, no_one at nowhere.org gurgled: + And the CDC is the Centers for Disease Control; and it has since +found many, many prior cases of AIDS. These three minor errors are +indicative of Attila's reliability of the subject. Of course, no one +at CDC or NIH believes any of this crap; it was tired a decade ago. A man is known by the company he keeps; floating nyms are the mark of a coward; why not just wear the mark of the beast? ... no_one at nowhere.org's utterance is an average pronouncement by a prototypical megalomaniacal, hedonistic cypherpunk who on days of lesser grandeur, humour, or importance corrects spelling and grammatical errors --unlike the standards you apparently set for yourself? I claim neither a medical degree nor the trade of a medical reporter; the information presented was solely an illustration of an unfortunate circumstance for both the AIDS victim and society as a whole. As to the current relevance of the AIDS victim (who, for that matter, may even have been an urban legend after a few historical rewrites) in today's revisionist politically correct special- interest social cauldron as promulgated by the mass hysterimedia (an environment which can, and has, rewritten the words of Thomas Jefferson to accommodate the current social agenda), the point is not only lost; it is mute, along with the truth --both your perceived truth and the historical truth. --attila == "you probably will not be last, you may not be next, but you are certainly too late to have been first. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMuqW2704kQrCC2kFAQE9MAQAluz6aLri1igCl8a/hE5clOQIyL3TjTG8 tzHHzEEQ4AzU4qtA2UiCSX1Y3eWAd4X/yL09C9HYrCzw9nRZHb0nBObw4+FGtU5L +vGuWOOAnhh4xJsiDOqYMNIGKftteFWpT1CG9M4C+n/DfNiHzfQV/HlX/Az8j4iP ovE04U/DpKI= =IAdt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From azur at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 17:10:35 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:10:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Public Key Partners Message-ID: <199701260110.RAA05986@toad.com> >Hello, > >Do you know of a way I can contact Public Key Partners by e-mail or phone? >Thanks. > >Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos >President >DataET Research >Data Engineering Technologies PKP is really just a holding/licensing company. Last time I heard Bob Fougner was still legal council to PKP. You should be able to contact him through Cylink Corp. (800) 600-5858. -- Steve P.S. Tell him hello from me. From shamrock at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 17:10:38 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:10:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <199701260110.RAA05992@toad.com> At 11:40 AM 1/25/97 -0500, Adam Shostack wrote: > >Paul Kocher announced that he has cracked it, and can recover data >quickly. He is not publishing details of the break. Why? -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From markm at voicenet.com Sat Jan 25 17:10:40 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:10:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: <199701260110.RAA06000@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 24 Jan 1997 aaron at herringn.com wrote: > Presented in a "this will help 911" context. Still disconcerting. > > [...] > Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls > have been given additional incentive with a Federal Communications > Commission order that all cell phone service companies have location > programs in place by the year 2001. > [...] I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to triangulate every call. The primary motivation for this is almost certainly "location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMuqrJizIPc7jvyFpAQEmsAf+KysBgt9xRDg/Wp0yJ+jTBEwueVMZu0vB z9KtEOQDLCZkd7bzzIeJwjXochpA5fqlXetP/pRyAT058ewE2OEYz3SgK2zwz3s/ LRTFHRAIdj4f/+7PTKx6LvoN4NPvKOssqZ4KpX/YYNm/pHhe7eKCY8uV2AEXnoxz bfs6FgLDYhEtdBYhQGhSbRUgl0MrdW6crmEredavCkZCuqf6G6YOZ7PB1kGK3ZlH QqIkcDrV2RewY738KuKRb1xsQJHtSC8hgchM6eYY6qpac0BkpQLESo4777wv/5/a oDMP/ubR8cXokEzQgmhRo8eeHCXBJ8tiKOkKzstkTAdSGOONlc9ttQ== =j7WP -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From attila at primenet.com Sat Jan 25 17:10:44 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:10:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: who the "fuck" am I? Message-ID: <199701260110.RAA06005@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In , on 01/25/97 at 12:32 PM, aga said: +Which Attila the Hun is this? +Is this the rec.nude guy? +-aga response -------------- I will not say "what is 'rec.nude'" but I have never been there; isn't that the one for nudists camps or some such? never been much into worrying about what I wore, or making the statement I did not! I always thought a little mystery was good for both sides: she knows not if I have a small dick, I know not if she has no tits; la, la, la.. .. as to multiple "Attila the Hun" accounts, I probably have as good as any original stake on the name as far as the net goes: --Bell Labs hung it on me in the mid 70s when I was doing some contract work on the unix kernal for Western Electric for the spook show. The name stuck, and why bother to change? Other than the fact the nudist might be a real loser, I could care less about a nym; there are multiple users on other nyms (for all we know, Tim May is a nym and the name is common); you can usually guess by context who is who. how many of us have actually seen each other face to face (who would want to )? so, in most cases, real names are no different than nyms in a make believe world. now, all that being said... it has been asked... "who the fuck are you?" to which I reply: "...good choice of expletives." "nobody, I guess; "well, let's see... "I have a Piled higher and Deeper in Information Techniques from Zuerich (undergrad at Harvard in dual honors physical chemistry); "I have been around since before the dawn of arpanet, probably even longer than TCMay; in fact, I was born before Franklin D. Roosevelt dusted off Wendell L. Willkie; "...but I've never held a 'job;' "I have personally coded more than a few 250,000+ line packages, which made me quite comfortable at one time, even if more than one did go down the black hole (along with countless other projects like the bit-slice hardware and firmware to replace B3500s in missle silos); "I have been the hatchet man in numerous high tech recoveries; "I have been detained for crypto offenses by the Feds; "I have been detained for 'treasonable' technology export; "I have been charged; "...a long time ago, in a land far, far away, there was more than one tour in the Corps' "deep-deep black" special operations; the battalion commanding officer for the 'Let's kill 'em all' vacant eyes, the misfits; "a combat chopper pilot; "an instrument rated multi-engine pilots license; "a rider of a 102 in. 115+ mph qtr. miler hawg on the street; "plus a few other reasons to guarantee an autobiography found on the fiction shelf." while playing Hotel California: So, who the 'fuck' am I? Just another aging 300 lb gorilla, long haired hippie, California freak, with yet another loud outlaw chopper. "Oh, yeah, I forgot, I hold a license to practice before the court in a couple European countries (not that I would waste my time...)." "So, who am I, really? "Nobody, I guess, just attila!" == "you probably will not be last, you may not be next, but you are certainly too late to have been first. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMuqidr04kQrCC2kFAQGiqgQAqu6qHbbX61IkM0YBXnFAZ2divzWvWPWB vt/+BHXq55PHmAPq1m2v5Yf0Jnam03abm4hFkvQLFtCg05i8bRaU5L8QiWyJJ3z0 wtMrDKF9VqRtSDhSwUoVwS2affnUUViE4GPBjezNCnuTtwHQ0fr7vgqq8IUr8q4I dDLp/VCMniE= =9nng -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 17:11:07 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:11:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260111.RAA06011@toad.com> Jim Choate writes: > > > Jim Choate writes: > > > > > [For the record, I have serious doubts whether the HIV virus causes AIDS. > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > problems. > > WOAH Bessie! Jim and Dale, I agree. Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 17:12:12 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:12:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: HELLO Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970125170608.0063aa78@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 10:31 AM 1/25/97 EST, Lou Zer wrote: >Is ESDES a good program? > > > No clue - got a pointer to where it lives? Also, a Subject line is a good way to let people know what your mail is about.... - like Subject: ESDES? Is ESDES a good program? It's at http://really-cool-warez.com/elite/trustme/warez.html # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 17:12:13 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:12:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anyone have info on foreign "ITARS" Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970125170856.0062ec78@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 09:01 PM 1/24/97 +0000, Bill Campbell wrote: >Does anyone have any pointers to info about the import/export >restrictions on encryption products in various countries. I know any From : "Bert-Jaap Koops" Subj : Crypto Law Survey updated Date : Thu, 9 Jan 1997 09:38:31 MET Forward? : No Return : owner-cryptography at c2.net --------------------------------------------------------------- I have just updated my survey of existing and envisaged cryptography laws and regulations. It now also includes a What's new section. This update contains among others updates on the OECD, Germany, France, Netherlands, the new US export regulations, and the Bernstein case. See the Crypto Law Survey at http://cwis.kub.nl/~frw/people/koops/lawsurvy.htm # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From john at travelcash.com Sat Jan 25 17:13:20 1997 From: john at travelcash.com (Dr. John Holleman) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:13:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Saw Your Post Message-ID: Interested in traveling and, in the process, earning income in a business that is profitable and realistic? To receive an instant presentation on how to travel the world and generate solid income, send a blank email to: travel at megd.com You should receive the presentation in your email inbox in 10 seconds. Be Good. You Are. Dr. John Holleman From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 17:18:07 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:18:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970125171733.0063b5b0@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 06:29 PM 1/24/97 -0800, Hugh Daniel wrote: >> Based on PGP, with no "third-party" key holder, the Nordic system >> uses unbreakable RSA-algorithm encryption with a 1024-bit key. >> However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a >> smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their >> computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of >> Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers Guess what - it's still got "key escrow"! If you've got a smartcard that holds your key, then you've got something well-defined that can be subpoenaed.... It's better than Yankee-style giving the government your keys in advance, but it's still key escrow. On the other hand, it's voluntary, and if it interoperates with Real PGP, then great - but will there be an expectation that you need to have your key signed by The Post Office to use it? # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 17:25:52 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:25:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: HELLO Message-ID: <199701260125.RAA06242@toad.com> At 10:31 AM 1/25/97 EST, Lou Zer wrote: >Is ESDES a good program? > > > No clue - got a pointer to where it lives? Also, a Subject line is a good way to let people know what your mail is about.... - like Subject: ESDES? Is ESDES a good program? It's at http://really-cool-warez.com/elite/trustme/warez.html # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 17:26:01 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:26:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Anyone have info on foreign "ITARS" Message-ID: <199701260126.RAA06257@toad.com> At 09:01 PM 1/24/97 +0000, Bill Campbell wrote: >Does anyone have any pointers to info about the import/export >restrictions on encryption products in various countries. I know any From : "Bert-Jaap Koops" Subj : Crypto Law Survey updated Date : Thu, 9 Jan 1997 09:38:31 MET Forward? : No Return : owner-cryptography at c2.net --------------------------------------------------------------- I have just updated my survey of existing and envisaged cryptography laws and regulations. It now also includes a What's new section. This update contains among others updates on the OECD, Germany, France, Netherlands, the new US export regulations, and the Bernstein case. See the Crypto Law Survey at http://cwis.kub.nl/~frw/people/koops/lawsurvy.htm # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sat Jan 25 17:26:02 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:26:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <199701260126.RAA06258@toad.com> At 06:29 PM 1/24/97 -0800, Hugh Daniel wrote: >> Based on PGP, with no "third-party" key holder, the Nordic system >> uses unbreakable RSA-algorithm encryption with a 1024-bit key. >> However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a >> smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their >> computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of >> Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers Guess what - it's still got "key escrow"! If you've got a smartcard that holds your key, then you've got something well-defined that can be subpoenaed.... It's better than Yankee-style giving the government your keys in advance, but it's still key escrow. On the other hand, it's voluntary, and if it interoperates with Real PGP, then great - but will there be an expectation that you need to have your key signed by The Post Office to use it? # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Sat Jan 25 17:59:00 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 17:59:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: NoneRe: [ANNOUNCEMENT] GAK Message-ID: <199701260159.SAA13094@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timmy C[ocksucker] May's abysmal grammar, atrocious spelling and feeble responses clearly identify him as a product of the American education system. ,,, (. .) -ooO-(_)-Ooo- Timmy C[ocksucker] May From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 18:04:14 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 18:04:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EAB953.6676@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > [For the record, I have serious doubts whether the HIV virus causes AIDS. > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > problems. > Jim and Dale, I agree. > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a healthy person can get it from the virii alone. One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 18:04:23 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 18:04:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701252135.PAA16387@einstein> Message-ID: <32EABA16.1926@gte.net> Jim Choate wrote: > Forwarded message: > > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 10:31:49 -0800 > > From: Dale Thorn > > Subject: Re: overview.htm > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Jim Choate writes: [snip] > WOAH Bessie! > I had nothing to do with this exchange, and definitely didn't write ANY of > the above. Please get me out of there and keep me out of it. I am more than > able to speak for myself thank you. I don't know what could have happened. I use the Netscape email editor in stupid mode, i.e., I just press the buttons, I don't have any idea how it works. Sorry! From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sat Jan 25 18:06:59 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 18:06:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mis-quote... Message-ID: <199701260212.UAA16949@einstein> Hi, I want to thank all those who sent me email apologizing for the mis-quote. Your courtesy is appreciated. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From azur at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 18:42:49 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 18:42:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: >Paul Kocher announced that he has cracked it, and can recover data >quickly. He is not publishing details of the break. > >Adam Shostack Sorry, I don't believe it any more than I believe other unsubstantiated crypto claims. Publish the code/method for others to verify or keep the clains to yourself Paul. --Steve From idea4u at concentric.net Sat Jan 25 18:54:50 1997 From: idea4u at concentric.net (idea4u at concentric.net) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 18:54:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: $$$ 9,780 $$$ Message-ID: <199701260020.TAA00231@newman.concentric.net> You have Nothing to lose!! Me: "Do you own a personal computer?" You: yes. Me: "Running WINDOWS 3.xx or WINDOWS 95?" You: sure, why? Me: "Wanna make $9,780 cash in the next 48 days?" You: who wouldn't? Me: "Without leaving your home?" You: really? what is it about? Me: "I own a SOFTWARE PROGRAM that explains the business. Do you want me to send you out one?" You: are you going to tell me what it is all about? Me: "That is not the way I work, the answers are in the program. Do you want the business package and software?" You: I have nothing to lose! If people are making that kind of money..... I HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK! NEW!! NEW!! NEW!! NEW!! NEW!! NEW!! NEW!! NEW!! COMPUTER BASED SOFTWARE BUSINESS SYSTEM CAN EARN YOU MEGA BUCKS!! If you've been looking for the ULTIMATE home-based business.......... THIS IS IT!!! It's simple, lucrative, & your ticket to the lifestyle you dream!!! Our computerized, software-driven business system is so simple to operate....... A CHILD COULD RUN IT! Does the potential of making thousands of dollars a week from home using a TOTALLY AUTOMATED SOFTWARE Business System excite you? If you own (or have access to) an IBM-compatable computer, and are willing to invest an hour or two a day to start -- with the potential of making MORE MONEY THAN YOU CAN IMAGINE --- THIS BUSINESS IS FOR YOU!! Our extraordinary computer-based software business is VERY EASY TO OPERATE. Your complete business package, including software, is only $24.95 up front (Money Back Guarantee), then you decide. NO COMPUTER KNOWLEDGE NECESSARY!! STEP BY STEP INSTRUCTIONS PROVIDED. (p.s. This is as tough as it gets) STEP 1 : Insert disk into computer. Push a couple of buttons. Sit back and have a cup of coffee while your computer and printer crank out $20 purchase orders. Place in window envelope (no tedious hand addressing). Stick on one of those self stick stamps. Mail. STEP 2 : Insert disk into computer. Push a couple of buttons. Remove disk and insert into envelope. Mail. Repeat as required. STEP 3 : Go to mailbox. Collect a ton of $20 money orders. Repeat daily. STEP 4 : Laugh all the way to the bank. If this sounds like the kind of "work" you could easily get used to, RUSH your address and $24.95: -------------------------------------------------------------- SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE---SAVE (ACT NOW!!! BEFORE Feb. 5th AND RECEIVE THE SOFTWARE & BUSINESS PACKAGE AT AN INCREDIBLE (40%) OFF!!! WITH THE SAME "NO RISK" 100% MONEY BACK GUARANTEE!) DON'T DELAY, YOU HAVE ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO LOSE and EVERYTHING TO GAIN! RUSH: YOUR ADDRESS and $14.97 check, cash or money order payable to: Alan H. (Vision Unlimited) (Before Feb 5th) -------------------------------------------------------------- TO: Alan H. (Vision Unlimited) 316 Pine Ridge Ln Lavergne, TN 37086 1 (615) 254-2894 14 day, No-questions-asked Money-back guarantee on $24.95 business package if you are dissatisfied with it for any reason whatsoever. *non activated software disk only. All orders shipped 1st class mail. For expedited delivery, please add $3.00 for Priority Mail. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sat Jan 25 19:20:39 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:20:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fan mail from Gilmore, Sandfart, and friends In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970124203349.006a229c@pop.netaddress.com> Message-ID: >From iverson at usa.net Sat Jan 25 12:51:37 1997 >Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) > via UUCP; Sat, 25 Jan 97 13:06:18 EST > for dlv >Received: (qmail 17565 invoked by uid 0); 25 Jan 1997 17:47:20 -0000 >Received: from nyc-ny15-18.ix.netcom.com (205.186.166.50) by netaddress.usa.net via mtad (2.0) on Sat Jan 25 10:47:15 1997 >Message-Id: <3.0.32.19970124203349.006a229c at pop.netaddress.com> >X-Sender: iverson at pop.netaddress.com (Unverified) >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 (32) >Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 12:46:01 -0500 >To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" >From: Casey Iverson >Subject: Re: No Dimitri?? >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > >At 10:33 PM 1/23/97 EST, you wrote: >>"William H. Geiger III" writes: >> >>> I have noticed that there has not been any post from Dimitri in a couple of >>> days. >>> >>> I am assuming that this means that the list moderation has now started? >> >>Yes - anything I say is junked irrespective of content. > >Devoid of content you piece of Russian Shit > >You have not completed the NetAddress survey. Please login to http://netaddress.usa.net/ to start using NetAddress > So much shit in NYC... From schtief at juno.com Sat Jan 25 19:31:57 1997 From: schtief at juno.com (schtief at juno.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:31:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: BITE ME Message-ID: <19970125.182024.5167.0.schtief@juno.com> Bite me everyone. I am the Great Schtief, hear me roar. O O o - Schtief the Great http://pages.prodigy.com/VT/hackersguide 18007TOUCH1 ext. 131196 --------------------------------------- From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sat Jan 25 19:40:40 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:40:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mis-quote... Message-ID: <199701260340.TAA08048@toad.com> Hi, I want to thank all those who sent me email apologizing for the mis-quote. Your courtesy is appreciated. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From azur at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 19:40:50 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:40:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <199701260340.TAA08071@toad.com> >Paul Kocher announced that he has cracked it, and can recover data >quickly. He is not publishing details of the break. > >Adam Shostack Sorry, I don't believe it any more than I believe other unsubstantiated crypto claims. Publish the code/method for others to verify or keep the clains to yourself Paul. --Steve From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 19:40:54 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:40:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260340.TAA08079@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: > Forwarded message: > > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 10:31:49 -0800 > > From: Dale Thorn > > Subject: Re: overview.htm > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Jim Choate writes: [snip] > WOAH Bessie! > I had nothing to do with this exchange, and definitely didn't write ANY of > the above. Please get me out of there and keep me out of it. I am more than > able to speak for myself thank you. I don't know what could have happened. I use the Netscape email editor in stupid mode, i.e., I just press the buttons, I don't have any idea how it works. Sorry! From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 19:41:03 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:41:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260341.TAA08101@toad.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > [For the record, I have serious doubts whether the HIV virus causes AIDS. > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > problems. > Jim and Dale, I agree. > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a healthy person can get it from the virii alone. One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. From blancw at cnw.com Sat Jan 25 20:59:34 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 20:59:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: US Info Supremacy Message-ID: <01BC0B03.3CE85DC0@king1-28.cnw.com> From: John Young Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons. ................................................................ He must be on vacation; he hasn't posted in quite a while. .. Blanc From blancw at cnw.com Sat Jan 25 21:10:45 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 21:10:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: US Info Supremacy Message-ID: <199701260510.VAA09124@toad.com> From: John Young Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons. ................................................................ He must be on vacation; he hasn't posted in quite a while. .. Blanc From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 25 21:14:55 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 21:14:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701260341.TAA08101@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701260509.XAA01076@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > > problems. > > > Jim and Dale, I agree. > > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. > > One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to > a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that > they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a > reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should > be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are > heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, has that been proven? - Igor. From azur at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 21:24:44 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 21:24:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >On Fri, 24 Jan 1997 aaron at herringn.com wrote: > >> Presented in a "this will help 911" context. Still disconcerting. >> >> [...] >> Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls >> have been given additional incentive with a Federal Communications >> Commission order that all cell phone service companies have location >> programs in place by the year 2001. >> [...] > Looks like this might create an opportunity for 'anonymous' cellular rentals. --Steve From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 25 21:35:26 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 21:35:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701260509.XAA01076@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <199701260531.XAA01225@manifold.algebra.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > > > problems. > > > > > Jim and Dale, I agree. > > > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. > > > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. Dale's hypothesis seems at odds with the linkage of aids and blood transfusion and transmission through needles. Nurses who contract aids through contaminated needles do not, normally, have devastated immune systems. - Igor. From Hello1 at usa.net Sat Jan 25 21:35:47 1997 From: Hello1 at usa.net (Hello1 at usa.net) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 21:35:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: EMAILONE'S BUSINESS CLASSIFIEDS Message-ID: <199701260535.VAA09377@toad.com> Removal Instructions: To be removed from all future mailings from Emailone Classifieds hit reply & Type REMOVE in the SUBJECT. The word remove must appear in the SUBJECT in order to be processed. Your request will be processed within a 24 hour period. Thank You ________________________________________________________ Thank you for supporting our advertisers. To respond by e-mail to a classified advertisement, send a separate e-mail directly to the address listed in the ad. PLEASE respond to the Advertisers according to the instructions given. ____________________________________________________________________ DOES YOUR BUSINESS ACCEPT CHECKS BY PHONE OR FAX? IT SHOULD! INCREASE YOUR SALES BY ACCEPTING CHECKS. Download free demo!!! Go to http://www.powerpromo.com/fspar ____________________________________________________________________ FLAT RATE 800 VOICE MAIL. NO PER MINUTE CHARGES. UNLIMITED CALLS. Rates as low as $19.95 a month!!! For complete info and an application email to our autoresponder at: 800FlatRate at replymail.com ____________________________________________________________________ 1 Million Email names only $69.00. If you would like a complete list of 1 million FRESH Email names go to our autoresponder for complete info. Million at replymail.com _____________________________________________________________________ STUCK WITH BAD CHECKS!!! WE WILL COLLECT FOR YOU AT NO CHARGE TO YOU!!! We are Virginia Court Services and we look forward to working with you. For more info email to: Michael Gray Process800 at aol.com ______________________________________________________________________ BULK EMAIL ISP: FOR RESPONSIBLE BULK EMAILERS ONLY. For complete info on a NEW Bulk Email ISP go to: http://www.powerpromo.com/fspar. If you do Bulk emailing and are interested in starting you own Home Based Internet Email business you must go to this Web Site. ______________________________________________________________________ ADVERTISE IN USA TODAY??? We can save you up to 40% on your classifieds ads in many papers including USA TODAY. For an application and rates email to our autoresponder at: USA at replymail.com. ______________________________________________________________________ If you would like to advertise your product or service please send an email to our autoresponder at : Rates at replymail.com Thank you for your time and supporting our advertisers. ______________________________________________________________________ From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 21:48:19 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 21:48:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701260509.XAA01076@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32EAEFED.23AA@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > > > problems. > > > Jim and Dale, I agree. > > > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. > > One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to > > a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that > > they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a > > reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should > > be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are > > heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. I'm not precisely sure, but remember, I'm not saying that your typical suburban, well-to-do, successful gay male falls into this category. There are, OTOH, a lot of people in the city who have lifestyles which are not represented accurately in the prime-time sitcoms, and the ones who fall into the greatest health-risk category are IV drug users and gay males (in the city, remember - i.e., Santa Monica boulevard). Remember too those ads for male sexual lubricants - you cannot use a condom with those lubricants. Safe sex, I don't think so. > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > has that been proven? You're kidding, yes? Anything besides good food, exercise, sleep etc. is bad for the immune system. Antibiotics (usually "dead" germs of some sort) are horrendous things to inject directly into your system. In October 1959, after lapsing into a coma from a massive sinus infection, I was given "a million units of penicillin" in the children's hospital when first admitted. I recovered OK after two weeks, so I'm certainly not opposed to antibiotics for those who really need them. OTOH, our U.S. economy today is antibiotic- and-hormone crazy, injecting cows, pigs, and chickens to name a few animals, all in the hopes of raising production. So why is the rate of cancer going up so high? It seems nearly everyone I know is getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 25 22:03:41 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:03:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <32EAEFED.23AA@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701260557.XAA01422@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to > > > a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that > > > they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a > > > reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should > > > be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are > > > heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. > > > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. > > I'm not precisely sure, but remember, I'm not saying that your typical > suburban, well-to-do, successful gay male falls into this category. > > There are, OTOH, a lot of people in the city who have lifestyles which > are not represented accurately in the prime-time sitcoms, and the ones > who fall into the greatest health-risk category are IV drug users and > gay males (in the city, remember - i.e., Santa Monica boulevard). > > Remember too those ads for male sexual lubricants - you cannot use > a condom with those lubricants. Safe sex, I don't think so. That does not come close to a theory that would explain HIV away. > > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > > has that been proven? > > You're kidding, yes? Anything besides good food, exercise, sleep etc. > is bad for the immune system. Antibiotics (usually "dead" germs of > some sort) are horrendous things to inject directly into your system. This may very well be true. I try to never use antibiotics, because I had allergy when I was a child and I also do not like taking any medications. There needs to be something more convincing than these generic statements, if you want to create some plausible theory. > In October 1959, after lapsing into a coma from a massive sinus > infection, I was given "a million units of penicillin" in the > children's hospital when first admitted. I recovered OK after > two weeks, so I'm certainly not opposed to antibiotics for those > who really need them. OTOH, our U.S. economy today is antibiotic- > and-hormone crazy, injecting cows, pigs, and chickens to name a few > animals, all in the hopes of raising production. So why is the rate > of cancer going up so high? It seems nearly everyone I know is > getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the > videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. > One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". As far as I understand, 1) no one really understands why cancer rates are up so much and 2) since people live longer, they are more likely do have cancer. What you said is one of the hypotheses. I personally feel that environment and bad greasy food are other major contributors. The way they cook all these fries, with overheated grease, is very bad. - Igor. From jimbell at pacifier.com Sat Jan 25 22:07:10 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:07:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <199701260606.WAA10383@mail.pacifier.com> At 05:44 AM 1/25/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >At 06:29 PM 1/24/97 -0800, Hugh Daniel wrote: >> FYI: >>>From: jsp at betz.biostr.washington.edu >[...] >>> However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a >>> smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their >>> computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of >>> Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers >>> will become standard on computers in Scandinavia. >[...] > >Interesting piece of trivia: I recently talked with a fellow from Intel. They are looking to purchase keyboards with smartcard readers built in. They hope to get them at $30/piece from suppliers in Asia. The lot size? 10 million. I suppose this is good news. I just hope they implement a system, like Chaum's low-knowledge/zero-knowledge systems, which make it difficult or impossible for snoops or tampered hardware to leak useful information. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From snow at smoke.suba.com Sat Jan 25 22:07:21 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:07:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sort this directly to Flames, was Re: Homosexuals In-Reply-To: <199701242112.NAA07645@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701260623.AAA00365@smoke.suba.com> > In <199701241414.GAA25350 at toad.com>, on 01/24/97 > at 07:17 AM, "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" said: > +Anything? My good friend TRRCJ3 reports from San Francisco that the > +city is much nicer now that so many homosexuals are 6 feet under. > +Thank God for AIDS. > when AIDS was relatively obscure, I always dismissed AIDS as > God's response to homosexuality (and other crimes against nature); > i.e. -settlement by a just God. I almost threw a dumb ass redneck of a ship in the middle of the ocean for a comment like this. I've read a lot of your rantings on this list, and I agree with some of them, but statements like this prove that you are a bigoted idiot. You may have some areas where you know what you are talking about, and I wouldn't want to be on the sharp end of a gun you were holding, but your head is definately stuck firmly up your ass. > Unfortunately, some of these boy-girls could not keep it among > themselves, and the closet queens brought it home. AIDS replicates Let's not forget the Hemophilliacs(spelling) and IV drug users. > asexually, knowing no boundaries. It was purely by accident that HIV was first noticed in the Homosexual population in this country. Viruses don't know anything about a persons sexual preference, and any so called "god" that would use such a non-selective weapon is not a god intelligent people should worship. Such a god would be a blind ignorant god. > I would not wish the disease upon anyone, but if you play, you > just might pay --as in "...reap what thy hath sown." Tell that to some 1 month old whose mother infected him/her. Tell that to a 5 year old who got it from a blood transfusion. > To be strongly opposed to homosexuality has nothing to do with > bigotry, political correctness, or aberrationist apologists; it is > an exposition of the natural order among the species. Answer me 2 questions: 1) If homosexuality is a "choice", why would anyone choose that lifestyle where the averge life expectancy is in the 40's, that causes so much pain among ones family, and so much conflict with the rest of society. 2) If it is not a choice, why would "god" punish those who had no choice? > and for those who deny God, read Darwin as to the relative > rate of survival for deviant and/or abnormal species. Then how do you explain homosexual behavior in several other species that seem to be doing quite well? The answer is you can't. You adopt a knee-jerk position that reinforces your deliberate isolationism. Anything that may cause you to question your worldview gets sorted to /dev/evil and you plow ahead like some pig ignorant dough boy killing as ordered for king and country. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 22:09:19 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:09:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701260531.XAA01225@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32EAF4C3.56CD@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > > > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > > > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > > > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. > Dale's hypothesis seems at odds with the linkage of aids and blood > transfusion and transmission through needles. > Nurses who contract aids through contaminated needles do not, > normally, have devastated immune systems. Let's be realistic about how AIDS is acquired. A small analogy: In my pockets I carry two wallets, one with $100's and the other with smaller change, about 50 bills in various small denominations. Let's say tomorrow I spend a $10 bill at the bookstore, and the guy behind the counter says "this is a phony bill". So where did I get it? Well, if pocket change were always LIFO (last in, first out), I might be able to remember, but there's a good chance I wouldn't, since I go to a lot of places and do a lot of small transactions. Now I'm only talking 50 or so small bills, acquired and redistributed over a period of at most a few months. AIDS, OTOH, is likely to be a development from years of 1) Contact with germs, chemicals, food additives, antibiotics other medical treatments, sexual contact, etc. and 2) Immune-suppressing activities such as lack of sleep and exercise, anxiety and stress, and so on. It seems to me that "proof" of someone acquiring AIDS from one stab with a contaminated needle is a very nebulous thing. As far as nurses go, the contact I've had with many of them tells me they are also (on average) drug users extraordinaire. Again, you'll be able to find a very clean hospital in a big city with a bunch of nice clean nurses in it (a lot of sweet old ladies is the image coming to mind), but this is as unrealistic as Leave It To Beaver and other 1950's nonsense. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 22:26:16 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:26:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701251627.IAA28475@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EAFDA5.2936@sk.sympatico.ca> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Toto writes: > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > It became rather glaringly obvious after moderation was announced > > that class structure would be the defining feature of moderation. > > Those who felt themselves to be in the 'upper class' made no > > bones about it. > > That's a very insightful obeservation. Obese-rvation? I hope you are not assuming that I am obese, just because I am responding to a post originating from 'fatmans.demon.co.uk.' I would hate to become relegated to the upcoming cypherpunks-fatpeople list because of assumptions of this nature. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 22:26:26 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:26:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Corelation Message-ID: <32EB0402.B87@sk.sympatico.ca> My database seems to indicate a direct co-relation between the number of postings criticizing moderation and the number of UCE/Spam postings showing up on the list. i.e. When there are a number of postings critizizing Sandy's moderation, then the diversionary UCE/Spam postings increase dramatically. Has anyone actually 'seen' John Gilmore, lately? Since there have been a number of postings indicating that the writer 'used to respect' Gilmore, I am wondering if perhaps this moderation experiment is not actually an attempt by someone to discredit him. Perhaps he is being held hostage somewhere, while the more nefarious elements among us are trying to besmirch his good name by using it to promote willy-nilly censorship and class-elitism. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 22:27:04 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:27:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701251627.IAA28475@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EB01B6.69D7@sk.sympatico.ca> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Jim Bell is a boor, but he had some very > interesting ideas that upset the "cypher punk" crowd because he advocates > dismantling the system they hope to join one day. I have enjoyed many of Jim Bell's posts, and occasionally sent him a note telling him so. Other posts of his leave me with the desire to fire off a missive telling him what a low-down, scum-sucking sack of shit he is. One thing I have gleaned from his posts is that he is an adult. As such, I assume that he is fully capable of living his life according to his own beliefs and standards, and will not be reduced to running to his mother, crying, because of the expressions of my relevant or non-relevant opinions. I have seen no posts from him indicating a desire to be 'saved' from any less-than-applausitory comments on my part, but it seems that others have taken it upon themselves to 'save' him, regardless. I fail to see how any supposedly intelligent members of the CypherPunks list can possibly be content to fall for the line, "Bend over, baby. I'm only going to moderate you 'a little bit'." Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 22:27:57 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:27:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular phone triangulation In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EAF1A4.405A@sk.sympatico.ca> Mark M. wrote: > I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and > have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There > would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to > triangulate every call. > The primary motivation for this is almost certainly > "location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. Replace the words 'drug dealers' with the words 'everyone', and I think this becomes not only a correct statement, but a very revealing one. It doesn't matter whether the subject is crypto, cell phones, or any communications item or issue, the 'answer' to the proclaimed 'problem', according to the government, is to increase the government's ability to monitor every citizen, everywhere, at any time. Our prisons are overflowing with drug dealers and drug users who were put there by quite ordinary means which didn't involve violating or discarding the rights of the ordinary citizen. Yet we keep hearing cries from the government for the desperate need to infringe on the citizen's right to freedom and privacy, again and again, in order to jail the guys who were supposed to be jailed by the 'last' infringement on the average citizen (and the one before that). So far, as a result of the plethora of laws passed to enable law enforcement agencies to 'catch drug dealers', I have seen only a few minor criminals who are claimed to have been brought to justice as a result of these laws, while seeing documentation of hundreds and thousands of ordinary citizens being harassed and having their human rights violated by these same laws. And still, we have people like Mark, who seem relatively intelligent and informed but who still echo the party-line of Big Brother when He proclaims that the average citizen must be subjected to new and better ways to monitor the movements and activities of His citizens in order to 'protect' them from 'drug dealers'. I am certain that the issues (and the debates about them) will be the same as today, when the dawn finally comes where we hear the announcement about the plans for identity-chip body-implants. I am sure that the government will tell us that our privacy and rights will be protected by the Key Escrow encryption in the identity-chip which will only be compromised for the purpose of catching 'drug dealers' and other 'scum'. I am sure that the statement above will be pooh-paah'd by many as an example of reactionary-paranoid thinking, but the same could be said for all of the rights and privacy-infringing realities that we currently live under. (Like having to provide samples of bodily fluids to keep your job as a janitor--in case you've been dipping into the coke stash of the CEO, who does 'not' have to piss in a jar.) Five years from now, you may well be wearing an identity-anklet at work (to combat employee-theft, etc.) and still laughing at my ludicrous example of body-implant identity-chips. ("It's not like they make us wear them at home, they are just for protecting us from unfair firing by our employer.") Ten years from now, you may be wearing your identity-anklet at home, and still laughing about the idiot who predicted body-implant identity-chips. ("It's no trouble wearing it at home, especially if it helps catch those damn 'drug dealers'. They are the only ones who leave their house during the curfew hours, anyway.") A couple years after that, you will welcome the government announcement that they have found a solution to the 'problem' of having to wear the identity-anklet all of the time--the new, improved, identity-chip solution--the body-implant ID-chip. Naturally, you will pooh-paah the naysayers who claim that the body-implant chip will eventually have the capacity to read your mind. ("The guy saying that is the same idiot who predicted that we would all be wearing body-implant identity-chips... "Well, OK, that's a bad example, but...") You can fight the increasing hi-tech machinations of Big Brother to control our actions, movements, and our thoughts, but it will cost an increasing amount of time and effort to do so. Not to mention larger and larger amounts of money. But, maybe if you became a 'drug dealer'... Toto From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 22:30:45 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:30:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701260557.XAA01422@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32EAF9EC.2E9F@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Remember too those ads for male sexual lubricants - you cannot use > > a condom with those lubricants. Safe sex, I don't think so. > That does not come close to a theory that would explain HIV away. The virus I believe is best explained by the numerous articles that were published in the 1970's on "gene splicing", and the fact that we now have two certified (official) government requests on paper that call for the development of an agent precisely like HIV, which were in fact funded. One was requested in 1979 (I think) by someone representing the Ft. Detrick folks ($10 million), and the other request was formally made by the World Health Organization. Why would the WHO want to develop a nasty bug like HIV? Use your imagination. Does the virus actually cause the immune collapse? That's still controversial, from what I hear. Try to find some of the material by Jakob Segal, who is heavily suppressed in the USA. Also check out Jon Rappaport (who also did some excellent on-the-spot interviews in OKC after the bombing), also Dr. Robert Strecker, whose brother was murdered trying to investigate the political threads of the origins of AIDS/HIV. > > In October 1959, after lapsing into a coma from a massive sinus > > infection, I was given "a million units of penicillin" in the > > children's hospital when first admitted. I recovered OK after > > two weeks, so I'm certainly not opposed to antibiotics for those > > who really need them. OTOH, our U.S. economy today is antibiotic- > > and-hormone crazy, injecting cows, pigs, and chickens to name a few > > animals, all in the hopes of raising production. So why is the rate > > of cancer going up so high? It seems nearly everyone I know is > > getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the > > videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. > > One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". > > As far as I understand, 1) no one really understands why cancer rates > are up so much and 2) since people live longer, they are more likely do > have cancer. True if all other things are equal. Try subtracting out some of the cancer factors, and perhaps they'd die of something else. > What you said is one of the hypotheses. I personally feel that > environment and bad greasy food are other major contributors. The > way they cook all these fries, with overheated grease, is very bad. Try an interesting experiment. Get an ordinary hamburger at McDonald's. Take the "meat" out of the bun and break it in half, then hold the broken edge up to your nose. It helps to have good sense of smell, but you'll probably get the picture anyway. From shamrock at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 22:39:47 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:39:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970125224046.006d9a10@192.100.81.136> At 09:50 PM 1/25/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >>Interesting piece of trivia: I recently talked with a fellow from Intel. They are looking to purchase keyboards with smartcard readers built in. They hope to get them at $30/piece from suppliers in Asia. The lot size? 10 million. > > >I suppose this is good news. I just hope they implement a system, like >Chaum's low-knowledge/zero-knowledge systems, which make it difficult or >impossible for snoops or tampered hardware to leak useful information. I understand that Intel's main problem at this time seem to be to find a keyboard manufacturer that understands that for the device to be effective, the CPU should not be involved in its operation. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From azur at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 22:55:33 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:55:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: <199701260655.WAA10130@toad.com> >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >On Fri, 24 Jan 1997 aaron at herringn.com wrote: > >> Presented in a "this will help 911" context. Still disconcerting. >> >> [...] >> Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls >> have been given additional incentive with a Federal Communications >> Commission order that all cell phone service companies have location >> programs in place by the year 2001. >> [...] > Looks like this might create an opportunity for 'anonymous' cellular rentals. --Steve From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 25 22:55:37 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:55:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260655.WAA10138@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > > > problems. > > > > > Jim and Dale, I agree. > > > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. > > > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. Dale's hypothesis seems at odds with the linkage of aids and blood transfusion and transmission through needles. Nurses who contract aids through contaminated needles do not, normally, have devastated immune systems. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 25 22:55:46 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:55:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260655.WAA10146@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > > problems. > > > Jim and Dale, I agree. > > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. > > One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to > a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that > they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a > reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should > be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are > heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, has that been proven? - Igor. From jimbell at pacifier.com Sat Jan 25 22:55:58 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:55:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <199701260655.WAA10169@toad.com> At 05:44 AM 1/25/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >At 06:29 PM 1/24/97 -0800, Hugh Daniel wrote: >> FYI: >>>From: jsp at betz.biostr.washington.edu >[...] >>> However, some hardware is required. Because the key is on a >>> smartcard, users must have smartcard readers installed on their >>> computers, which aren't yet widely available. But Pdr Andler of >>> Finnish Hewlett Packard says that later this year, smartcard readers >>> will become standard on computers in Scandinavia. >[...] > >Interesting piece of trivia: I recently talked with a fellow from Intel. They are looking to purchase keyboards with smartcard readers built in. They hope to get them at $30/piece from suppliers in Asia. The lot size? 10 million. I suppose this is good news. I just hope they implement a system, like Chaum's low-knowledge/zero-knowledge systems, which make it difficult or impossible for snoops or tampered hardware to leak useful information. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 22:56:07 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:56:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701260656.WAA10195@toad.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Toto writes: > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > It became rather glaringly obvious after moderation was announced > > that class structure would be the defining feature of moderation. > > Those who felt themselves to be in the 'upper class' made no > > bones about it. > > That's a very insightful obeservation. Obese-rvation? I hope you are not assuming that I am obese, just because I am responding to a post originating from 'fatmans.demon.co.uk.' I would hate to become relegated to the upcoming cypherpunks-fatpeople list because of assumptions of this nature. Toto From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 22:56:13 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:56:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260656.WAA10208@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > > > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > > > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > > > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. > Dale's hypothesis seems at odds with the linkage of aids and blood > transfusion and transmission through needles. > Nurses who contract aids through contaminated needles do not, > normally, have devastated immune systems. Let's be realistic about how AIDS is acquired. A small analogy: In my pockets I carry two wallets, one with $100's and the other with smaller change, about 50 bills in various small denominations. Let's say tomorrow I spend a $10 bill at the bookstore, and the guy behind the counter says "this is a phony bill". So where did I get it? Well, if pocket change were always LIFO (last in, first out), I might be able to remember, but there's a good chance I wouldn't, since I go to a lot of places and do a lot of small transactions. Now I'm only talking 50 or so small bills, acquired and redistributed over a period of at most a few months. AIDS, OTOH, is likely to be a development from years of 1) Contact with germs, chemicals, food additives, antibiotics other medical treatments, sexual contact, etc. and 2) Immune-suppressing activities such as lack of sleep and exercise, anxiety and stress, and so on. It seems to me that "proof" of someone acquiring AIDS from one stab with a contaminated needle is a very nebulous thing. As far as nurses go, the contact I've had with many of them tells me they are also (on average) drug users extraordinaire. Again, you'll be able to find a very clean hospital in a big city with a bunch of nice clean nurses in it (a lot of sweet old ladies is the image coming to mind), but this is as unrealistic as Leave It To Beaver and other 1950's nonsense. From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 22:56:15 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:56:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260656.WAA10209@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > > > problems. > > > Jim and Dale, I agree. > > > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. > > One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to > > a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that > > they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a > > reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should > > be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are > > heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. I'm not precisely sure, but remember, I'm not saying that your typical suburban, well-to-do, successful gay male falls into this category. There are, OTOH, a lot of people in the city who have lifestyles which are not represented accurately in the prime-time sitcoms, and the ones who fall into the greatest health-risk category are IV drug users and gay males (in the city, remember - i.e., Santa Monica boulevard). Remember too those ads for male sexual lubricants - you cannot use a condom with those lubricants. Safe sex, I don't think so. > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > has that been proven? You're kidding, yes? Anything besides good food, exercise, sleep etc. is bad for the immune system. Antibiotics (usually "dead" germs of some sort) are horrendous things to inject directly into your system. In October 1959, after lapsing into a coma from a massive sinus infection, I was given "a million units of penicillin" in the children's hospital when first admitted. I recovered OK after two weeks, so I'm certainly not opposed to antibiotics for those who really need them. OTOH, our U.S. economy today is antibiotic- and-hormone crazy, injecting cows, pigs, and chickens to name a few animals, all in the hopes of raising production. So why is the rate of cancer going up so high? It seems nearly everyone I know is getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". From ichudov at algebra.com Sat Jan 25 22:56:16 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 22:56:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260656.WAA10210@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to > > > a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that > > > they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a > > > reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should > > > be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are > > > heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. > > > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. > > I'm not precisely sure, but remember, I'm not saying that your typical > suburban, well-to-do, successful gay male falls into this category. > > There are, OTOH, a lot of people in the city who have lifestyles which > are not represented accurately in the prime-time sitcoms, and the ones > who fall into the greatest health-risk category are IV drug users and > gay males (in the city, remember - i.e., Santa Monica boulevard). > > Remember too those ads for male sexual lubricants - you cannot use > a condom with those lubricants. Safe sex, I don't think so. That does not come close to a theory that would explain HIV away. > > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > > has that been proven? > > You're kidding, yes? Anything besides good food, exercise, sleep etc. > is bad for the immune system. Antibiotics (usually "dead" germs of > some sort) are horrendous things to inject directly into your system. This may very well be true. I try to never use antibiotics, because I had allergy when I was a child and I also do not like taking any medications. There needs to be something more convincing than these generic statements, if you want to create some plausible theory. > In October 1959, after lapsing into a coma from a massive sinus > infection, I was given "a million units of penicillin" in the > children's hospital when first admitted. I recovered OK after > two weeks, so I'm certainly not opposed to antibiotics for those > who really need them. OTOH, our U.S. economy today is antibiotic- > and-hormone crazy, injecting cows, pigs, and chickens to name a few > animals, all in the hopes of raising production. So why is the rate > of cancer going up so high? It seems nearly everyone I know is > getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the > videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. > One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". As far as I understand, 1) no one really understands why cancer rates are up so much and 2) since people live longer, they are more likely do have cancer. What you said is one of the hypotheses. I personally feel that environment and bad greasy food are other major contributors. The way they cook all these fries, with overheated grease, is very bad. - Igor. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 23:10:31 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:10:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Corelation Message-ID: <199701260710.XAA10352@toad.com> My database seems to indicate a direct co-relation between the number of postings criticizing moderation and the number of UCE/Spam postings showing up on the list. i.e. When there are a number of postings critizizing Sandy's moderation, then the diversionary UCE/Spam postings increase dramatically. Has anyone actually 'seen' John Gilmore, lately? Since there have been a number of postings indicating that the writer 'used to respect' Gilmore, I am wondering if perhaps this moderation experiment is not actually an attempt by someone to discredit him. Perhaps he is being held hostage somewhere, while the more nefarious elements among us are trying to besmirch his good name by using it to promote willy-nilly censorship and class-elitism. Toto From shamrock at netcom.com Sat Jan 25 23:10:35 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:10:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Scandinavian Goverments provide PGP to postal customers... Message-ID: <199701260710.XAA10360@toad.com> At 09:50 PM 1/25/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >>Interesting piece of trivia: I recently talked with a fellow from Intel. They are looking to purchase keyboards with smartcard readers built in. They hope to get them at $30/piece from suppliers in Asia. The lot size? 10 million. > > >I suppose this is good news. I just hope they implement a system, like >Chaum's low-knowledge/zero-knowledge systems, which make it difficult or >impossible for snoops or tampered hardware to leak useful information. I understand that Intel's main problem at this time seem to be to find a keyboard manufacturer that understands that for the device to be effective, the CPU should not be involved in its operation. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From sandfort at crl.com Sat Jan 25 23:10:42 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:10:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Corelation In-Reply-To: <32EB0402.B87@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > Has anyone actually 'seen' John Gilmore, lately? Since there > have been a number of postings indicating that the writer > 'used to respect' Gilmore, I am wondering if perhaps this > moderation experiment is not actually an attempt by someone > to discredit him. Well I saw John last night at the C2Net party, but I guess that's not much reassurance. :-) S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From dthorn at gte.net Sat Jan 25 23:10:51 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:10:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260710.XAA10386@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Remember too those ads for male sexual lubricants - you cannot use > > a condom with those lubricants. Safe sex, I don't think so. > That does not come close to a theory that would explain HIV away. The virus I believe is best explained by the numerous articles that were published in the 1970's on "gene splicing", and the fact that we now have two certified (official) government requests on paper that call for the development of an agent precisely like HIV, which were in fact funded. One was requested in 1979 (I think) by someone representing the Ft. Detrick folks ($10 million), and the other request was formally made by the World Health Organization. Why would the WHO want to develop a nasty bug like HIV? Use your imagination. Does the virus actually cause the immune collapse? That's still controversial, from what I hear. Try to find some of the material by Jakob Segal, who is heavily suppressed in the USA. Also check out Jon Rappaport (who also did some excellent on-the-spot interviews in OKC after the bombing), also Dr. Robert Strecker, whose brother was murdered trying to investigate the political threads of the origins of AIDS/HIV. > > In October 1959, after lapsing into a coma from a massive sinus > > infection, I was given "a million units of penicillin" in the > > children's hospital when first admitted. I recovered OK after > > two weeks, so I'm certainly not opposed to antibiotics for those > > who really need them. OTOH, our U.S. economy today is antibiotic- > > and-hormone crazy, injecting cows, pigs, and chickens to name a few > > animals, all in the hopes of raising production. So why is the rate > > of cancer going up so high? It seems nearly everyone I know is > > getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the > > videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. > > One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". > > As far as I understand, 1) no one really understands why cancer rates > are up so much and 2) since people live longer, they are more likely do > have cancer. True if all other things are equal. Try subtracting out some of the cancer factors, and perhaps they'd die of something else. > What you said is one of the hypotheses. I personally feel that > environment and bad greasy food are other major contributors. The > way they cook all these fries, with overheated grease, is very bad. Try an interesting experiment. Get an ordinary hamburger at McDonald's. Take the "meat" out of the bun and break it in half, then hold the broken edge up to your nose. It helps to have good sense of smell, but you'll probably get the picture anyway. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 23:10:54 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:10:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular phone triangulation Message-ID: <199701260710.XAA10387@toad.com> Mark M. wrote: > I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and > have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There > would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to > triangulate every call. > The primary motivation for this is almost certainly > "location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. Replace the words 'drug dealers' with the words 'everyone', and I think this becomes not only a correct statement, but a very revealing one. It doesn't matter whether the subject is crypto, cell phones, or any communications item or issue, the 'answer' to the proclaimed 'problem', according to the government, is to increase the government's ability to monitor every citizen, everywhere, at any time. Our prisons are overflowing with drug dealers and drug users who were put there by quite ordinary means which didn't involve violating or discarding the rights of the ordinary citizen. Yet we keep hearing cries from the government for the desperate need to infringe on the citizen's right to freedom and privacy, again and again, in order to jail the guys who were supposed to be jailed by the 'last' infringement on the average citizen (and the one before that). So far, as a result of the plethora of laws passed to enable law enforcement agencies to 'catch drug dealers', I have seen only a few minor criminals who are claimed to have been brought to justice as a result of these laws, while seeing documentation of hundreds and thousands of ordinary citizens being harassed and having their human rights violated by these same laws. And still, we have people like Mark, who seem relatively intelligent and informed but who still echo the party-line of Big Brother when He proclaims that the average citizen must be subjected to new and better ways to monitor the movements and activities of His citizens in order to 'protect' them from 'drug dealers'. I am certain that the issues (and the debates about them) will be the same as today, when the dawn finally comes where we hear the announcement about the plans for identity-chip body-implants. I am sure that the government will tell us that our privacy and rights will be protected by the Key Escrow encryption in the identity-chip which will only be compromised for the purpose of catching 'drug dealers' and other 'scum'. I am sure that the statement above will be pooh-paah'd by many as an example of reactionary-paranoid thinking, but the same could be said for all of the rights and privacy-infringing realities that we currently live under. (Like having to provide samples of bodily fluids to keep your job as a janitor--in case you've been dipping into the coke stash of the CEO, who does 'not' have to piss in a jar.) Five years from now, you may well be wearing an identity-anklet at work (to combat employee-theft, etc.) and still laughing at my ludicrous example of body-implant identity-chips. ("It's not like they make us wear them at home, they are just for protecting us from unfair firing by our employer.") Ten years from now, you may be wearing your identity-anklet at home, and still laughing about the idiot who predicted body-implant identity-chips. ("It's no trouble wearing it at home, especially if it helps catch those damn 'drug dealers'. They are the only ones who leave their house during the curfew hours, anyway.") A couple years after that, you will welcome the government announcement that they have found a solution to the 'problem' of having to wear the identity-anklet all of the time--the new, improved, identity-chip solution--the body-implant ID-chip. Naturally, you will pooh-paah the naysayers who claim that the body-implant chip will eventually have the capacity to read your mind. ("The guy saying that is the same idiot who predicted that we would all be wearing body-implant identity-chips... "Well, OK, that's a bad example, but...") You can fight the increasing hi-tech machinations of Big Brother to control our actions, movements, and our thoughts, but it will cost an increasing amount of time and effort to do so. Not to mention larger and larger amounts of money. But, maybe if you became a 'drug dealer'... Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 23:45:34 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:45:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701260509.XAA01076@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32EB23B4.67E8@sk.sympatico.ca> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. Both male homosexuals and IV drug-users have always suffered from an inordinate amount of infections, etc., because they are engaging in physical behavior that Mother Nature had not anticipated, since the behavior fulfills more of a psychological need than a physical one. Perhaps Mother Nature is homophobic and anti-drug, but, at any rate, she did not design the butt-hole to allow virus-free insertion of outside objects, nor blood-veins to be pierced regularly in order to insert condensed chemical combinations. As a result, those who engage in these behaviors have always had to deal with the physical effects which result from Nature's 'error'. IV drug users have always had high incidences of jaundice, etc., while male homosexuals have had to contend with various forms of venereal disease, etc. In both cases, they end up in a continuing cycle of antibiotic use. > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > has that been proven? There has been great concern raised among those in the medical profession regarding the end-effects of their wholesale prescribing of anitbiotics for colds, aches and pains, etc., leading to the development of new strains of virus which are immune to the older antibiotics. This leads to development of stronger (misused) antibiotics, which then leads to stronger strains of virus. There have been a number of studies which point to the fact that the human immune system is now caught in a battle between increasingly potent virus and antibiotics and is losing its capacity to fight its 'natural' enemies. Humans tend to base their 'judgements' on psychological critera. Thus someone who puts a quart of scotch in their system every day can turn around and call someone who is putting outside objects into their butt-hole a 'pervert' who is doing 'unnatural' things to their body. Personally, I prefer to kill two birds with one stone, so I put a quart of scotch up my butt-hole every day. Toto > - Igor. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 23:45:38 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:45:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701260531.XAA01225@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32EB25C5.6FB7@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Dale's hypothesis seems at odds with the linkage of aids and blood > > transfusion and transmission through needles. > > Nurses who contract aids through contaminated needles do not, > > normally, have devastated immune systems. > It seems to me that "proof" of someone acquiring AIDS from one stab > with a contaminated needle is a very nebulous thing. As far as nurses > go, the contact I've had with many of them tells me they are also > (on average) drug users extraordinaire. Nurses have free access to all types of antibiotics and high-inducing drugs, and a good many of them are regular users of both. Hospitals are notoriously bad places for healthy people to go, as many go in with little diseases and come out with big diseases (for which they are often re-hospitalized). Also, outward appearances rarely have a whole lot to do with indications of a superior auto-immune system. Plants have been bred to 'look pretty' for the consumer, so we now have unblemished food stuffs which require huge applications of poisonous chemicals in order to survive, because they have lost their natural ability to defend themselves against even ordinary plant pests and diseases. Toto From attila at primenet.com Sat Jan 25 23:49:50 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:49:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701260712.XAA10405@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701260749.AAA25243@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701260712.XAA10405 at toad.com>, on 01/25/97 at 11:03 PM, Toto said: + I fail to see how any supposedly intelligent members of the +CypherPunks list can possibly be content to fall for the line, + "Bend over, baby. I'm only going to moderate you 'a little bit'." attila sez: no matter if one perceives the "need" for a moderator or not, I find it hard to accept --even to eliminate the grossly obscene attacks by a few members against other members. I wonder if we need a 'childish' excluder? I question how Sandy can accept the job as moderator, passing judgement on 100-300 messages per day. just trimming spam is questionable: what is spam? flames: what draws the line at flames: personal attacks? profanity? politically [in]correct speach? historical revisionism? and, I think cypherpunks is setting an atrocious example of our own narrow mindedness (creditable or not) when we sanction any filtering of what we see --is this not **exactly** what we accuse the controlled media of determining what is "fit to print?" unfortunately, we are demonstrating to our critics that a) net anarchy does not work b) cyberlibertarianism breeds anarchy c) we're loose cannons on the deck d) we are not civilized enough to warrant respect and this can go on and on and on... But, the minute we, as a group, start to tell other members of the group to 'clean up your act' we are violating the principal "ethic" which we claim: freedom. sure, we can claim we are entitled to total libertarianism, or anarchy; but there is a responsibility to create a workable, cooperative social order, if for no other reason than protecting us in the wilderness, or feeding us, or clothing us. anyone here wish to return to survivalist modes of a head of household 200 years ago? we can have pure communism, the LDS Brotherhood, the Shaker house, or even true anarchy where you may do anything you wish as long as it does not infringe on the rights or property of another. --catch22: just how do set the laws on limits, and how do you enforce the limits if you have voted to dissolve all 'government' and 'police?' when basic human ambition to better oneself is literally killed... good luck, Sandy; make sure you pull a sanity check everyday when you start and finish the onerous task! == "you may not be next, you may not be last, but you are too late to have been first. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMusMbr04kQrCC2kFAQFXYgP/aK2vEs0skEaYNbwWiDXS+GcYKIRJ52/c y87akjVm/d1U+LDheHN0cvFxHiMCNRCIJKKa7hHNr3AYDXzJtehthP/pi+L5NPTD kYY58tUFy0p/t0hN4vze4i0wnxkymAVCnIVNkfGyAGwXytCxCmPUCHcV5ZzlYcI+ jrXv2nuBsos= =ZTbB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From sandfort at crl11.crl.com Sat Jan 25 23:55:42 1997 From: sandfort at crl11.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:55:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Corelation Message-ID: <199701260755.XAA11016@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > Has anyone actually 'seen' John Gilmore, lately? Since there > have been a number of postings indicating that the writer > 'used to respect' Gilmore, I am wondering if perhaps this > moderation experiment is not actually an attempt by someone > to discredit him. Well I saw John last night at the C2Net party, but I guess that's not much reassurance. :-) S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sat Jan 25 23:57:23 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 23:57:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260757.XAA11026@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. Both male homosexuals and IV drug-users have always suffered from an inordinate amount of infections, etc., because they are engaging in physical behavior that Mother Nature had not anticipated, since the behavior fulfills more of a psychological need than a physical one. Perhaps Mother Nature is homophobic and anti-drug, but, at any rate, she did not design the butt-hole to allow virus-free insertion of outside objects, nor blood-veins to be pierced regularly in order to insert condensed chemical combinations. As a result, those who engage in these behaviors have always had to deal with the physical effects which result from Nature's 'error'. IV drug users have always had high incidences of jaundice, etc., while male homosexuals have had to contend with various forms of venereal disease, etc. In both cases, they end up in a continuing cycle of antibiotic use. > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > has that been proven? There has been great concern raised among those in the medical profession regarding the end-effects of their wholesale prescribing of anitbiotics for colds, aches and pains, etc., leading to the development of new strains of virus which are immune to the older antibiotics. This leads to development of stronger (misused) antibiotics, which then leads to stronger strains of virus. There have been a number of studies which point to the fact that the human immune system is now caught in a battle between increasingly potent virus and antibiotics and is losing its capacity to fight its 'natural' enemies. Humans tend to base their 'judgements' on psychological critera. Thus someone who puts a quart of scotch in their system every day can turn around and call someone who is putting outside objects into their butt-hole a 'pervert' who is doing 'unnatural' things to their body. Personally, I prefer to kill two birds with one stone, so I put a quart of scotch up my butt-hole every day. Toto > - Igor. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 00:00:14 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 00:00:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Public Key Partners In-Reply-To: <199701251755.JAA29412@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970125231918.005b6c30@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 12:50 PM 1/25/97 -0500, DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: >Do you know of a way I can contact Public Key Partners by e-mail or phone? >Thanks. Time travel? (PKP dissolved when the partners sued each other. There's a Cylink ex-partner, and an RSA ex-partner, available at www.*.com ) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 00:01:16 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 00:01:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ultimate Flames List In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EB2B89.2B4B@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. It has been suggested that disease is merely an attempt by Nature to 'moderate' the species. One could make a strong case for Nature merely 'sorting' individuals into physical lists, one of which is her own 'flames' list. It remains to be seen whether Nature also plans on dropping the 'flames' list after her moderation experiment is over. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 00:10:33 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 00:10:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701260810.AAA11433@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Dale's hypothesis seems at odds with the linkage of aids and blood > > transfusion and transmission through needles. > > Nurses who contract aids through contaminated needles do not, > > normally, have devastated immune systems. > It seems to me that "proof" of someone acquiring AIDS from one stab > with a contaminated needle is a very nebulous thing. As far as nurses > go, the contact I've had with many of them tells me they are also > (on average) drug users extraordinaire. Nurses have free access to all types of antibiotics and high-inducing drugs, and a good many of them are regular users of both. Hospitals are notoriously bad places for healthy people to go, as many go in with little diseases and come out with big diseases (for which they are often re-hospitalized). Also, outward appearances rarely have a whole lot to do with indications of a superior auto-immune system. Plants have been bred to 'look pretty' for the consumer, so we now have unblemished food stuffs which require huge applications of poisonous chemicals in order to survive, because they have lost their natural ability to defend themselves against even ordinary plant pests and diseases. Toto From attila at primenet.com Sun Jan 26 00:10:37 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 00:10:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701260810.AAA11442@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701260712.XAA10405 at toad.com>, on 01/25/97 at 11:03 PM, Toto said: + I fail to see how any supposedly intelligent members of the +CypherPunks list can possibly be content to fall for the line, + "Bend over, baby. I'm only going to moderate you 'a little bit'." attila sez: no matter if one perceives the "need" for a moderator or not, I find it hard to accept --even to eliminate the grossly obscene attacks by a few members against other members. I wonder if we need a 'childish' excluder? I question how Sandy can accept the job as moderator, passing judgement on 100-300 messages per day. just trimming spam is questionable: what is spam? flames: what draws the line at flames: personal attacks? profanity? politically [in]correct speach? historical revisionism? and, I think cypherpunks is setting an atrocious example of our own narrow mindedness (creditable or not) when we sanction any filtering of what we see --is this not **exactly** what we accuse the controlled media of determining what is "fit to print?" unfortunately, we are demonstrating to our critics that a) net anarchy does not work b) cyberlibertarianism breeds anarchy c) we're loose cannons on the deck d) we are not civilized enough to warrant respect and this can go on and on and on... But, the minute we, as a group, start to tell other members of the group to 'clean up your act' we are violating the principal "ethic" which we claim: freedom. sure, we can claim we are entitled to total libertarianism, or anarchy; but there is a responsibility to create a workable, cooperative social order, if for no other reason than protecting us in the wilderness, or feeding us, or clothing us. anyone here wish to return to survivalist modes of a head of household 200 years ago? we can have pure communism, the LDS Brotherhood, the Shaker house, or even true anarchy where you may do anything you wish as long as it does not infringe on the rights or property of another. --catch22: just how do set the laws on limits, and how do you enforce the limits if you have voted to dissolve all 'government' and 'police?' when basic human ambition to better oneself is literally killed... good luck, Sandy; make sure you pull a sanity check everyday when you start and finish the onerous task! == "you may not be next, you may not be last, but you are too late to have been first. --attila -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMusMbr04kQrCC2kFAQFXYgP/aK2vEs0skEaYNbwWiDXS+GcYKIRJ52/c y87akjVm/d1U+LDheHN0cvFxHiMCNRCIJKKa7hHNr3AYDXzJtehthP/pi+L5NPTD kYY58tUFy0p/t0hN4vze4i0wnxkymAVCnIVNkfGyAGwXytCxCmPUCHcV5ZzlYcI+ jrXv2nuBsos= =ZTbB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 00:46:01 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 00:46:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701260749.AAA25243@infowest.com> Message-ID: <32EB3666.62F8@sk.sympatico.ca> Attila T. Hun wrote: > I question how Sandy can accept the job as moderator, passing > judgement on 100-300 messages per day. just trimming spam is > questionable: what is spam? flames: what draws the line at flames: It is whatever the moderator decides it is, depending upon h/is/er intelligence, understanding, mood, command of language, sobriety, etc., etc., etc. > and, I think cypherpunks is setting an atrocious example of our > own narrow mindedness (creditable or not) when we sanction any > filtering of what we see --is this not **exactly** what we accuse > the controlled media of determining what is "fit to print?" I am certain that there are members of the controlled media who are ROTL at the CypherPunks following in their footsteps, after having belittled the media for years for their sheep-mentality. > unfortunately, we are demonstrating to our critics that > a) net anarchy does not work > b) cyberlibertarianism breeds anarchy > c) we're loose cannons on the deck > d) we are not civilized enough to warrant respect We are also demonstrating that all of the CypherPunk rhetoric about cryptography and freedom and... was just a lot of 'smoke' being blown by a bunch of pretenders who folded like a busted flush when they were 'told' that the man who owns the Machine will now subject them to the whims of whatever moderation he sees fit to impose on the list. Cryptography is about privacy. Apparently, however, the New List Order is of the opinion the Privacy Without Freedom is an obtainable goal. > --catch22: just how do set the laws on limits, and how do you > enforce the limits if you have voted to dissolve all 'government' > and 'police?' It doesn't matter if the 'owner' of the list/Machine decides that s/he is now the government, with the power and/or right to make all decisions concerning the list. > good luck, Sandy; make sure you pull a sanity check everyday > when you start and finish the onerous task! I think that anyone who thinks that moderation is, or could ever be, anything other than a dance into the arms of the establishment, is already crazy. For the record, I don't think that either John or Sandy is crazy. I think that they have their own pre-established goals which others on the cypherpunks list are not privy to. Of course, this is my personal opinion, and I could be wrong. On the other hand, I could be 'right' like I am about everything else. Toto From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 01:21:08 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 01:21:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [No Subject:] In-Reply-To: <199701251610.IAA28175@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126004030.0062f040@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 09:13 AM 1/25/97 EST, Lou Zer wrote: >You missed the hole point. You read that BECAUSE their was no header, if >it was ANARCHY you would have just deleted it. Not necessarily; I _am_ an anarchist, after all. The rest of the header is enough of a potential deterrent, anyway. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 01:25:16 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 01:25:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <01BC0B28.3F64CFA0@king1-28.cnw.com> Toto and Jim Choate were having a little disagreement about the rights of nations to maintain the boundaries of ignorance around their "citizenry", and Jim said that no one outside a nation's boundaries should feel moved to interfere with the program: > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > particular view on them. ............................................................ Normally, I would agree that people who choose to live within a certain locale and choose the kind of government that they will live with and the kind of policies that they will accept as impositions upon their lives, should be allowed to "enjoy the fruits of their labors". But on further examination of the situation in 'foreign' countries, these things must be realized: . Individuals do not agree with each other 100% . Individuals living within the boundaries of a nation will not agree with each other 100% about the kind of government they should have . Many of the individuals living within the boundaries of *any* nation do not have 100% control over which policies, or the quality of them, they will have to live under . It is not uncommon for "leaders" of nations to take advantage of their position to benefit more from the contributions of their citizenry than vice versa (the citizenry benefitting from their leadership) . It is not uncommon for there to be proportionately more people in favor of living in a state of dependence than not; and it is not uncommon for those who favor dependence to favor proposals which seem to put them on the receiving end of "benefits" (versus being contributors); and it is not uncommon for these "benefits" to be derived at the expense of such virtues as freedom and liberty . Many individuals reside within a nation not because they favor its po litics, but because they feel more comfortable among their own kind than with strangers elsewhere - for example, Chinese who have lived in China all their lives (and whose ancestral roots are there) will wish to stay there and do what they can within the boundaries of that nation, rather than for instance moving to Canada, when the going gets rough. Given these things, nevertheless it is true that the internet , among other events in our "modern" world, is opening up avenues towards advantages and benefits hitherto difficult to comeby. As many of you are aware, many people are beginning to identify with a global network of friends and co-workers according to their particular (or peculiar) interests, rather than with the "Old Order". It is becoming moot what nationality or what government or what company one works for - the loyalties of the past are being tested and re-configured in the minds of those who now do business and communicate and share things and develop friendships, acquaintances, and empathies, on the net. So to speak of "having a say" on how Singapore or China or any other nation-state runs "our web" or vice versa "us" having a say on how they run "their web" is becoming irrelevant. Economics will be determining how the web is run, and by whom. The identity of those who use it will be not "those who are citizens of Singapore", but: "my friend who lives in Singapore and is having a hard time accessing a file that I wanted him/her to have". Affiliations will be seen differently by those who connect in cyberspace, and if certain of one's cyberspace friends are having problems - if, say, a Hitler were to suddenly rise up in their midst - then the netizens could send their emergency alert out to anyone and everyone on the net about a problem brewing which perhaps someone could help them deal with, according to their ability to do so. It is true that individuals still live within the physical boundaries of "nations" which have formed in the past, and they still hold the concepts of these boundaries in their minds and they still identify closely with these, and they still vote problems upon themselves. But it is becoming an anachronism, and it is becoming inaccurate to speak of "what Singaporians want for the internet". This phrase would describe many of those who live in Singapore, but not all of them. It is more accurate to speak of what "individuals who use the internet" want, of what "individuals who want to communicate" want, of what "individuals who want to connect with others" want. The identifications of self as a citizen who must be identified with the vote of a majority, and consequently suffer the perception of oneself as someone who "voted to accept restrictions of the net, therefore should not be helped against it", is becoming irrelevant. When a distress call goes out from someone anywhere on the planet, the assistance and relief may come from anyone anywhere who chooses to rally others and provide assistance. It is not the traditional "we" against "them", and it is not the "citizens of the US" helping those who "voted themselves a Hitler into power" or "voted themselves into restrictions against free speech". It is "those of us who appreciate the liberty in communications technology" against "those who would take it away". .. Blanc From gt at kdn0.attnet.or.jp Sun Jan 26 01:25:45 1997 From: gt at kdn0.attnet.or.jp (Gemini Thunder) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 01:25:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: DataETRsch Message-ID: <32ed219a.200245212@kdn0.attnet.or.jp> Apparently intimidated by the response from the Cypherpunks list, DataETRsch has begun spamming mailing lists with ads for their UDCM/IMDMP Windows DLL. It reared its ugly head in linux-c-programming at vger.rutgers.edu today. From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 02:15:20 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 02:15:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <01BC0B2F.588DFCC0@king1-04.cnw.com> >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >>>Jim Choate wrote: >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >>>>>>>irrelevant at nowhere.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 02:15:24 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 02:15:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <01BC0B2F.5CF108C0@king1-04.cnw.com> From: Toto Obese-rvation? I hope you are not assuming that I am obese, just because I am responding to a post originating from 'fatmans.demon.co.uk.' I would hate to become relegated to the upcoming cypherpunks-fatpeople list because of assumptions of this nature. ................................................. Well, Toto, if you don't like this obeservation, you can always unsudribe from "unmoderated" and subcrive to "expurgated". There's also a rumor about a new "exfoliated" list for Snakes of Medusa starting up.... (I swear, I Toto is a tentacle of TCM) .. Blanc From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 02:24:10 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 02:24:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... In-Reply-To: <199701260110.RAA06000@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126020648.0063ab98@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 07:54 PM 1/25/97 -0500, Mark M. wrote: >> Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls >> [...] >I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and >have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. Pretty expensive - GPS receivers currently cost ~$200, which is more than the average cell phone, and needs a whole separate set of radio-receiver hardware, so you'd about double the size of your phone. On the other hand, the cell sites already know which you're close to, and can easily enough track when you've made transitions between cells. So they can get a good start on location by processing information that the phone companies need to have anyway. Would they save any of this for later? Of course not :-) >"location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. And everybody else.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 02:33:41 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 02:33:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: US Info Supremacy Message-ID: <01BC0B31.E81ABA20@king1-17.cnw.com> From: John Young Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons. ........................................ He must be on vacation; he hasn't posted in quite a while. .. Blanc From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 02:33:46 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 02:33:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <01BC0B31.EC43CA60@king1-17.cnw.com> From: Toto Obese-rvation? I hope you are not assuming that I am obese, just because I am responding to a post originating from 'fatmans.demon.co.uk.' I would hate to become relegated to the upcoming cypherpunks-fatpeople list because of assumptions of this nature. ................................................. Well, Toto, if you don't like this obeservation, you can always unsudribe from "unmoderated" and subcrive to "expurgated". (There's also a rumor about a new "exfoliated" list for Snakes of Medusa starting up....) .. Blanc From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Sun Jan 26 02:39:13 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 02:39:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <854274612.916192.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > > My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks > > > on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous > > > remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames > > > mailing list. > > > > I don`t think I read the article (even though I subscribe to the > > unmoderated list), can you forward me a copy. > > As I understand it though, from other comentaries, it was junked > > because it was in response to a message by Dimitri who, given that it > > is Sandy that is moderating the list, is no doubt filtered by > > different criteria than anyone else on the list, in my opinion a > > censorous and fascist restraint as Dimitri has recently been posting > > more crypto relevant material, besides which whatever the content of > > his posts they should be open to review before a decision is made on > > if they are to be junked or not. > > Has Paul reversed his previous pro-censorship stand and decided to > learn something about crypto from people who actually know some? There is no change of stance needed, I happen to believe you are knowledgable about cryptography and sometimes post worthwhile commentary and information, however, you also post a lot of dreck and flammable material which means I respond in kind. That does not mean I believe you, or anyone else, should be censored. > > > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > > > criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. > > > > Yes Sandy, please enlighten us, what is the criterion you use to > > moderate the list if not crypto-relevancy. I suspect an element of > > self preservation and protection of the list fuhrer and diktat maker > > John Gilmore (who, until the disgraceful incident with Dimitri > > commanded some respect on this list). > > I used to respect Gilmore until this series of incidents (unsubscribing > me, turning list moderated). Now I only have disdain for him. I agree entirely, Gilmore was a respected man (despite the EFF being a corporate whore) who threw any respect and admiration others had for him away. > > > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > > > the current readership. > > > > I don`t think this is the point, John Gilmore is free to appoint > > whoever he wants to moderate his list, he is free to censor all > > messages which criticise him and his censorship, however, subscribers > > to the list should be told they are being censored on these grounds > > and not on some facade of "crypto relevancy" or another thin veil > > drawn weakly over content based censorship to protect a certain class > > of list members. > > Quite a few people have expressed interest in re-creating an unmoderated > cypherpunks list at another site if Gilmore decided to stick to his > "moderation experiment". I notice and appreciate the quotes around "moderation experiment", this is, without doubt, a permenant measure to silence members of the list who dare to offer criticism of anyone an element of {x: x a friend or co-censor of John Gilmore} I do not have the resources to run such an unmoderated list but I hope someone on this list does and is good enough to start such a list, cypherpunks is a shell of what it once was. Also, please note this message will be junked onto cypherpunks-flames even though it contains no flames or flame bait because it dares to criticise the censorship of the list (once again Sandy, I give you an opportunity to prove me wrong). Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From gbroiles at netbox.com Sun Jan 26 02:55:38 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 02:55:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Toto's database Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970126025513.006ba14c@ricochet.net> Toto writes: >My database seems to indicate a direct co-relation between the >number of postings criticizing moderation and the number of >UCE/Spam postings showing up on the list. An interesting assertion. Is your database available for others to draw their own conclusions from? I'd appreciate seeing at least a first-level abstraction of the data, e.g., the number of messages posted in opposition to moderation and the number of "spam" messages posted, listed by date. The possibility that other factors caused the correlation you mention suggests that other categorizations (e.g., total # of messages, # of messages which are not spam nor related to moderation, and # of pro-moderation messages) would also be useful, although I notice you do not mention those statistics. Of course, correlation alone doesn't tell us much. If it really exists, it suggests that the two phenomena observed are related in some way, but it doesn't tell us the nature or the cause of the relationship. (All serial killers drink water; but are all water-drinkers serial killers? Does drinking water cause a person to become a serial killer?) One explanation would be the link you suggested, that a moderation proponent is sending (or causing to be sent) the spams as a way to make moderation seem more attractive, or to detract attention from the anti-moderation arguments. (If that really worked - e.g., if spam had the effect of reducing the effectiveness of certain arguments, or of being harmfully "diversionary" - wouldn't that suggest that moderation was, in fact, necessary or at least useful? Hmm.) Another explanation would be that a moderation opponent is sending the spams as a way to punish the proponents of moderation. It's further conceivable that you don't have a big enough data set to draw meaningful conclusions from. The moderation decision, implementation, and associated arguing have taken place within three weeks (John Gilmore's original announcement was sent Sunday 1/5/97); it's hard to see how you're going to be able to distinguish signal from noise in such a small data set. I think this is especially true given the relatively inexact nature of the "spam" weapon; as far as I can tell, apart from Dmitri's ASCII art/cocksucker messages, the spams we've received have been from real live spammers (not pissed-off listmembers) who harvested the "cypherpunks at toad.com" address from messages sent to Usenet as spam bait. Inherent in the "spam bait" attack is a lack of precise control over when messages will be sent, or how many will be sent; so I'm curious about the reliability of a correlation you've found between the actions of distributed third parties (who are pursuing their own, cypherpunk-ignorant, goals) and messages sent to the list. Yet another explanation might identify external factors (like the recent storms in the American midwest) which caused people to send more messages independent of their ideology or content. My ISP, io.com, recorded much heavier mail flow recently (to the point that it created problems for delivery) during the storm; speculation is that people were stuck at home for several days and turned to the Net to amuse themselves. Such an event might cause otherwise independent-minded groups (spammers and moderation opponents) to act in similar ways, like sending more messages than usual. Of course, one would expect to see a rise in all message traffic, were this the case. Perhaps you'll be good enough to make your database available so that we may each draw our own conclusions. I'm looking forward to hearing more about how you derived this correlation. (If you have trouble finding a server from which to make the data available, just say so; if nobody else has a handy server, I'll add it to my web page.) >Has anyone actually 'seen' John Gilmore, lately? He was at C2Net's party last Friday night (1/24), being interviewed by some folks from a Japanese TV program. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 03:42:14 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 03:42:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701221210.EAA23236@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126032853.00649120@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 12:11 AM 1/22/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >> Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think >> this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? > >'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to >stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run >our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - it's made up of the activies and property of many different people. If some of those people don't like what other people are saying, or reading, they've got no right to limit it, just because they've got enough guns to call themselves "the government". If they don't like something, they don't have to read it, or they can send out their own counter-propaganda. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From haystack at holy.cow.net Sun Jan 26 05:18:31 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 05:18:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701261300.IAA02540@holy.cow.net> Timmy May the self-admitted child molester possesses a rudimentary dick less than one inch long, half the size of his mother's clitoris, that barely makes a fistful. Thereby hangs the root of this Jew-hating sissy's sick fixation on little boys and Usenet forgeries. /\ /\ + \______/ + / . . \ < / > \ \--/ / ------ From aga at dhp.com Sun Jan 26 06:15:53 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 06:15:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Get Set for War/ American Dissident Voices In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, J Durbin wrote: > Aga wrote: > > >You keep ALL of your replies to usenet, or ELSE! > > Note recent, hypocritical, unsolicited email reply to a Usenet article > from aga at dhp.com: > That was not an adversarial reply. It is the *adversarial* e-mail and/or complaints which are the prohibited and deemed legal "harassment," since the party "KNOWS" that it is unwanted. It is the "intent" that counts > > Received: from proxy3.ba.best.com (root at proxy3.ba.best.com > [206.184.139.14]) by shellx.best.com (8.8.4/8.8.3) with ESMTP id > GAA25960 for ; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 06:39:17 -0800 > (PST) > Received: from dhp.com (dhp.com [199.245.105.1]) by proxy3.ba.best.com > (8.8.4/8.8.3) with ESMTP id GAA04244 for ; Sat, > 18 Jan 1997 06:38:53 -0800 (PST) > Received: from dhp.com (dhp.com [199.245.105.1]) by dhp.com > (8.8.4/8.6.12) with SMTP id JAA05322; Sat, 18 Jan 1997 09:38:46 -0500 > Newsgroups: ne.internet.services,alt.fan.speedbump,alt.god.grubor > Date: Sat, 18 Jan 1997 09:38:43 -0500 (EST) > From: aga > To: freedom-knights at jetcafe.org > cc: "Dr. Grubor" , J Durbin > Subject: Re: [Fwd: Re: Victory Party] > In-Reply-To: <32E0D65F.7442 at earthlink.net> > Message-ID: > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > > Hey you fucker; you pay my expenses and I will come. > You get a one hour lecture and one hour of questions and > answers afterward. Everybody gets frisked for guns at the door, > since we do not trust some of those cypherpunks. > > -- > jason durbin > slothrop at poisson.com > stop reading here <--- > > So, that was not an "adversarial" response, and therefore it was permitted. aga administrator UseNet Freedom Council From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 07:40:36 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:40:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Public Key Partners Message-ID: <199701261540.HAA17919@toad.com> At 12:50 PM 1/25/97 -0500, DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: >Do you know of a way I can contact Public Key Partners by e-mail or phone? >Thanks. Time travel? (PKP dissolved when the partners sued each other. There's a Cylink ex-partner, and an RSA ex-partner, available at www.*.com ) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 07:40:39 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:40:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Ultimate Flames List Message-ID: <199701261540.HAA17920@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. It has been suggested that disease is merely an attempt by Nature to 'moderate' the species. One could make a strong case for Nature merely 'sorting' individuals into physical lists, one of which is her own 'flames' list. It remains to be seen whether Nature also plans on dropping the 'flames' list after her moderation experiment is over. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 07:40:40 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:40:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701261540.HAA17921@toad.com> Attila T. Hun wrote: > I question how Sandy can accept the job as moderator, passing > judgement on 100-300 messages per day. just trimming spam is > questionable: what is spam? flames: what draws the line at flames: It is whatever the moderator decides it is, depending upon h/is/er intelligence, understanding, mood, command of language, sobriety, etc., etc., etc. > and, I think cypherpunks is setting an atrocious example of our > own narrow mindedness (creditable or not) when we sanction any > filtering of what we see --is this not **exactly** what we accuse > the controlled media of determining what is "fit to print?" I am certain that there are members of the controlled media who are ROTL at the CypherPunks following in their footsteps, after having belittled the media for years for their sheep-mentality. > unfortunately, we are demonstrating to our critics that > a) net anarchy does not work > b) cyberlibertarianism breeds anarchy > c) we're loose cannons on the deck > d) we are not civilized enough to warrant respect We are also demonstrating that all of the CypherPunk rhetoric about cryptography and freedom and... was just a lot of 'smoke' being blown by a bunch of pretenders who folded like a busted flush when they were 'told' that the man who owns the Machine will now subject them to the whims of whatever moderation he sees fit to impose on the list. Cryptography is about privacy. Apparently, however, the New List Order is of the opinion the Privacy Without Freedom is an obtainable goal. > --catch22: just how do set the laws on limits, and how do you > enforce the limits if you have voted to dissolve all 'government' > and 'police?' It doesn't matter if the 'owner' of the list/Machine decides that s/he is now the government, with the power and/or right to make all decisions concerning the list. > good luck, Sandy; make sure you pull a sanity check everyday > when you start and finish the onerous task! I think that anyone who thinks that moderation is, or could ever be, anything other than a dance into the arms of the establishment, is already crazy. For the record, I don't think that either John or Sandy is crazy. I think that they have their own pre-established goals which others on the cypherpunks list are not privy to. Of course, this is my personal opinion, and I could be wrong. On the other hand, I could be 'right' like I am about everything else. Toto From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 07:41:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Corelation Message-ID: <94851D48w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Sandy Sandfort writes: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, > > On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > > > Has anyone actually 'seen' John Gilmore, lately? Since there > > have been a number of postings indicating that the writer > > 'used to respect' Gilmore, I am wondering if perhaps this > > moderation experiment is not actually an attempt by someone > > to discredit him. > > Well I saw John last night at the C2Net party, but I guess that's > not much reassurance. :-) Let me rephrase Toto's question: has anyone with some credibility left seen Gilmore lately? (I last saw Gilmore in September. I'm trying to remember if he looked like he lost weight. :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 07:41:14 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:41:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701260656.WAA10195@toad.com> Message-ID: Toto writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Toto writes: > > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > > It became rather glaringly obvious after moderation was announced > > > that class structure would be the defining feature of moderation. > > > Those who felt themselves to be in the 'upper class' made no > > > bones about it. > > > > That's a very insightful obeservation. > > Obese-rvation? I hope you are not assuming that I am obese, just > because I am responding to a post originating from > 'fatmans.demon.co.uk.' > I would hate to become relegated to the upcoming cypherpunks-fatpeople > list because of assumptions of this nature. It was obviously a typo - my apologies to Toto. (Interestingly, Herr Moderatorfuehrer has tossed my article Toto replied to into cypherpunks-flames, while posting Toto's response to the censored list.) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 07:42:27 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 07:42:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <01BC0B28.3F64CFA0@king1-28.cnw.com> Message-ID: blanc writes: (a bunch of sensible stuff) > . Many individuals reside within a nation not because they favor its po > litics, but because they feel more comfortable among their own kind than > with strangers elsewhere - for example, Chinese who have lived in China all > their lives (and whose ancestral roots are there) will wish to stay there > and do what they can within the boundaries of that nation, rather than for > instance moving to Canada, when the going gets rough. Also many "un-freer" societies restrict the ability to emigrate, and many "freer" society restrict the ability to immigrate. It's not so easy for someone living in Communist China to pick up his ass and go someplace else, like Taiwan. A large number of people got shot while trying to cross the Berlin Wall. Plus if they do get out, they may have difficulty going to countries like U.S. or Canada. (In case anyone missed it, the U.S. is much more selective about who it lets in as immigrants than it was earlier in the century.) > It is true that individuals still live within the physical boundaries of > "nations" which have formed in the past, and they still hold the concepts > of these boundaries in their minds and they still identify closely with > these, and they still vote problems upon themselves. But it is becoming > an anachronism, and it is becoming inaccurate to speak of "what > Singaporians want for the internet". This phrase would describe many of > those who live in Singapore, but not all of them. It is more accurate to > speak of what "individuals who use the internet" want, of what > "individuals who want to communicate" want, of what "individuals who want > to connect with others" want. > > The identifications of self as a citizen who must be identified with the > vote of a majority, and consequently suffer the perception of oneself as > someone who "voted to accept restrictions of the net, therefore should not > be helped against it", is becoming irrelevant. When a distress call goes > out from someone anywhere on the planet, the assistance and relief may come > from anyone anywhere who chooses to rally others and provide assistance. > > It is not the traditional "we" against "them", and it is not the "citizens > of the US" helping those who "voted themselves a Hitler into power" or > "voted themselves into restrictions against free speech". It is "those of > us who appreciate the liberty in communications technology" against "those > who would take it away". However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their civilians in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 08:02:47 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:02:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program Message-ID: <199701261600.KAA04355@manifold.algebra.com> In article <5cd7ki$52b at news.xs4all.nl> bernard at xs4all.nl Crypto wrote: Newsgroups: comp.security.misc * DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program * * DPT16 or DPT32 total encryption Windows program. * * Encrypt fast, Files, Dir, Floppys, e-mail, text or Messages .... * * Key up to 30 Kb, Hide your encrypted data's in a picture file. * Direct mail encryption, Visit the Data Privacy Tools home page. * * at; http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard Bernard, thanks for an interesting post. I am Cc-ing your message to Cypherpunks mailing list which is ostensibly dedicated to discussions of cryptography. As follows from info on your home page, you do use simple XOR to encrypt your data. It was not clear to me though, how do you generate the keys to encrypt the data. I am sure that many readers of cypherpunks mailing list will be interested, so please send a copy of your reply to cypherpunks at toad.com. igor From frissell at panix.com Sun Jan 26 08:32:46 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:32:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... In-Reply-To: <199701260655.WAA10130@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126113215.017ebcd8@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 09:27 PM 1/25/97 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: >>> Presented in a "this will help 911" context. Still disconcerting. >>> >>> [...] >>> Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls >>> have been given additional incentive with a Federal Communications >>> Commission order that all cell phone service companies have location >>> programs in place by the year 2001. >>> [...] >> > >Looks like this might create an opportunity for 'anonymous' cellular rentals. > >--Steve Anonymous cellular accounts have been available in NYC for a year or so. See any copy of the Post or the Daily News for the ads. A similar service just started in Mexico City according to the NYT. You call the company and order the phone for circa $249.00 C.O.D. This includes one hour of calls. Subsequent hours are purchased for $36. Not cheap but anonymous. No roaming either. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMuuHDIVO4r4sgSPhAQFKjwQAoYOpb6t/L3/ah6yN7bMnwlTXX34q7yLC ECW8R7QzZsvZoHd9LxwN38DrvHsCmyot+xWwF/Drixupen8ydJz9yXcmSpddeYM6 r8mmvQcA27YmNID6LF4iAh1Z7gqYu1iUyIaxEE6WhPN1cAEobJn9x3rFVV1dpouC Y88L4vFRo+I= =acJo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From adam at homeport.org Sun Jan 26 08:35:45 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:35:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970125155133.00683d28@192.100.81.136> Message-ID: <199701261631.LAA20392@homeport.org> Lucky Green wrote: | At 11:40 AM 1/25/97 -0500, Adam Shostack wrote: | > | >Paul Kocher announced that he has cracked it, and can recover data | >quickly. He is not publishing details of the break. | | Why? Probably to make money. Paul does do this for a living. Even if he hasn't cracked it, the ZIP protection mechanism is propreitary and exportable. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From gt at kdn0.attnet.or.jp Sun Jan 26 08:40:34 1997 From: gt at kdn0.attnet.or.jp (Gemini Thunder) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:40:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: DataETRsch Message-ID: <199701261640.IAA18369@toad.com> Apparently intimidated by the response from the Cypherpunks list, DataETRsch has begun spamming mailing lists with ads for their UDCM/IMDMP Windows DLL. It reared its ugly head in linux-c-programming at vger.rutgers.edu today. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 08:40:37 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:40:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: [No Subject:] Message-ID: <199701261640.IAA18377@toad.com> At 09:13 AM 1/25/97 EST, Lou Zer wrote: >You missed the hole point. You read that BECAUSE their was no header, if >it was ANARCHY you would have just deleted it. Not necessarily; I _am_ an anarchist, after all. The rest of the header is enough of a potential deterrent, anyway. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From sandfort at crl.com Sun Jan 26 08:40:43 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:40:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <32EB3666.62F8@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > I think that anyone who thinks that moderation is, or could ever be, > anything other than a dance into the arms of the establishment, is > already crazy. Apparently, Toto does not know very much about John or me or our relationships with the "Establishment." It is who are using a intellectually dishonest smokescreen of "freedom of speech" in order to disrupt and hamper the work of Cypherpunks who are dancing into the arms of the "Establishment." > For the record, I don't think that either John or Sandy is crazy. > I think that they have their own pre-established goals which others > on the cypherpunks list are not privy to. I can't speak for John, but my goals have been stated too often and too completely for anyone not to know them. I want us all to have privacy. The Cypherpunks list was created to facilitate discussion--and ultimately action by those who were inclined and able to do something to further that goal via the use of cryptographic and other technologies. I believe that childish name-calling and personal attacks interferes with rational discourse and a spirit of common purpose and community. It is obvious to me that those who are waving the bloody flag of "censorship" are doing so for either of two reasons. The ones to whom I am the most sympathetic are those who simply do not have a clear and coherent understanding of rights in an anarchistic, volunteeristic society. The ones for whom I have no sympathy are those whose obvious goal is disruption of the Cypherpunks list and who are hiding behind a phoney interpretation of "free speech." I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves maintain. This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. If most list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot more than homesteading. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From frissell at panix.com Sun Jan 26 08:46:07 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:46:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126114551.0173b44c@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Anyone running Windows 95 who hasn't grabbed the beta of PGPmail 4.5 from http://www.pgp.com/ is crazy. It works seamlessly with Netscape 3.0 and Eudora Pro 3.0. The 30-day demo of Eudora Pro is at: http://www.eudora.com/prodemo/. It is easy to use. I just installed it and pointed it at my old pubring.pgp and secring.pgp files and went to work. All my messages have been signed since then and some have been encrypted. The installation program found my existing copies of Eudora and Netscape and installed the PGP add in without any fuss. My only problem was finding the controls for the add in which (in the case of Eudora) consist of buttons to encrypt, sign, bring up the program, insert a copy of your key, and actually modify the message. The controls only appear on the message create, and message read windows. Easy to use. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMuuKMYVO4r4sgSPhAQFfzAP+LkDjOecHxz0iEVVggLLABxAOE9tVyOLl AIkKlagFqK+lBboo7fETCZtSpmDHcNsJG6Et6BWO5aYf7Artw+jXj+734c+w4RWj zcj6+351LUqT60TmcukH02p2MT0sd8w1dAnhD8+o1E13G5h5N1CF/p6KQjmHOiQ6 9T1ehMax0jE= =E8Pu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 08:47:56 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:47:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701261712.LAA00406@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 03:28:53 -0800 > From: Bill Stewart > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > At 12:11 AM 1/22/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > >> Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > >> this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? > > > >'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > >stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > >our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > > Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of 'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. The net is a bunch of computers, running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody else is along for the ride. If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then once a box goes on the net it belongs to nobody/everybody. Clearly utter nonsense. If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't understand what is going on. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com ps I also support France's current attempt at forcing the Georgia university web site on French soil to use French. From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 08:55:36 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:55:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: US Info Supremacy Message-ID: <199701261655.IAA18539@toad.com> From: John Young Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons. ........................................ He must be on vacation; he hasn't posted in quite a while. .. Blanc From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 08:55:37 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:55:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701261655.IAA18541@toad.com> >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >>>Jim Choate wrote: >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >>>>>>>irrelevant at nowhere.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 08:55:40 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:55:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701261655.IAA18542@toad.com> From: Toto Obese-rvation? I hope you are not assuming that I am obese, just because I am responding to a post originating from 'fatmans.demon.co.uk.' I would hate to become relegated to the upcoming cypherpunks-fatpeople list because of assumptions of this nature. ................................................. Well, Toto, if you don't like this obeservation, you can always unsudribe from "unmoderated" and subcrive to "expurgated". There's also a rumor about a new "exfoliated" list for Snakes of Medusa starting up.... (I swear, I Toto is a tentacle of TCM) .. Blanc From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 08:55:44 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:55:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: <199701261655.IAA18550@toad.com> At 07:54 PM 1/25/97 -0500, Mark M. wrote: >> Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls >> [...] >I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and >have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. Pretty expensive - GPS receivers currently cost ~$200, which is more than the average cell phone, and needs a whole separate set of radio-receiver hardware, so you'd about double the size of your phone. On the other hand, the cell sites already know which you're close to, and can easily enough track when you've made transitions between cells. So they can get a good start on location by processing information that the phone companies need to have anyway. Would they save any of this for later? Of course not :-) >"location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. And everybody else.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From gbroiles at netbox.com Sun Jan 26 08:55:52 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:55:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Toto's database Message-ID: <199701261655.IAA18570@toad.com> Toto writes: >My database seems to indicate a direct co-relation between the >number of postings criticizing moderation and the number of >UCE/Spam postings showing up on the list. An interesting assertion. Is your database available for others to draw their own conclusions from? I'd appreciate seeing at least a first-level abstraction of the data, e.g., the number of messages posted in opposition to moderation and the number of "spam" messages posted, listed by date. The possibility that other factors caused the correlation you mention suggests that other categorizations (e.g., total # of messages, # of messages which are not spam nor related to moderation, and # of pro-moderation messages) would also be useful, although I notice you do not mention those statistics. Of course, correlation alone doesn't tell us much. If it really exists, it suggests that the two phenomena observed are related in some way, but it doesn't tell us the nature or the cause of the relationship. (All serial killers drink water; but are all water-drinkers serial killers? Does drinking water cause a person to become a serial killer?) One explanation would be the link you suggested, that a moderation proponent is sending (or causing to be sent) the spams as a way to make moderation seem more attractive, or to detract attention from the anti-moderation arguments. (If that really worked - e.g., if spam had the effect of reducing the effectiveness of certain arguments, or of being harmfully "diversionary" - wouldn't that suggest that moderation was, in fact, necessary or at least useful? Hmm.) Another explanation would be that a moderation opponent is sending the spams as a way to punish the proponents of moderation. It's further conceivable that you don't have a big enough data set to draw meaningful conclusions from. The moderation decision, implementation, and associated arguing have taken place within three weeks (John Gilmore's original announcement was sent Sunday 1/5/97); it's hard to see how you're going to be able to distinguish signal from noise in such a small data set. I think this is especially true given the relatively inexact nature of the "spam" weapon; as far as I can tell, apart from Dmitri's ASCII art/cocksucker messages, the spams we've received have been from real live spammers (not pissed-off listmembers) who harvested the "cypherpunks at toad.com" address from messages sent to Usenet as spam bait. Inherent in the "spam bait" attack is a lack of precise control over when messages will be sent, or how many will be sent; so I'm curious about the reliability of a correlation you've found between the actions of distributed third parties (who are pursuing their own, cypherpunk-ignorant, goals) and messages sent to the list. Yet another explanation might identify external factors (like the recent storms in the American midwest) which caused people to send more messages independent of their ideology or content. My ISP, io.com, recorded much heavier mail flow recently (to the point that it created problems for delivery) during the storm; speculation is that people were stuck at home for several days and turned to the Net to amuse themselves. Such an event might cause otherwise independent-minded groups (spammers and moderation opponents) to act in similar ways, like sending more messages than usual. Of course, one would expect to see a rise in all message traffic, were this the case. Perhaps you'll be good enough to make your database available so that we may each draw our own conclusions. I'm looking forward to hearing more about how you derived this correlation. (If you have trouble finding a server from which to make the data available, just say so; if nobody else has a handy server, I'll add it to my web page.) >Has anyone actually 'seen' John Gilmore, lately? He was at C2Net's party last Friday night (1/24), being interviewed by some folks from a Japanese TV program. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 08:55:55 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:55:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701261655.IAA18578@toad.com> Toto and Jim Choate were having a little disagreement about the rights of nations to maintain the boundaries of ignorance around their "citizenry", and Jim said that no one outside a nation's boundaries should feel moved to interfere with the program: > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > particular view on them. ............................................................ Normally, I would agree that people who choose to live within a certain locale and choose the kind of government that they will live with and the kind of policies that they will accept as impositions upon their lives, should be allowed to "enjoy the fruits of their labors". But on further examination of the situation in 'foreign' countries, these things must be realized: . Individuals do not agree with each other 100% . Individuals living within the boundaries of a nation will not agree with each other 100% about the kind of government they should have . Many of the individuals living within the boundaries of *any* nation do not have 100% control over which policies, or the quality of them, they will have to live under . It is not uncommon for "leaders" of nations to take advantage of their position to benefit more from the contributions of their citizenry than vice versa (the citizenry benefitting from their leadership) . It is not uncommon for there to be proportionately more people in favor of living in a state of dependence than not; and it is not uncommon for those who favor dependence to favor proposals which seem to put them on the receiving end of "benefits" (versus being contributors); and it is not uncommon for these "benefits" to be derived at the expense of such virtues as freedom and liberty . Many individuals reside within a nation not because they favor its po litics, but because they feel more comfortable among their own kind than with strangers elsewhere - for example, Chinese who have lived in China all their lives (and whose ancestral roots are there) will wish to stay there and do what they can within the boundaries of that nation, rather than for instance moving to Canada, when the going gets rough. Given these things, nevertheless it is true that the internet , among other events in our "modern" world, is opening up avenues towards advantages and benefits hitherto difficult to comeby. As many of you are aware, many people are beginning to identify with a global network of friends and co-workers according to their particular (or peculiar) interests, rather than with the "Old Order". It is becoming moot what nationality or what government or what company one works for - the loyalties of the past are being tested and re-configured in the minds of those who now do business and communicate and share things and develop friendships, acquaintances, and empathies, on the net. So to speak of "having a say" on how Singapore or China or any other nation-state runs "our web" or vice versa "us" having a say on how they run "their web" is becoming irrelevant. Economics will be determining how the web is run, and by whom. The identity of those who use it will be not "those who are citizens of Singapore", but: "my friend who lives in Singapore and is having a hard time accessing a file that I wanted him/her to have". Affiliations will be seen differently by those who connect in cyberspace, and if certain of one's cyberspace friends are having problems - if, say, a Hitler were to suddenly rise up in their midst - then the netizens could send their emergency alert out to anyone and everyone on the net about a problem brewing which perhaps someone could help them deal with, according to their ability to do so. It is true that individuals still live within the physical boundaries of "nations" which have formed in the past, and they still hold the concepts of these boundaries in their minds and they still identify closely with these, and they still vote problems upon themselves. But it is becoming an anachronism, and it is becoming inaccurate to speak of "what Singaporians want for the internet". This phrase would describe many of those who live in Singapore, but not all of them. It is more accurate to speak of what "individuals who use the internet" want, of what "individuals who want to communicate" want, of what "individuals who want to connect with others" want. The identifications of self as a citizen who must be identified with the vote of a majority, and consequently suffer the perception of oneself as someone who "voted to accept restrictions of the net, therefore should not be helped against it", is becoming irrelevant. When a distress call goes out from someone anywhere on the planet, the assistance and relief may come from anyone anywhere who chooses to rally others and provide assistance. It is not the traditional "we" against "them", and it is not the "citizens of the US" helping those who "voted themselves a Hitler into power" or "voted themselves into restrictions against free speech". It is "those of us who appreciate the liberty in communications technology" against "those who would take it away". .. Blanc From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 08:57:19 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 08:57:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701261657.IAA18586@toad.com> From: Toto Obese-rvation? I hope you are not assuming that I am obese, just because I am responding to a post originating from 'fatmans.demon.co.uk.' I would hate to become relegated to the upcoming cypherpunks-fatpeople list because of assumptions of this nature. ................................................. Well, Toto, if you don't like this obeservation, you can always unsudribe from "unmoderated" and subcrive to "expurgated". (There's also a rumor about a new "exfoliated" list for Snakes of Medusa starting up....) .. Blanc From adam at homeport.org Sun Jan 26 09:10:38 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:10:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <199701261710.JAA18727@toad.com> Lucky Green wrote: | At 11:40 AM 1/25/97 -0500, Adam Shostack wrote: | > | >Paul Kocher announced that he has cracked it, and can recover data | >quickly. He is not publishing details of the break. | | Why? Probably to make money. Paul does do this for a living. Even if he hasn't cracked it, the ZIP protection mechanism is propreitary and exportable. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 09:10:44 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:10:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701261710.JAA18743@toad.com> At 12:11 AM 1/22/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >> Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think >> this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? > >'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to >stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run >our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - it's made up of the activies and property of many different people. If some of those people don't like what other people are saying, or reading, they've got no right to limit it, just because they've got enough guns to call themselves "the government". If they don't like something, they don't have to read it, or they can send out their own counter-propaganda. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From frissell at panix.com Sun Jan 26 09:10:53 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:10:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: <199701261710.JAA18777@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 09:27 PM 1/25/97 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: >>> Presented in a "this will help 911" context. Still disconcerting. >>> >>> [...] >>> Companies working on the technology to track cellular phone calls >>> have been given additional incentive with a Federal Communications >>> Commission order that all cell phone service companies have location >>> programs in place by the year 2001. >>> [...] >> > >Looks like this might create an opportunity for 'anonymous' cellular rentals. > >--Steve Anonymous cellular accounts have been available in NYC for a year or so. See any copy of the Post or the Daily News for the ads. A similar service just started in Mexico City according to the NYT. You call the company and order the phone for circa $249.00 C.O.D. This includes one hour of calls. Subsequent hours are purchased for $36. Not cheap but anonymous. No roaming either. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMuuHDIVO4r4sgSPhAQFKjwQAoYOpb6t/L3/ah6yN7bMnwlTXX34q7yLC ECW8R7QzZsvZoHd9LxwN38DrvHsCmyot+xWwF/Drixupen8ydJz9yXcmSpddeYM6 r8mmvQcA27YmNID6LF4iAh1Z7gqYu1iUyIaxEE6WhPN1cAEobJn9x3rFVV1dpouC Y88L4vFRo+I= =acJo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From frissell at panix.com Sun Jan 26 09:10:59 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:10:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <199701261710.JAA18785@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Anyone running Windows 95 who hasn't grabbed the beta of PGPmail 4.5 from http://www.pgp.com/ is crazy. It works seamlessly with Netscape 3.0 and Eudora Pro 3.0. The 30-day demo of Eudora Pro is at: http://www.eudora.com/prodemo/. It is easy to use. I just installed it and pointed it at my old pubring.pgp and secring.pgp files and went to work. All my messages have been signed since then and some have been encrypted. The installation program found my existing copies of Eudora and Netscape and installed the PGP add in without any fuss. My only problem was finding the controls for the add in which (in the case of Eudora) consist of buttons to encrypt, sign, bring up the program, insert a copy of your key, and actually modify the message. The controls only appear on the message create, and message read windows. Easy to use. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMuuKMYVO4r4sgSPhAQFfzAP+LkDjOecHxz0iEVVggLLABxAOE9tVyOLl AIkKlagFqK+lBboo7fETCZtSpmDHcNsJG6Et6BWO5aYf7Artw+jXj+734c+w4RWj zcj6+351LUqT60TmcukH02p2MT0sd8w1dAnhD8+o1E13G5h5N1CF/p6KQjmHOiQ6 9T1ehMax0jE= =E8Pu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 09:11:26 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:11:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701261711.JAA18817@toad.com> blanc writes: (a bunch of sensible stuff) > . Many individuals reside within a nation not because they favor its po > litics, but because they feel more comfortable among their own kind than > with strangers elsewhere - for example, Chinese who have lived in China all > their lives (and whose ancestral roots are there) will wish to stay there > and do what they can within the boundaries of that nation, rather than for > instance moving to Canada, when the going gets rough. Also many "un-freer" societies restrict the ability to emigrate, and many "freer" society restrict the ability to immigrate. It's not so easy for someone living in Communist China to pick up his ass and go someplace else, like Taiwan. A large number of people got shot while trying to cross the Berlin Wall. Plus if they do get out, they may have difficulty going to countries like U.S. or Canada. (In case anyone missed it, the U.S. is much more selective about who it lets in as immigrants than it was earlier in the century.) > It is true that individuals still live within the physical boundaries of > "nations" which have formed in the past, and they still hold the concepts > of these boundaries in their minds and they still identify closely with > these, and they still vote problems upon themselves. But it is becoming > an anachronism, and it is becoming inaccurate to speak of "what > Singaporians want for the internet". This phrase would describe many of > those who live in Singapore, but not all of them. It is more accurate to > speak of what "individuals who use the internet" want, of what > "individuals who want to communicate" want, of what "individuals who want > to connect with others" want. > > The identifications of self as a citizen who must be identified with the > vote of a majority, and consequently suffer the perception of oneself as > someone who "voted to accept restrictions of the net, therefore should not > be helped against it", is becoming irrelevant. When a distress call goes > out from someone anywhere on the planet, the assistance and relief may come > from anyone anywhere who chooses to rally others and provide assistance. > > It is not the traditional "we" against "them", and it is not the "citizens > of the US" helping those who "voted themselves a Hitler into power" or > "voted themselves into restrictions against free speech". It is "those of > us who appreciate the liberty in communications technology" against "those > who would take it away". However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their civilians in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From sandfort at crl8.crl.com Sun Jan 26 09:11:27 1997 From: sandfort at crl8.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:11:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701261711.JAA18818@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > I think that anyone who thinks that moderation is, or could ever be, > anything other than a dance into the arms of the establishment, is > already crazy. Apparently, Toto does not know very much about John or me or our relationships with the "Establishment." It is who are using a intellectually dishonest smokescreen of "freedom of speech" in order to disrupt and hamper the work of Cypherpunks who are dancing into the arms of the "Establishment." > For the record, I don't think that either John or Sandy is crazy. > I think that they have their own pre-established goals which others > on the cypherpunks list are not privy to. I can't speak for John, but my goals have been stated too often and too completely for anyone not to know them. I want us all to have privacy. The Cypherpunks list was created to facilitate discussion--and ultimately action by those who were inclined and able to do something to further that goal via the use of cryptographic and other technologies. I believe that childish name-calling and personal attacks interferes with rational discourse and a spirit of common purpose and community. It is obvious to me that those who are waving the bloody flag of "censorship" are doing so for either of two reasons. The ones to whom I am the most sympathetic are those who simply do not have a clear and coherent understanding of rights in an anarchistic, volunteeristic society. The ones for whom I have no sympathy are those whose obvious goal is disruption of the Cypherpunks list and who are hiding behind a phoney interpretation of "free speech." I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves maintain. This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. If most list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot more than homesteading. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 09:12:34 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:12:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program Message-ID: <199701261712.JAA18832@toad.com> In article <5cd7ki$52b at news.xs4all.nl> bernard at xs4all.nl Crypto wrote: Newsgroups: comp.security.misc * DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program * * DPT16 or DPT32 total encryption Windows program. * * Encrypt fast, Files, Dir, Floppys, e-mail, text or Messages .... * * Key up to 30 Kb, Hide your encrypted data's in a picture file. * Direct mail encryption, Visit the Data Privacy Tools home page. * * at; http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard Bernard, thanks for an interesting post. I am Cc-ing your message to Cypherpunks mailing list which is ostensibly dedicated to discussions of cryptography. As follows from info on your home page, you do use simple XOR to encrypt your data. It was not clear to me though, how do you generate the keys to encrypt the data. I am sure that many readers of cypherpunks mailing list will be interested, so please send a copy of your reply to cypherpunks at toad.com. igor From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 09:25:37 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:25:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701261725.JAA19049@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 03:28:53 -0800 > From: Bill Stewart > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > At 12:11 AM 1/22/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > >> Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > >> this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? > > > >'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > >stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > >our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > > Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of 'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. The net is a bunch of computers, running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody else is along for the ride. If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then once a box goes on the net it belongs to nobody/everybody. Clearly utter nonsense. If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't understand what is going on. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com ps I also support France's current attempt at forcing the Georgia university web site on French soil to use French. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 09:27:01 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 09:27:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <199701261751.LAA00526@einstein> Hi, blanc has put forth an interesting assertion relating to nationalism and the Internet. If he is correct then we will have a one world government (ie technocracy) whether we like it or not. I agree with this assertion, which is why I hold that it is a waste of bandwidth trying to 'control' the Internet or access thereof by citizens of such countries as Singapore. Let them cut themselves off, it does us all a service, and themselves a dis-service. If the citizens have as much dissatisfaction as some members claim they will take care of it themselves. When they get hungry for ideas, materials, and food they will change. You can take a horse to water, you can't make him drink. You can drown him however. Then you are walking, not riding. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 10:17:18 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:17:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Toto's database In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970126025513.006ba14c@ricochet.net> Message-ID: <32EB9F84.227E@gte.net> Greg Broiles wrote: > Toto writes: > >Has anyone actually 'seen' John Gilmore, lately? > He was at C2Net's party last Friday night (1/24), being interviewed by some > folks from a Japanese TV program. It would be interesting if someone could show up at Gilmore's press conferences to supply an alternative view of Gilmore himself. Of course, those still clinging to the notion that Gilmore is working for us might not be comfortable with this idea - biting the hand that feeds, etc., but I think it could be a good way to keep the moderator honest. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 10:25:49 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:25:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <199701261825.KAA20690@toad.com> Hi, blanc has put forth an interesting assertion relating to nationalism and the Internet. If he is correct then we will have a one world government (ie technocracy) whether we like it or not. I agree with this assertion, which is why I hold that it is a waste of bandwidth trying to 'control' the Internet or access thereof by citizens of such countries as Singapore. Let them cut themselves off, it does us all a service, and themselves a dis-service. If the citizens have as much dissatisfaction as some members claim they will take care of it themselves. When they get hungry for ideas, materials, and food they will change. You can take a horse to water, you can't make him drink. You can drown him however. Then you are walking, not riding. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 10:30:23 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:30:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EBA287.3309@gte.net> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > > I think that anyone who thinks that moderation is, or could ever be, > > anything other than a dance into the arms of the establishment, is > > already crazy. > Apparently, Toto does not know very much about John or me or our > relationships with the "Establishment." It is who are using a > intellectually dishonest smokescreen of "freedom of speech" in > order to disrupt and hamper the work of Cypherpunks who are > dancing into the arms of the "Establishment." [some snip] > This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did > not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse > in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. If most > list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we > can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the > meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show > John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > more than homesteading. Actually, it is a certifiable fact that the list subscribers can jump to the unmoderated list whenever they want to. It is also a certifiable fact that they (97% or so) have *not* done so. Because of these facts, I must conclude that either: 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that they've just left things as is. Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 10:40:45 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:40:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Toto's database Message-ID: <199701261840.KAA21206@toad.com> Greg Broiles wrote: > Toto writes: > >Has anyone actually 'seen' John Gilmore, lately? > He was at C2Net's party last Friday night (1/24), being interviewed by some > folks from a Japanese TV program. It would be interesting if someone could show up at Gilmore's press conferences to supply an alternative view of Gilmore himself. Of course, those still clinging to the notion that Gilmore is working for us might not be comfortable with this idea - biting the hand that feeds, etc., but I think it could be a good way to keep the moderator honest. From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Sun Jan 26 10:46:27 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:46:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [noise?] Media Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126103240.01f7e7f4@mail.teleport.com> This was forwarded to me. It was too good not to share... >"Tonight on tales from Encrypt, we have a ghastly little story involving >Congress and your Web page." --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From iverson at usa.net Sun Jan 26 10:50:08 1997 From: iverson at usa.net (Casey Iverson) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:50:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Humor Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970126134828.006ae6f4@pop.netaddress.com> Watch out for the Goodtimes Virus Goodtimes will re-write your hard drive, scramble any disks that are even close to your computer, recalibrate your refrigerator's coolness setting so all your ice cream goes melty,demagnetize the strips on all your credit cards, screw up the tracking on your television and use subspace field harmonics to scratch any CD's you try to play. It will give your ex-girlfriend your new phone number. It will mix Kool-aid into your fishtank. It will drink all your beer and leave its socks out on the coffee table when there's company coming over. It will put a dead kitten in the back pocket of your good suit pants and hide your car keys when you are late for work. Goodtimes will make you fall in love with a penguin. It will give you nightmares about circus midgets. It will pour sugar in your gas tank and shave off both your eyebrows while dating your current boyfriend behind your back and billing the dinner and hotel room to your Visa card. It will seduce your grandmother. It does not matter if she is dead, such is the power of Goodtimes, it reaches out beyond the grave to sully those things we hold most dear. It moves your car randomly around parking lots so you can't find it. It will kick your dog. It will leave libidinous messages on your boss's voice mail in your voice! It is insidious and subtle. It is dangerous and terrifying to behold. It is also a rather interesting shade of mauve. Goodtimes will give you Dutch Elm disease. It will leave the toilet seat up. It will make a batch of Methamphetamine in your bathtub and then leave bacon cooking on the stove while it goes out to chase gradeschoolers with your new snowblower. These are just a few signs... Just be very careful! CI From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 10:55:44 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 10:55:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Toto writes: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > Toto writes: > > > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > > > > It became rather glaringly obvious after moderation was announced > > > > that class structure would be the defining feature of moderation. > > > > Those who felt themselves to be in the 'upper class' made no > > > > bones about it. > > > > > > That's a very insightful obeservation. > > > > Obese-rvation? I hope you are not assuming that I am obese, just > > because I am responding to a post originating from > > 'fatmans.demon.co.uk.' > > I would hate to become relegated to the upcoming cypherpunks-fatpeople > > list because of assumptions of this nature. > > It was obviously a typo - my apologies to Toto. > (Interestingly, Herr Moderatorfuehrer has tossed my article Toto replied to > into cypherpunks-flames, while posting Toto's response to the censored list.) Those jerks...! From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Sun Jan 26 11:05:52 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:05:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks In-Reply-To: <199701261710.JAA18727@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701261905.OAA21691@wauug.erols.com> Proving a crack with revealing how is trivial. Someone sends Paul cyphertext; he returns clear. Proving the opposite without posting the code is a joke. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From mjb at aiinc.com Sun Jan 26 11:07:00 1997 From: mjb at aiinc.com (Michael Bailey) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:07:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... Message-ID: <19970126185911908.AAA188@mjb> Yes that would be cool so i could test it out against my decompiler that seems to do great agains encrypted txt. With the realease of the usa policy on encryption do you all think that the 160 level will be increased or will they make new standards. ---------- > From: ichudov at algebra.com > To: DataETRsch at aol.com > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... > Date: Thursday, January 23, 1997 8:06 PM > > Mr. Ramos, > > > You promised to release the algorithm of your program as well as > crypto-relevant source code. You promised to do it atfer a month, and > the time has come. We are eagerly awaiting the promised code. > > Thank you so much for your openness. > > igor > > DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > > > {If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} > > {UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you > > visited.} > > {UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate > > correctly.} > > {UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} > > {Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been > > added.} > > {UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} > > {UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} > > {UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} > > {This advertisement has also been modified.} > > > > Hello, > > > > Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data > > Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that > > DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal > > Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely > > advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, > > Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. > > > > UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... > > > > o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. > > o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. > > o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. > > o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. > > o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. > > o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. > > o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. > > o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. > > o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. > > o Includes time and date locking features. > > o Includes file specific unique encryption features. > > o Includes file authentication guard features. > > o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. > > o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. > > o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. > > > > UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed > > with popular application and database programming languages and environments > > such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo > > Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. > > > > DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. > > > > To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: > > http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. > > > > I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you > > very much for your time. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos > > President > > DataET Research > > Data Engineering Technologies > > > > > > - Igor. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 11:21:17 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:21:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 In-Reply-To: <199701261710.JAA18785@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126111938.0065b868@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 11:45 AM 1/26/97 -0500, Duncan Frissell wrote: >Anyone running Windows 95 who hasn't grabbed the beta of PGPmail 4.5 from >http://www.pgp.com/ is crazy. It works seamlessly with Netscape 3.0 and >Eudora Pro 3.0. The 30-day demo of Eudora Pro is at: http://www.eudora.com/prodemo/. PGPmail 4.5 now has beta 10 available - the download is smaller than beta 9. Eudora Lite 3.0.1 also supports plugins, so it should work. It also supports filters, which has allowed probable flames to quietly vanish from my inbox :-) BTW, from a non-government-user perspective, the questions asked to establish export permission are nicely worded. Rather than asking "Are you a US Subject", and "Do you agree to follow every vague detail of the Export Laws", as some sites do, it asks > - Is the requesting computer located within the United States? [N/Y] > - Do you acknowledge affirmatively that you understand that PGPmail is > subject to export controls under the Export Administration Act and > that you cannot export the software without a license? [N/Y] > - Do you certify that you are not on any of the United States Government's > lists of export-precluded parties or otherwise ineligible to receive this > transfer of cryptographic software subject to export controls under the > Export Administration Act? and then has a button saying "I certify that the above answers are truthful", which is flexible enough that I don't have to feel bad about not being _absolutely_ certain that my packets aren't getting routed through Canada, or that I'm not on some list that bans telephone company employees from downloading cryptographic software on Tuesdays, or whether computers 30 feet above the US are subject to this week's export rules :-), or having to say "No" to Question 2 because I understand that you _can_ export this software without a license (just do it) even though the Feds disapprove.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 11:23:06 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:23:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701261725.JAA19049@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126105213.0065c600@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 11:12 AM 1/26/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >stewart> Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - > >The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of >'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. The net is a bunch of computers, >running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and >EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility >support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody >else is along for the ride. For individuals, and voluntary groups of individuals, that's certainly true. But what about taxpayers involuntarily paying for a network run by bureaucrats - does each individual have an equal right to decide what he/she will say or read on the net, or are some individuals more equal than others? And if so, why is it the armed thugs who want to censor people who get to be more equal? It's the usual insoluable problem about how to decide policy for involuntarily-funded services - the government is morally obligated to follow the wishes of everybody paying for them, which are in radical conflict. It's bad enough with schools... The Arpanet had its Acceptable Use Policy, which limited speech on goverment-funded parts of the net to non-commercial use; one of main drivers behind the Commercial Internet Exchange was to allow businesses to send each other email without being limited by it. >ps I also support France's current attempt at forcing the Georgia university > web site on French soil to use French. And then there's the French Telecom Monopoly (until it falls apart) - if you don't like the rules the bureaucrats make for what you can say or read, you're not even allowed to build your own telecom network or obtain services from providers who don't censor what you can say or read. And I also don't support the French government's attempt at forcing its own subjects on French soil to use French. Asking them nicely, or running propaganda against Academically-incorrect French, is something the Academie can do itself. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Sun Jan 26 11:52:41 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:52:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list In-Reply-To: <199701251011.CAA23822@toad.com> Message-ID: Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list "population." The decision of that small segment to excercise its rights "in extreme" passed the tolerance thresholds of increasing numbers of list members, and the end result was a "restriction" adopted/elected/forced-on (colour it however you chose) on the entire "population." "Rights" are derived from social responsibility; its either that, or the "law of the jungle." -r.w. On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Cynthia H. Brown wrote: > > Beauty, flames and censorship are all in the eyes of the beholder. > > However, by providing both "raw" and "cooked" versions of the list, Sandy > I apologize for intruding, Cynthia, but I have a question about "doing > as s/he sees fit". For example, what is the list? Is it the equipment, > is it the software that runs on the equipment, or is it the contents of > the list (my writings, your writings, etc.)? If I had to rank them, I > would rank the contents as being more important than the equipment or > the software. That said, how can those contents be considered the > property of the list owner/manager to do with as they see fit? > > I do understand that they have the right to manage the list as they see > fit, and to move the messages into whatever buckets seem appropriate, > but your phrasing suggested more to me, and I'm puzzled by it. > > > From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 11:54:12 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 11:54:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft In-Reply-To: <199701182105.NAA13618@netcom10.netcom.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126115211.005b4fd8@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 01:05 PM 1/18/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >I predict that microcurrency will not catch on in a big way >until it is integrated with browsers, and when it is, it ..... >the idea would also be to invent some new html tags that >indicate the charge on a link. the charge is incurred when ..... >of time before some enterprising programmers plug it all >together in an easy to use way. (as far as I know the >Digicash software is not easily integrated with any browser, >am I correct?) The Digicash software wasn't terribly easy to integrate with _anything_, but folks like Lucky Green have been banging on them to define and release their interface specs, and there's a library called -lucre that will do the Digicash functions. A few months ago, Ian demonstrated a Digicash-compatible plugin at one of our Bay Area cypherpunks meetings (with blinding removed for patent reasons.) I don't know about BorgBrowser, but with Netscape, you can implement non-built-in features as either a plug-in or as a helper application; no need to mess with the HTML spec in yet another browser-specific manner. You can also wedge things in using cookies (though their are non-cookie-aware browsers and people who turn their browsers off) which could work well for lower-security microcurrencies. For instance, connecting to http://newspaper.com/cookie-store.html could take your credit card with SSL and give you a cookie with 100 or 1000 credits using some S/Key-like mechanism, and each time you read a news page it would decrement by one. To avoid fraud (people resetting their cookie files) the newspaper would have to track cookie use, but they may be tracking who's reading what anyway. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From markm at voicenet.com Sun Jan 26 12:11:25 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 12:11:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular phone triangulation In-Reply-To: <199701260710.XAA10387@toad.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > So far, as a result of the plethora of laws passed to enable law > enforcement agencies to 'catch drug dealers', I have seen only a > few minor criminals who are claimed to have been brought to justice > as a result of these laws, while seeing documentation of hundreds > and thousands of ordinary citizens being harassed and having their > human rights violated by these same laws. > And still, we have people like Mark, who seem relatively intelligent > and informed but who still echo the party-line of Big Brother when > He proclaims that the average citizen must be subjected to new and > better ways to monitor the movements and activities of His citizens > in order to 'protect' them from 'drug dealers'. Somehow, I thought my original post was ambiguous enough to be interpreted as support for the government's expansion of surveillance capabilities or the War on Some Drugs. Nothing could be further from the truth. I believe that the original intention of requiring cell phone providers to have the ability to triangulate all the signals they receive was so that drug dealers and other Enemies of the People could be caught easier. Since, drug dealers frequently use cell phones to avoid tracking, I thought that this was probably the primary justification. Just like the current GAK proposal, the government has found another way to justify a proposal to fool people into thinking that it's really for their own good. Many people have grown tired of hearing about the government's "compelling interest" in fighting "crime." The government claims that GAK is not only for violating people's rights by trying to get people to believe that it is a valuable service because it will allow people to recover their crypto keys if they ever lose them. In the case of the cell phone proposal, the promise of better 911 service is used to justify this latest violation of civil rights. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMuu7UizIPc7jvyFpAQG55gf6ApVENBJJEIQ+9xKs/9ldaSRbDvemI1DY Q0MyPkuOHo4e97i3dMYFk42Jb+OA+O0Q0kdsxRV0Y2i26GxTvC362+f/xI2+dTly YvyhPwgUyztfVC+IrjQgpuvqOMWthqdBrkZR7cJAs7KQG49CiWMAVcmCmQGUWJU/ mv2TRHAw3GT0NYIqF5FhTFAEoXcPZAjuEHP1pYPOPJ1zjrUkp6adcK2khgFHKwYp L8Pc9YLTJ/VNuw1n02PcfnitzPfgQIdhQVJAxwRClCxyifBKzQW1BtcMKyPhoxHY roTqotTzpIROBJVGZStx99mEscYG3KJCymDp6zqEfC78WWcUhoMMYg== =N8mn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From snow at smoke.suba.com Sun Jan 26 12:15:50 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 12:15:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular phone triangulation In-Reply-To: <199701260710.XAA10387@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701262032.OAA01584@smoke.suba.com> > Our prisons are overflowing with drug dealers and drug users who were > put there by quite ordinary means which didn't involve violating or > discarding the rights of the ordinary citizen. Yet we keep hearing Wanna bet? > do so. > Not to mention larger and larger amounts of money. > But, maybe if you became a 'drug dealer'... I'd rather become an "arms dealer". From snow at smoke.suba.com Sun Jan 26 12:30:58 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 12:30:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701260656.WAA10210@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701262048.OAA01617@smoke.suba.com> > > getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the > > videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. > > One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". > As far as I understand, 1) no one really understands why cancer rates > are up so much and 2) since people live longer, they are more likely do > have cancer. While I don't claim to to be a Medical Researcher, I think that 1) should be reworded to be "No one is willing to _admit_ why cancer rates are up so much". You (generic) can look at certain population groups where there is low incidence(sp?) of cancer, and then look at our society and it becomes pretty obvious. Breast Cancer is exteremely rare in japenese women living in Japan. Thes same women move to the US, start living like American start developing breast cancer at a rate very similar to that of American born women. IMO the biggest reason that "no one really understands why cancer rates are up..." is that "they" are looking for the single bullet when reality isn't usually that simple. I would be willing to make a bet that if you could get a large population group to do the following, you would see a large statistical reduction in the incidence(sp?) of cancer. 1) Eat a lot of fruits, vegetables & breads and cerials. Stay away from large quantities of meat. Try to reduce your fat intake to under 20 grams a day (USDA recommends around 40) 2) Exercise regularly. Ride a bike or walk/run to work. 3) Avoid excess in all things. > What you said is one of the hypotheses. I personally feel that > environment and bad greasy food are other major contributors. > The way they cook all these fries, with overheated grease, is very > bad. BINGO!. Sorry, gotta go, it's dinner time and McD's is calling... From richieb at teleport.com Sun Jan 26 12:32:57 1997 From: richieb at teleport.com (Rich Burroughs) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 12:32:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 In-Reply-To: <199701261710.JAA18785@toad.com> Message-ID: It really does rock. I owned Eudora 3 already, but if I didn't I would purchase it for using PGPmail alone. Another great feature of PGPmail is that it adds PGP functionality to the Windows Explorer. When you right-click on a file in Windows, a PGP submenu is added to the normal right-click menu, allowing you to encrypt, decrypt, etc. This product really has the ease of use that is needed to get PGP more into the mainstream. Like Duncan, I found it very easy to incorporate my existing keyrings. I'm very impressed. I haven't tried it with NT 4.0 yet, and don't know how well it works. I run the same copy of Eudora with 95 and NT, so I'm assuming it will be fine... Rich _______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb at teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/ See my Blue Ribbon Page at http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/blueribbon/ dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause/ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 13:30:47 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:30:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <57m61D2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Nurdane Oksas writes: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Toto writes: > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Toto writes: > > > > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > > > > > > It became rather glaringly obvious after moderation was announced > > > > > that class structure would be the defining feature of moderation. > > > > > Those who felt themselves to be in the 'upper class' made no > > > > > bones about it. > > > > > > > > That's a very insightful obeservation. > > > > > > Obese-rvation? I hope you are not assuming that I am obese, just > > > because I am responding to a post originating from > > > 'fatmans.demon.co.uk.' > > > I would hate to become relegated to the upcoming cypherpunks-fatpeople > > > list because of assumptions of this nature. > > > > It was obviously a typo - my apologies to Toto. > > (Interestingly, Herr Moderatorfuehrer has tossed my article Toto replied to > > into cypherpunks-flames, while posting Toto's response to the censored list > > Those jerks...! > Interestingly, my apologies were also cast to cypherpunks-flames. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 13:32:31 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:32:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970126111938.0065b868@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: Bill Stewart writes: > At 11:45 AM 1/26/97 -0500, Duncan Frissell wrote: > >Anyone running Windows 95 who hasn't grabbed the beta of PGPmail 4.5 from > >http://www.pgp.com/ is crazy. It works seamlessly with Netscape 3.0 and > >Eudora Pro 3.0. The 30-day demo of Eudora Pro is at: > http://www.eudora.com/prodemo/. > > PGPmail 4.5 now has beta 10 available - the download is smaller than beta 9. > > Eudora Lite 3.0.1 also supports plugins, so it should work. > It also supports filters, which has allowed probable flames to > quietly vanish from my inbox :-) > > BTW, from a non-government-user perspective, the questions asked to establish > export permission are nicely worded. Rather than asking > "Are you a US Subject", and "Do you agree to follow every vague > detail of the Export Laws", as some sites do, it asks > > - Is the requesting computer located within the United States? [N/Y] > > - Do you acknowledge affirmatively that you understand that PGPmail is > > subject to export controls under the Export Administration Act and > > that you cannot export the software without a license? [N/Y] > > - Do you certify that you are not on any of the United States Government's > > lists of export-precluded parties or otherwise ineligible to receive this > > transfer of cryptographic software subject to export controls under the > > Export Administration Act? > and then has a button saying > "I certify that the above answers are truthful", > which is flexible enough that I don't have to feel bad about not being > _absolutely_ certain that my packets aren't getting routed through Canada, > or that I'm not on some list that bans telephone company employees from > downloading cryptographic software on Tuesdays, or whether > computers 30 feet above the US are subject to this week's export rules :-), > or having to say "No" to Question 2 because I understand that you _can_ > export this software without a license (just do it) even though the Feds > disapprove.... > > > # Thanks; Bill > # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com > # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp > # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) > It doesn't seem to work with the mail program in MS IE, or MS WordMail. I understand why some people don't like Microsoft, but excluding support for popular Microsoft programs seems contrary to their stated goal of promoting the use of crypto. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 13:47:38 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:47:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <01BC0B90.0B78E600@king2-16.cnw.com> From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their civilians in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. ................................................................ The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take their chances and retaliate, etc. These things are done on a level not accessible to the most of us. All that we individuals have are access to telephone lines, computers, and modems. Yet even as we speak the world is being "wired" with cables to further make this singular communication possible and open up avenues to non-government organized activities: international corporations are se tting up offices, services, and correspondence wherever in the world they can find markets. All this is happening even while the governments are complaining to each other about what their citizens are posting (tch, tch) and threatening to deprive each other of that privilege. While governments and their True Believer citizens are dealing with each other on one level, the rest of the world is reorganizing itself into a different order of living and doing business. They are sharing ideas and examining their concepts and beliefs, they are conducting a lot of their disagreements on the net (instead of physically against each other on the ground), opening up to a broader view of relationships between individuals, or to governments, or to religions, sexuality, etc. The situation hasn't completely changed yet, but it is in process. .. Blanc From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 14:00:54 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:00:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701262048.OAA01617@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, snow wrote: > > > getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the > > > videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. > > > One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". > > As far as I understand, 1) no one really understands why cancer rates > > are up so much and 2) since people live longer, they are more likely do > > have cancer. > > While I don't claim to to be a Medical Researcher, I think that 1) should > be reworded to be "No one is willing to _admit_ why cancer rates are up so > much". You (generic) can look at certain population groups where there is > low incidence(sp?) of cancer, and then look at our society and it becomes > pretty obvious. > > Breast Cancer is exteremely rare in japenese women living in Japan. Thes > same women move to the US, start living > like American start developing breast cancer at a rate very similar to that > of American born women. lack of olive oil intake?? i head that olive oil is esp. necessary for women, as well as milk. > > IMO the biggest reason that "no one really understands why cancer rates are > up..." is that "they" are looking for the single bullet when reality isn't > usually that simple. > > I would be willing to make a bet that if you could get a large population > group to do the following, you would see a large statistical reduction in the > incidence(sp?) of cancer. > > 1) Eat a lot of fruits, vegetables & breads and cerials. Stay away from > large quantities of meat. Try to reduce your fat intake to under 20 grams a > day (USDA recommends around 40) > > 2) Exercise regularly. Ride a bike or walk/run to work. i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > 3) Avoid excess in all things. even chocolate? :) > > What you said is one of the hypotheses. I personally feel that > > environment and bad greasy food are other major contributors. > > The way they cook all these fries, with overheated grease, is very > > bad. > > BINGO!. EAt well, and smile too ;) > > Sorry, gotta go, it's dinner time and McD's is calling... a good laugh goes a long way ... ;) From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Sun Jan 26 14:28:56 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:28:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Elliptic curves Message-ID: <199701262229.PAA19532@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timmy C[reep] May's family tree goes straight up. All of his ancestors were siblings, to dumb to recognize each other in the dark. _ O O _ \-|-\_/-|-/ Timmy C[reep] May /^\ /^\ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ From jya at pipeline.com Sun Jan 26 14:50:02 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:50:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular Encryption Docs Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970126224449.006d04a0@pop.pipeline.com> Thanks to David Wagner and Steve Schear, we've learned about the latest documents on cellular encryption which supercede the 1992 CAVE document, Appendix A to IS-54, which contained the CAVE algorithm. Here are the latest, followed by ordering information. TIA/EIA/IS-136.1-A -- TDMA Cellular/PCS - Radio Interface - Mobile Station - Base Station Compatibility - Digital Control Panel, October, 1996, 372 pp. $350.00. Addendum No. 1 to IS-136.1-A, November, 1996, 40 pp. Free. TIA/EIA/IS-136.2-A -- TDMA Cellular/PCS - Radio Interface - Mobile Station - Base Station Compatibility - Traffic Channels and FSK Control Channel, October, 1996, 378 pp. $310.00. TIA/EIA-627 -- 800 MHZ Cellular System, TDMA Radio Interface, Dual-Mode Mobile Station - Base Station Compatibility Standard, June, 1996, 258 pp. $120.00. These documents can be ordered from: Global Engineering Documents 15 Inverness Way East Englewood, Colorado 80112 Telephone: 1-800-854-7179 However, each of the documents lists the following related supplements which contain "sensitive information" and may be obtained by US/CA citizens from TIA by signing a Non-Disclosure Agreement and acceptance of export restrictions: Appendix A to IS-136. Appendix A to 627. Common Cryptographic Algorithms. Interface Specification for Common Cryptographic Algorithms. These controlled documents can be requested by calling Ms. Sharon Vargish at 1-703-907-7702, who will fax an NDA, and upon receipt of the completed form, will send the controlled documents at no cost. Here's the NDA: AGREEMENT ON CONTROL AND NONDISCLOSURE OF COMMON CRYPTOGRAPHIC ALGORITHMS REVISION A TO IS-54, IS-95, AND IS-136 [Note: 627 supercedes IS-54; IS-95 is for CDMA] "I, _________________________, an employee/consultant/affiliate (typed name) of __________________________, hereafter, "the company," (Company name) _____________________________ (Company address) _____________________________ and a United States or Canadian citizen, acknowledge and understand that the subject documents, to which I will have access contain information [which] is subject to export control under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (Title 22, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 120-130). I also understand that the subject documents represent valuable, proprietary and confidential business information of TIA and its members. I hereby certify that this information will be controlled and will only be further disclosed, exported, or transferred according to the terms of the ITAR. ______________________________ _____________________________ Signature Date ______________________________ _____________________________ Printed Name Witness ______________________________ _____________________________ Title Printed Name of Witness [End NDA] From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 14:54:11 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:54:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hi again, and an invitation to kibitz In-Reply-To: <199701180202.VAA11013@beast.brainlink.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970126145141.005b4068@popd.ix.netcom.com> In addition to David Wagner's comments, I'd like to point out several more weaknesses. - Would Kerberos work just as well? No sense reinventing the 3-headed dog. - You're not authenticating the server to the client. - If the challenge is different every time, the server needs to keep the user's password in plaintext (unlike Unix encrypted passwords.) This means that attacks on the server's file system can steal it, and since the password is used for session encryption, it can be used to forge sessions as well. - Alternatively, if the challenge is always the same (per user), then even one eavesdrop kills you, as with Unix passwords. - Since you're using the same 7-byte password hash for the first third of the authentication as for the session key, the dictionary attack on E(challenge, First-seven-bytes) gives you the session key, so you can eavesdrop just fine. If the password is too short, you can then dictionary-attack MD4 to find it also. - There's a Diffie-Hellman variant that can do logins. Unfortunately, it's patented (by some guy from Siemens in Paderborn DE, who patented it in Germany about 2 years before I rediscovered it, and patented it in the US about 6 months before :-) It covers any login methods using commutative hashes H1(H2(x)) == H2(H1(x)). The Siemens version extends it to authenticate both ends to each other; I extended it to get a session key for encryption and/or authentication. This really shouldn't have been patentable - my rediscovery shows that it must be pretty obvious to anyone skilled in the trade :-), and rather than reinventing the wheel, I was reinventing the hubcap or tire swing.... > In article <199701140755.CAA04514 at mail.intercon.com>, >Amanda Walker wrote: >> (a) Server sends 8-byte challenge to client >> (b) Client sends Microsoft NT authentication response to the server >> (take the password in Unicode form, do an MD4 hash, pad with 0s to 21 >> bytes, split into 3 7-byte groups, use these as DES keys to encrypt >> the challenge three times, send the 24-byte result as the response). >> (c) If authentication fails, close the connection. >> (d) If authentication succeeds, all subsequent traffic is enccrypted with >> DES in CFB mode. Until April :), the DES key used is taken from the >> first 7 bytes of the MD4 hash of the password (after April, we expect >> to switch to Diffie-Hellman key exchange first, followed by a revised >> authentication handshake). > At 11:20 AM 1/17/97 -0800, David Wagner wrote: >Some weaknesses: >- It doesn't resist dictionary attacks (no salt) when the attacker can make > one active probe (forge a fixed challenge and get the client's response). In particular, an 8 byte challenge is nowhere near enough, though the average million-dollar DES-cracker won't be as easy to adapt for 2**64 cycles of hash+DES*3 - and don't handle each third separately! At least do something like 3DES-EDE and return an 8-byte response, or hash the three output bytes together and send the hash. Using >=16 bytes of challenge would be better, or >=24 if you want printable challenges. >- It doesn't stop replay attacks (replay a fixed challenge, now the same DES > key is used, so replay DES-encrypted session data). You may not be able to replay a given challenge usefully, assuming it's different each time, but MITM attacks work ok after you've cracked the password by dictionary attack in the previous round. >- DES-encryption doesn't provide message authentication against active > attacks; use a MAC too. >- You should use independent DES keys for each direction of the connection. >- Also the DES encryption key doesn't change for each connection. It should. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From 3bmice at nym.alias.net Sun Jan 26 14:54:22 1997 From: 3bmice at nym.alias.net (Three Blind Mice) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 14:54:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: <19970126225416.15792.qmail@anon.lcs.mit.edu> On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Mark M. wrote: > I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and > have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There > would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to > triangulate every call. The primary motivation for this is almost certainly > "location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. Of course, one could always follow the ID4 example and triangulate cells from a single location, preferably using equipment that any small-time operator can find in his own car. -- 3bmice From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Sun Jan 26 15:10:38 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:10:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [noise?] Media Message-ID: <199701262310.PAA26731@toad.com> This was forwarded to me. It was too good not to share... >"Tonight on tales from Encrypt, we have a ghastly little story involving >Congress and your Web page." --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Sun Jan 26 15:10:41 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:10:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Encrypting ZIP disks Message-ID: <199701262310.PAA26737@toad.com> Proving a crack with revealing how is trivial. Someone sends Paul cyphertext; he returns clear. Proving the opposite without posting the code is a joke. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 15:10:56 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:10:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701262310.PAA26784@toad.com> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > > I think that anyone who thinks that moderation is, or could ever be, > > anything other than a dance into the arms of the establishment, is > > already crazy. > Apparently, Toto does not know very much about John or me or our > relationships with the "Establishment." It is who are using a > intellectually dishonest smokescreen of "freedom of speech" in > order to disrupt and hamper the work of Cypherpunks who are > dancing into the arms of the "Establishment." [some snip] > This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did > not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse > in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. If most > list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we > can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the > meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show > John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > more than homesteading. Actually, it is a certifiable fact that the list subscribers can jump to the unmoderated list whenever they want to. It is also a certifiable fact that they (97% or so) have *not* done so. Because of these facts, I must conclude that either: 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that they've just left things as is. Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 15:10:59 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:10:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <199701262310.PAA26793@toad.com> At 11:45 AM 1/26/97 -0500, Duncan Frissell wrote: >Anyone running Windows 95 who hasn't grabbed the beta of PGPmail 4.5 from >http://www.pgp.com/ is crazy. It works seamlessly with Netscape 3.0 and >Eudora Pro 3.0. The 30-day demo of Eudora Pro is at: http://www.eudora.com/prodemo/. PGPmail 4.5 now has beta 10 available - the download is smaller than beta 9. Eudora Lite 3.0.1 also supports plugins, so it should work. It also supports filters, which has allowed probable flames to quietly vanish from my inbox :-) BTW, from a non-government-user perspective, the questions asked to establish export permission are nicely worded. Rather than asking "Are you a US Subject", and "Do you agree to follow every vague detail of the Export Laws", as some sites do, it asks > - Is the requesting computer located within the United States? [N/Y] > - Do you acknowledge affirmatively that you understand that PGPmail is > subject to export controls under the Export Administration Act and > that you cannot export the software without a license? [N/Y] > - Do you certify that you are not on any of the United States Government's > lists of export-precluded parties or otherwise ineligible to receive this > transfer of cryptographic software subject to export controls under the > Export Administration Act? and then has a button saying "I certify that the above answers are truthful", which is flexible enough that I don't have to feel bad about not being _absolutely_ certain that my packets aren't getting routed through Canada, or that I'm not on some list that bans telephone company employees from downloading cryptographic software on Tuesdays, or whether computers 30 feet above the US are subject to this week's export rules :-), or having to say "No" to Question 2 because I understand that you _can_ export this software without a license (just do it) even though the Feds disapprove.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From mjb at aiinc.com Sun Jan 26 15:11:01 1997 From: mjb at aiinc.com (Michael Bailey) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:11:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... Message-ID: <199701262311.PAA26794@toad.com> Yes that would be cool so i could test it out against my decompiler that seems to do great agains encrypted txt. With the realease of the usa policy on encryption do you all think that the 160 level will be increased or will they make new standards. ---------- > From: ichudov at algebra.com > To: DataETRsch at aol.com > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... > Date: Thursday, January 23, 1997 8:06 PM > > Mr. Ramos, > > > You promised to release the algorithm of your program as well as > crypto-relevant source code. You promised to do it atfer a month, and > the time has come. We are eagerly awaiting the promised code. > > Thank you so much for your openness. > > igor > > DataETRsch at aol.com wrote: > > > > {If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} > > {UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you > > visited.} > > {UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate > > correctly.} > > {UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} > > {Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been > > added.} > > {UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} > > {UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} > > {UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} > > {This advertisement has also been modified.} > > > > Hello, > > > > Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data > > Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that > > DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal > > Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely > > advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, > > Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. > > > > UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... > > > > o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. > > o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. > > o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. > > o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. > > o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. > > o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. > > o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. > > o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. > > o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. > > o Includes time and date locking features. > > o Includes file specific unique encryption features. > > o Includes file authentication guard features. > > o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. > > o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. > > o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. > > > > UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed > > with popular application and database programming languages and environments > > such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo > > Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. > > > > DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. > > > > To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: > > http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. > > > > I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you > > very much for your time. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos > > President > > DataET Research > > Data Engineering Technologies > > > > > > - Igor. From iverson at usa.net Sun Jan 26 15:12:35 1997 From: iverson at usa.net (Casey Iverson) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:12:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Humor Message-ID: <199701262312.PAA26812@toad.com> Watch out for the Goodtimes Virus Goodtimes will re-write your hard drive, scramble any disks that are even close to your computer, recalibrate your refrigerator's coolness setting so all your ice cream goes melty,demagnetize the strips on all your credit cards, screw up the tracking on your television and use subspace field harmonics to scratch any CD's you try to play. It will give your ex-girlfriend your new phone number. It will mix Kool-aid into your fishtank. It will drink all your beer and leave its socks out on the coffee table when there's company coming over. It will put a dead kitten in the back pocket of your good suit pants and hide your car keys when you are late for work. Goodtimes will make you fall in love with a penguin. It will give you nightmares about circus midgets. It will pour sugar in your gas tank and shave off both your eyebrows while dating your current boyfriend behind your back and billing the dinner and hotel room to your Visa card. It will seduce your grandmother. It does not matter if she is dead, such is the power of Goodtimes, it reaches out beyond the grave to sully those things we hold most dear. It moves your car randomly around parking lots so you can't find it. It will kick your dog. It will leave libidinous messages on your boss's voice mail in your voice! It is insidious and subtle. It is dangerous and terrifying to behold. It is also a rather interesting shade of mauve. Goodtimes will give you Dutch Elm disease. It will leave the toilet seat up. It will make a batch of Methamphetamine in your bathtub and then leave bacon cooking on the stove while it goes out to chase gradeschoolers with your new snowblower. These are just a few signs... Just be very careful! CI From wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org Sun Jan 26 15:12:36 1997 From: wombat at mcfeely.bsfs.org (Rabid Wombat) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:12:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701262312.PAA26813@toad.com> Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list "population." The decision of that small segment to excercise its rights "in extreme" passed the tolerance thresholds of increasing numbers of list members, and the end result was a "restriction" adopted/elected/forced-on (colour it however you chose) on the entire "population." "Rights" are derived from social responsibility; its either that, or the "law of the jungle." -r.w. On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Cynthia H. Brown wrote: > > Beauty, flames and censorship are all in the eyes of the beholder. > > However, by providing both "raw" and "cooked" versions of the list, Sandy > I apologize for intruding, Cynthia, but I have a question about "doing > as s/he sees fit". For example, what is the list? Is it the equipment, > is it the software that runs on the equipment, or is it the contents of > the list (my writings, your writings, etc.)? If I had to rank them, I > would rank the contents as being more important than the equipment or > the software. That said, how can those contents be considered the > property of the list owner/manager to do with as they see fit? > > I do understand that they have the right to manage the list as they see > fit, and to move the messages into whatever buckets seem appropriate, > but your phrasing suggested more to me, and I'm puzzled by it. > > > From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 15:12:39 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:12:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701262312.PAA26814@toad.com> At 11:12 AM 1/26/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >stewart> Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - > >The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of >'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. The net is a bunch of computers, >running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and >EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility >support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody >else is along for the ride. For individuals, and voluntary groups of individuals, that's certainly true. But what about taxpayers involuntarily paying for a network run by bureaucrats - does each individual have an equal right to decide what he/she will say or read on the net, or are some individuals more equal than others? And if so, why is it the armed thugs who want to censor people who get to be more equal? It's the usual insoluable problem about how to decide policy for involuntarily-funded services - the government is morally obligated to follow the wishes of everybody paying for them, which are in radical conflict. It's bad enough with schools... The Arpanet had its Acceptable Use Policy, which limited speech on goverment-funded parts of the net to non-commercial use; one of main drivers behind the Commercial Internet Exchange was to allow businesses to send each other email without being limited by it. >ps I also support France's current attempt at forcing the Georgia university > web site on French soil to use French. And then there's the French Telecom Monopoly (until it falls apart) - if you don't like the rules the bureaucrats make for what you can say or read, you're not even allowed to build your own telecom network or obtain services from providers who don't censor what you can say or read. And I also don't support the French government's attempt at forcing its own subjects on French soil to use French. Asking them nicely, or running propaganda against Academically-incorrect French, is something the Academie can do itself. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From snow at smoke.suba.com Sun Jan 26 15:25:53 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:25:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular phone triangulation Message-ID: <199701262325.PAA27154@toad.com> > Our prisons are overflowing with drug dealers and drug users who were > put there by quite ordinary means which didn't involve violating or > discarding the rights of the ordinary citizen. Yet we keep hearing Wanna bet? > do so. > Not to mention larger and larger amounts of money. > But, maybe if you became a 'drug dealer'... I'd rather become an "arms dealer". From 3bmice at nym.alias.net Sun Jan 26 15:26:07 1997 From: 3bmice at nym.alias.net (Three Blind Mice) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:26:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: <199701262326.PAA27174@toad.com> On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Mark M. wrote: > I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and > have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There > would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to > triangulate every call. The primary motivation for this is almost certainly > "location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. Of course, one could always follow the ID4 example and triangulate cells from a single location, preferably using equipment that any small-time operator can find in his own car. -- 3bmice From richieb at teleport.com Sun Jan 26 15:26:17 1997 From: richieb at teleport.com (Rich Burroughs) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:26:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <199701262326.PAA27191@toad.com> It really does rock. I owned Eudora 3 already, but if I didn't I would purchase it for using PGPmail alone. Another great feature of PGPmail is that it adds PGP functionality to the Windows Explorer. When you right-click on a file in Windows, a PGP submenu is added to the normal right-click menu, allowing you to encrypt, decrypt, etc. This product really has the ease of use that is needed to get PGP more into the mainstream. Like Duncan, I found it very easy to incorporate my existing keyrings. I'm very impressed. I haven't tried it with NT 4.0 yet, and don't know how well it works. I run the same copy of Eudora with 95 and NT, so I'm assuming it will be fine... Rich _______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb at teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/ See my Blue Ribbon Page at http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/blueribbon/ dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause/ From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 15:26:29 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:26:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: microcurrency: Netscape vs. Microsoft Message-ID: <199701262326.PAA27239@toad.com> At 01:05 PM 1/18/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >I predict that microcurrency will not catch on in a big way >until it is integrated with browsers, and when it is, it ..... >the idea would also be to invent some new html tags that >indicate the charge on a link. the charge is incurred when ..... >of time before some enterprising programmers plug it all >together in an easy to use way. (as far as I know the >Digicash software is not easily integrated with any browser, >am I correct?) The Digicash software wasn't terribly easy to integrate with _anything_, but folks like Lucky Green have been banging on them to define and release their interface specs, and there's a library called -lucre that will do the Digicash functions. A few months ago, Ian demonstrated a Digicash-compatible plugin at one of our Bay Area cypherpunks meetings (with blinding removed for patent reasons.) I don't know about BorgBrowser, but with Netscape, you can implement non-built-in features as either a plug-in or as a helper application; no need to mess with the HTML spec in yet another browser-specific manner. You can also wedge things in using cookies (though their are non-cookie-aware browsers and people who turn their browsers off) which could work well for lower-security microcurrencies. For instance, connecting to http://newspaper.com/cookie-store.html could take your credit card with SSL and give you a cookie with 100 or 1000 credits using some S/Key-like mechanism, and each time you read a news page it would decrement by one. To avoid fraud (people resetting their cookie files) the newspaper would have to track cookie use, but they may be tracking who's reading what anyway. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From snow at smoke.suba.com Sun Jan 26 15:26:30 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:26:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701262326.PAA27240@toad.com> > > getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the > > videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. > > One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". > As far as I understand, 1) no one really understands why cancer rates > are up so much and 2) since people live longer, they are more likely do > have cancer. While I don't claim to to be a Medical Researcher, I think that 1) should be reworded to be "No one is willing to _admit_ why cancer rates are up so much". You (generic) can look at certain population groups where there is low incidence(sp?) of cancer, and then look at our society and it becomes pretty obvious. Breast Cancer is exteremely rare in japenese women living in Japan. Thes same women move to the US, start living like American start developing breast cancer at a rate very similar to that of American born women. IMO the biggest reason that "no one really understands why cancer rates are up..." is that "they" are looking for the single bullet when reality isn't usually that simple. I would be willing to make a bet that if you could get a large population group to do the following, you would see a large statistical reduction in the incidence(sp?) of cancer. 1) Eat a lot of fruits, vegetables & breads and cerials. Stay away from large quantities of meat. Try to reduce your fat intake to under 20 grams a day (USDA recommends around 40) 2) Exercise regularly. Ride a bike or walk/run to work. 3) Avoid excess in all things. > What you said is one of the hypotheses. I personally feel that > environment and bad greasy food are other major contributors. > The way they cook all these fries, with overheated grease, is very > bad. BINGO!. Sorry, gotta go, it's dinner time and McD's is calling... From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 15:26:32 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:26:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701262326.PAA27241@toad.com> From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their civilians in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. ................................................................ The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take their chances and retaliate, etc. These things are done on a level not accessible to the most of us. All that we individuals have are access to telephone lines, computers, and modems. Yet even as we speak the world is being "wired" with cables to further make this singular communication possible and open up avenues to non-government organized activities: international corporations are se tting up offices, services, and correspondence wherever in the world they can find markets. All this is happening even while the governments are complaining to each other about what their citizens are posting (tch, tch) and threatening to deprive each other of that privilege. While governments and their True Believer citizens are dealing with each other on one level, the rest of the world is reorganizing itself into a different order of living and doing business. They are sharing ideas and examining their concepts and beliefs, they are conducting a lot of their disagreements on the net (instead of physically against each other on the ground), opening up to a broader view of relationships between individuals, or to governments, or to religions, sexuality, etc. The situation hasn't completely changed yet, but it is in process. .. Blanc From markm at voicenet.com Sun Jan 26 15:26:34 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:26:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular phone triangulation Message-ID: <199701262326.PAA27242@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > So far, as a result of the plethora of laws passed to enable law > enforcement agencies to 'catch drug dealers', I have seen only a > few minor criminals who are claimed to have been brought to justice > as a result of these laws, while seeing documentation of hundreds > and thousands of ordinary citizens being harassed and having their > human rights violated by these same laws. > And still, we have people like Mark, who seem relatively intelligent > and informed but who still echo the party-line of Big Brother when > He proclaims that the average citizen must be subjected to new and > better ways to monitor the movements and activities of His citizens > in order to 'protect' them from 'drug dealers'. Somehow, I thought my original post was ambiguous enough to be interpreted as support for the government's expansion of surveillance capabilities or the War on Some Drugs. Nothing could be further from the truth. I believe that the original intention of requiring cell phone providers to have the ability to triangulate all the signals they receive was so that drug dealers and other Enemies of the People could be caught easier. Since, drug dealers frequently use cell phones to avoid tracking, I thought that this was probably the primary justification. Just like the current GAK proposal, the government has found another way to justify a proposal to fool people into thinking that it's really for their own good. Many people have grown tired of hearing about the government's "compelling interest" in fighting "crime." The government claims that GAK is not only for violating people's rights by trying to get people to believe that it is a valuable service because it will allow people to recover their crypto keys if they ever lose them. In the case of the cell phone proposal, the promise of better 911 service is used to justify this latest violation of civil rights. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMuu7UizIPc7jvyFpAQG55gf6ApVENBJJEIQ+9xKs/9ldaSRbDvemI1DY Q0MyPkuOHo4e97i3dMYFk42Jb+OA+O0Q0kdsxRV0Y2i26GxTvC362+f/xI2+dTly YvyhPwgUyztfVC+IrjQgpuvqOMWthqdBrkZR7cJAs7KQG49CiWMAVcmCmQGUWJU/ mv2TRHAw3GT0NYIqF5FhTFAEoXcPZAjuEHP1pYPOPJ1zjrUkp6adcK2khgFHKwYp L8Pc9YLTJ/VNuw1n02PcfnitzPfgQIdhQVJAxwRClCxyifBKzQW1BtcMKyPhoxHY roTqotTzpIROBJVGZStx99mEscYG3KJCymDp6zqEfC78WWcUhoMMYg== =N8mn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ravage at ssz.com Sun Jan 26 15:26:52 1997 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:26:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Humor] Crypto in Traveller (a game) Message-ID: <199701262351.RAA01371@einstein> Hi, I thought I would pass this along to demonstrate that all uses of crypto are not 'real world'... Hope you enjoy. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com Forwarded message: > To: traveller at MPGN.COM > Subject: Re: Aperture Synthesis, Aegis > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:40:18 +0000 > > At 08:15 AM 1/26/97 +0000, you wrote: > > >For example, at 5 ls, you have ship A sending data to ship B, which has > >to know "exactly" how long it took for the data to cross the gap, as > >that's one of the parameters in the calculations. > > > >If it's "exactly" 5 seconds, then each ship "combines" the data it > >receives directly with the data received 5 seconds later from the other > >ship. The combining involves various things like trig and other messy > >stuff. But it all boils down to "A saw X1 from direction Y1 at time Z1, B > >saw X2 from Y2 at Z2". You combine the info and triangulate. > > > >So at 5 ls, you have a "data lag" of the 5 seconds it takes the signal > >to cross the distance *plus* the processing time. > > > >And since the distance *will* vary, even if only by a little bit, that > >changes the point in the your datastream that you are comparing with > >the datastream from the other ship. > > > > Could we presume that vessels operating together would have some type of > synchronized timekeeping, such as an atomic clock, in each ship, with each > message between ships being time & velocity stamped so that each receiver > could adjust the data for integration to local data? > > We should also assume a really good (and closely gaurded) encryption on the > interchanges, or enemy intercepts would be right dangerous. > > Adventure possiblity: trying to obtain a given unit's encryption code or > seeking to recover said code. From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 15:27:03 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:27:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701262327.PAA27273@toad.com> On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, snow wrote: > > > getting this degenerate disease when they get older. Check out the > > > videos by Howard Lyman, who used to be a big-time "chemical" farmer. > > > One quote: "My soil after a few years was like asbestos". > > As far as I understand, 1) no one really understands why cancer rates > > are up so much and 2) since people live longer, they are more likely do > > have cancer. > > While I don't claim to to be a Medical Researcher, I think that 1) should > be reworded to be "No one is willing to _admit_ why cancer rates are up so > much". You (generic) can look at certain population groups where there is > low incidence(sp?) of cancer, and then look at our society and it becomes > pretty obvious. > > Breast Cancer is exteremely rare in japenese women living in Japan. Thes > same women move to the US, start living > like American start developing breast cancer at a rate very similar to that > of American born women. lack of olive oil intake?? i head that olive oil is esp. necessary for women, as well as milk. > > IMO the biggest reason that "no one really understands why cancer rates are > up..." is that "they" are looking for the single bullet when reality isn't > usually that simple. > > I would be willing to make a bet that if you could get a large population > group to do the following, you would see a large statistical reduction in the > incidence(sp?) of cancer. > > 1) Eat a lot of fruits, vegetables & breads and cerials. Stay away from > large quantities of meat. Try to reduce your fat intake to under 20 grams a > day (USDA recommends around 40) > > 2) Exercise regularly. Ride a bike or walk/run to work. i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > 3) Avoid excess in all things. even chocolate? :) > > What you said is one of the hypotheses. I personally feel that > > environment and bad greasy food are other major contributors. > > The way they cook all these fries, with overheated grease, is very > > bad. > > BINGO!. EAt well, and smile too ;) > > Sorry, gotta go, it's dinner time and McD's is calling... a good laugh goes a long way ... ;) From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 15:27:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:27:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <199701262327.PAA27285@toad.com> Bill Stewart writes: > At 11:45 AM 1/26/97 -0500, Duncan Frissell wrote: > >Anyone running Windows 95 who hasn't grabbed the beta of PGPmail 4.5 from > >http://www.pgp.com/ is crazy. It works seamlessly with Netscape 3.0 and > >Eudora Pro 3.0. The 30-day demo of Eudora Pro is at: > http://www.eudora.com/prodemo/. > > PGPmail 4.5 now has beta 10 available - the download is smaller than beta 9. > > Eudora Lite 3.0.1 also supports plugins, so it should work. > It also supports filters, which has allowed probable flames to > quietly vanish from my inbox :-) > > BTW, from a non-government-user perspective, the questions asked to establish > export permission are nicely worded. Rather than asking > "Are you a US Subject", and "Do you agree to follow every vague > detail of the Export Laws", as some sites do, it asks > > - Is the requesting computer located within the United States? [N/Y] > > - Do you acknowledge affirmatively that you understand that PGPmail is > > subject to export controls under the Export Administration Act and > > that you cannot export the software without a license? [N/Y] > > - Do you certify that you are not on any of the United States Government's > > lists of export-precluded parties or otherwise ineligible to receive this > > transfer of cryptographic software subject to export controls under the > > Export Administration Act? > and then has a button saying > "I certify that the above answers are truthful", > which is flexible enough that I don't have to feel bad about not being > _absolutely_ certain that my packets aren't getting routed through Canada, > or that I'm not on some list that bans telephone company employees from > downloading cryptographic software on Tuesdays, or whether > computers 30 feet above the US are subject to this week's export rules :-), > or having to say "No" to Question 2 because I understand that you _can_ > export this software without a license (just do it) even though the Feds > disapprove.... > > > # Thanks; Bill > # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com > # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp > # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) > It doesn't seem to work with the mail program in MS IE, or MS WordMail. I understand why some people don't like Microsoft, but excluding support for popular Microsoft programs seems contrary to their stated goal of promoting the use of crypto. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From jya at pipeline.com Sun Jan 26 15:27:49 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:27:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular Encryption Docs Message-ID: <199701262327.PAA27300@toad.com> Thanks to David Wagner and Steve Schear, we've learned about the latest documents on cellular encryption which supercede the 1992 CAVE document, Appendix A to IS-54, which contained the CAVE algorithm. Here are the latest, followed by ordering information. TIA/EIA/IS-136.1-A -- TDMA Cellular/PCS - Radio Interface - Mobile Station - Base Station Compatibility - Digital Control Panel, October, 1996, 372 pp. $350.00. Addendum No. 1 to IS-136.1-A, November, 1996, 40 pp. Free. TIA/EIA/IS-136.2-A -- TDMA Cellular/PCS - Radio Interface - Mobile Station - Base Station Compatibility - Traffic Channels and FSK Control Channel, October, 1996, 378 pp. $310.00. TIA/EIA-627 -- 800 MHZ Cellular System, TDMA Radio Interface, Dual-Mode Mobile Station - Base Station Compatibility Standard, June, 1996, 258 pp. $120.00. These documents can be ordered from: Global Engineering Documents 15 Inverness Way East Englewood, Colorado 80112 Telephone: 1-800-854-7179 However, each of the documents lists the following related supplements which contain "sensitive information" and may be obtained by US/CA citizens from TIA by signing a Non-Disclosure Agreement and acceptance of export restrictions: Appendix A to IS-136. Appendix A to 627. Common Cryptographic Algorithms. Interface Specification for Common Cryptographic Algorithms. These controlled documents can be requested by calling Ms. Sharon Vargish at 1-703-907-7702, who will fax an NDA, and upon receipt of the completed form, will send the controlled documents at no cost. Here's the NDA: AGREEMENT ON CONTROL AND NONDISCLOSURE OF COMMON CRYPTOGRAPHIC ALGORITHMS REVISION A TO IS-54, IS-95, AND IS-136 [Note: 627 supercedes IS-54; IS-95 is for CDMA] "I, _________________________, an employee/consultant/affiliate (typed name) of __________________________, hereafter, "the company," (Company name) _____________________________ (Company address) _____________________________ and a United States or Canadian citizen, acknowledge and understand that the subject documents, to which I will have access contain information [which] is subject to export control under the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (Title 22, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 120-130). I also understand that the subject documents represent valuable, proprietary and confidential business information of TIA and its members. I hereby certify that this information will be controlled and will only be further disclosed, exported, or transferred according to the terms of the ITAR. ______________________________ _____________________________ Signature Date ______________________________ _____________________________ Printed Name Witness ______________________________ _____________________________ Title Printed Name of Witness [End NDA] From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Sun Jan 26 15:29:31 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:29:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Hi again, and an invitation to kibitz Message-ID: <199701262329.PAA27341@toad.com> In addition to David Wagner's comments, I'd like to point out several more weaknesses. - Would Kerberos work just as well? No sense reinventing the 3-headed dog. - You're not authenticating the server to the client. - If the challenge is different every time, the server needs to keep the user's password in plaintext (unlike Unix encrypted passwords.) This means that attacks on the server's file system can steal it, and since the password is used for session encryption, it can be used to forge sessions as well. - Alternatively, if the challenge is always the same (per user), then even one eavesdrop kills you, as with Unix passwords. - Since you're using the same 7-byte password hash for the first third of the authentication as for the session key, the dictionary attack on E(challenge, First-seven-bytes) gives you the session key, so you can eavesdrop just fine. If the password is too short, you can then dictionary-attack MD4 to find it also. - There's a Diffie-Hellman variant that can do logins. Unfortunately, it's patented (by some guy from Siemens in Paderborn DE, who patented it in Germany about 2 years before I rediscovered it, and patented it in the US about 6 months before :-) It covers any login methods using commutative hashes H1(H2(x)) == H2(H1(x)). The Siemens version extends it to authenticate both ends to each other; I extended it to get a session key for encryption and/or authentication. This really shouldn't have been patentable - my rediscovery shows that it must be pretty obvious to anyone skilled in the trade :-), and rather than reinventing the wheel, I was reinventing the hubcap or tire swing.... > In article <199701140755.CAA04514 at mail.intercon.com>, >Amanda Walker wrote: >> (a) Server sends 8-byte challenge to client >> (b) Client sends Microsoft NT authentication response to the server >> (take the password in Unicode form, do an MD4 hash, pad with 0s to 21 >> bytes, split into 3 7-byte groups, use these as DES keys to encrypt >> the challenge three times, send the 24-byte result as the response). >> (c) If authentication fails, close the connection. >> (d) If authentication succeeds, all subsequent traffic is enccrypted with >> DES in CFB mode. Until April :), the DES key used is taken from the >> first 7 bytes of the MD4 hash of the password (after April, we expect >> to switch to Diffie-Hellman key exchange first, followed by a revised >> authentication handshake). > At 11:20 AM 1/17/97 -0800, David Wagner wrote: >Some weaknesses: >- It doesn't resist dictionary attacks (no salt) when the attacker can make > one active probe (forge a fixed challenge and get the client's response). In particular, an 8 byte challenge is nowhere near enough, though the average million-dollar DES-cracker won't be as easy to adapt for 2**64 cycles of hash+DES*3 - and don't handle each third separately! At least do something like 3DES-EDE and return an 8-byte response, or hash the three output bytes together and send the hash. Using >=16 bytes of challenge would be better, or >=24 if you want printable challenges. >- It doesn't stop replay attacks (replay a fixed challenge, now the same DES > key is used, so replay DES-encrypted session data). You may not be able to replay a given challenge usefully, assuming it's different each time, but MITM attacks work ok after you've cracked the password by dictionary attack in the previous round. >- DES-encryption doesn't provide message authentication against active > attacks; use a MAC too. >- You should use independent DES keys for each direction of the connection. >- Also the DES encryption key doesn't change for each connection. It should. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 15:55:38 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 15:55:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: [Humor] Crypto in Traveller (a game) Message-ID: <199701262355.PAA27990@toad.com> Hi, I thought I would pass this along to demonstrate that all uses of crypto are not 'real world'... Hope you enjoy. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com Forwarded message: > To: traveller at MPGN.COM > Subject: Re: Aperture Synthesis, Aegis > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:40:18 +0000 > > At 08:15 AM 1/26/97 +0000, you wrote: > > >For example, at 5 ls, you have ship A sending data to ship B, which has > >to know "exactly" how long it took for the data to cross the gap, as > >that's one of the parameters in the calculations. > > > >If it's "exactly" 5 seconds, then each ship "combines" the data it > >receives directly with the data received 5 seconds later from the other > >ship. The combining involves various things like trig and other messy > >stuff. But it all boils down to "A saw X1 from direction Y1 at time Z1, B > >saw X2 from Y2 at Z2". You combine the info and triangulate. > > > >So at 5 ls, you have a "data lag" of the 5 seconds it takes the signal > >to cross the distance *plus* the processing time. > > > >And since the distance *will* vary, even if only by a little bit, that > >changes the point in the your datastream that you are comparing with > >the datastream from the other ship. > > > > Could we presume that vessels operating together would have some type of > synchronized timekeeping, such as an atomic clock, in each ship, with each > message between ships being time & velocity stamped so that each receiver > could adjust the data for integration to local data? > > We should also assume a really good (and closely gaurded) encryption on the > interchanges, or enemy intercepts would be right dangerous. > > Adventure possiblity: trying to obtain a given unit's encryption code or > seeking to recover said code. From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Sun Jan 26 16:03:28 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 16:03:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701270023.TAA17765@unix.asb.com> On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:32:56 GMT, you wrote: >This is surprising, given that (in Kahn on Codes) Mr. Kahn expressed >forceful opinions >- against certain aspects of export controls, >- questioning the value of the NSA's mission, in contrast to social >demands on government revenues. I didn't find his opinions forceful in Codebreakers, 2nd. ed. Questioning the NSA's purpose vs. advoctating GAK are not incompatible. >However, while I oppose making key escrow mandatory in general, and >share the general suspicion of a voluntary Clipper, if Mr. Kahn's >support for Clipper is limited to cellular telephones, then I have no >quarrel with such a position. >Encryption is illegal, without special permission, for use over the >airwaves, particularly where mobile radio is involved. This is a >long-standing restriction, and not unreasonable. Private communication >between people at home is one thing, but allowing criminals to closely >coordinate their activities on the move is another. [..] The problem is the technology is merged. What if you're using cellular links to your ISP, and use SSL or ssh or PGP? Radio is being advocated as a possible solution to some of the net's bandwidth problems. Rob From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 16:20:12 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 16:20:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Toto's database In-Reply-To: <199701261840.KAA21206@toad.com> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > Greg Broiles wrote: > > Toto writes: > a good way to keep the moderator > honest. I don't think it's possible. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 16:20:22 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 16:20:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701261655.IAA18541@toad.com> Message-ID: blanc writes: > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >>>>>>>irrelevant at nowhere.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". Clearly Gilmore disagrees with both statements. He practices censorship and plug-pulling. What a dishonorable person. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Sun Jan 26 16:40:52 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 16:40:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701270040.QAA29514@toad.com> On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:32:56 GMT, you wrote: >This is surprising, given that (in Kahn on Codes) Mr. Kahn expressed >forceful opinions >- against certain aspects of export controls, >- questioning the value of the NSA's mission, in contrast to social >demands on government revenues. I didn't find his opinions forceful in Codebreakers, 2nd. ed. Questioning the NSA's purpose vs. advoctating GAK are not incompatible. >However, while I oppose making key escrow mandatory in general, and >share the general suspicion of a voluntary Clipper, if Mr. Kahn's >support for Clipper is limited to cellular telephones, then I have no >quarrel with such a position. >Encryption is illegal, without special permission, for use over the >airwaves, particularly where mobile radio is involved. This is a >long-standing restriction, and not unreasonable. Private communication >between people at home is one thing, but allowing criminals to closely >coordinate their activities on the move is another. [..] The problem is the technology is merged. What if you're using cellular links to your ISP, and use SSL or ssh or PGP? Radio is being advocated as a possible solution to some of the net's bandwidth problems. Rob From jimbell at pacifier.com Sun Jan 26 16:41:59 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 16:41:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: <199701270041.QAA19356@mail.pacifier.com> At 07:54 PM 1/25/97 -0500, Mark M. wrote: >I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and >have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There >would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to >triangulate every call. The primary motivation for this is almost certainly >"location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. It would only be marginally reliable. GPS signals are so weak (coming from satellites in 11,000 mile orbits) that reception outdoors is sometimes iffy if the signals have to go through foliage. Reception indoors is probably only rarely do-able. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 16:43:12 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 16:43:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701262310.PAA26784@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701270039.SAA01662@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, > 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that > they've just left things as is. > Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold > the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will > hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). In case of 2, they are probably not worthy of your help. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 16:47:07 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 16:47:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701262327.PAA27273@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701270041.SAA01716@manifold.algebra.com> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; but remember, tanning will kill ya. - Igor. From rwright at adnetsol.com Sun Jan 26 17:00:15 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:00:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" Message-ID: <199701270100.RAA01704@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> Thought this might interest you guys. ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:00:14 -0800 (PST) From: Audrie Krause Subject: Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" To: iaj-futuremedia at igc.apc.org * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ACTION ALERT Please re-post where appropriate * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dear Friends, On February 8, the first anniversary of the Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996, NetAction and the Center for Educational Priorities are launching a month-long Internet demonstration to call attention to the wide gap between the rhetoric and reality of this sweeping legislation. President Clinton and Congress promised the American people that enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act would lead to a cornucopia of technological innovations that would change the nation's cultural frontiers, expand our choices, dazzle our eyes, and inform our minds. Instead, we've been censored in cyberspace, subjected to TV ratings systems, and prevented from experiencing the benefits of a truly competitive marketplace by the emergence of "cartels" created by mega-mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. This is not reform! And it's not too late to demand that our decision makers deliver on what they promised us on February 8, 1996: MORE competition, MORE consumer choices, MORE widespread access to information technology. The Center for Educational Priorities and NetAction are spearheading this demonstration in an effort to pressure the Federal Communications Commission and other state and national regulatory agencies to ensure that the Act is implemented in a way that truly benefits the public. We invite you to join this effort by linking to the site at for one month beginning on February 8. By linking to the protest site, you will be adding your voice to a united demand for true telecommunications reform. The site is currently under development. When completed, it will feature brief summaries of the impact the Act has had in its first year on telecommunications and technology policy, media ownership and content, and censorship, along with suggested actions to help ensure that implementation of the Act truly benefits the public. We are also creating extensive links to other organizations working on these issues, as well as to other sites with current information on censorship, mega-mergers, universal service, school hook-ups, and the v-chip. We welcome suggestions for additional links to add. Please let us know if you will participate in the demonstration by contacting NetAction, by email at akrause at igc.org, or by phone at 415-775-8674. Thanks! =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From jimbell at pacifier.com Sun Jan 26 17:00:49 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:00:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270100.RAA21027@mail.pacifier.com> At 09:30 AM 1/26/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >blanc writes: >> The identifications of self as a citizen who must be identified with the >> vote of a majority, and consequently suffer the perception of oneself as >> someone who "voted to accept restrictions of the net, therefore should not >> be helped against it", is becoming irrelevant. When a distress call goes >> out from someone anywhere on the planet, the assistance and relief may come >> from anyone anywhere who chooses to rally others and provide assistance. >> >> It is not the traditional "we" against "them", and it is not the "citizens >> of the US" helping those who "voted themselves a Hitler into power" or >> "voted themselves into restrictions against free speech". It is "those of >> us who appreciate the liberty in communications technology" against "those >> who would take it away". > >However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should >not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their civilians >in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. "I have a solution to that problem." Seriously! Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see any recognition of this fact. For the benefit of the masses, the AP ("Assassination Politics") solution to, for example, the Iraq problem would be to allow anyone and everyone in the world to donate money towards the death of Saddam Hussein, and any leadership which survives him, until that leadership satisfies the public that they won't be following in Hussein's footsteps. Simple. Economical. And, dare I say it, fair. I believe that the Coalition spent $60 BILLION dollars doing the Iraq war, and they didn't even get rid of Saddam. I'm sure AP would have done the task for under $100 million, and possibly far less. (and that money would have been collected by donation, not stolen in taxes. Much of that money would have come from the Iraqi people themselves, BTW.) There would be few if any civilian casualities, no hunger or poverty caused among the people. Even their soldiers would be relatively unaffected, except that their militaries (as well as ours) would be disbanded. Reminds me of the punchline to that joke. "He sent two boats and a helicopter! What more did you want?!?" Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 17:10:46 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:10:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270110.RAA00819@toad.com> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; but remember, tanning will kill ya. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 17:10:48 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:10:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701270110.RAA00823@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, > 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that > they've just left things as is. > Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold > the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will > hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). In case of 2, they are probably not worthy of your help. - Igor. From jimbell at pacifier.com Sun Jan 26 17:10:50 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:10:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location... Message-ID: <199701270110.RAA00824@toad.com> At 07:54 PM 1/25/97 -0500, Mark M. wrote: >I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and >have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There >would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to >triangulate every call. The primary motivation for this is almost certainly >"location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. It would only be marginally reliable. GPS signals are so weak (coming from satellites in 11,000 mile orbits) that reception outdoors is sometimes iffy if the signals have to go through foliage. Reception indoors is probably only rarely do-able. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 17:14:25 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:14:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <01BC0BAC.ED2F1EE0@king2-16.cnw.com> From: Jim Choate blanc has put forth an interesting assertion relating to nationalism and the Internet. If he is correct then we will have a one world government (ie technocracy) whether we like it or not. ................................................................... When your little company grows up to become a big World Leader in robotics, will you then be a member of this technocracy, participating in a one-world government, whether we like it or not? Will you sit on the Board of Honchos making important decisions about net access for all, perhaps active in the Chamber of Borgs? :>) .. Blanc p.s. I be femme From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Sun Jan 26 17:22:58 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:22:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Text files Message-ID: <19970126.202040.12382.0.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> ho was the one who wanted a list of my texts? I deleted the message accidentally From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 17:30:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:30:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: [No Subject:] In-Reply-To: <199701261640.IAA18377@toad.com> Message-ID: <6w161D73w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Bill Stewart writes: > At 09:13 AM 1/25/97 EST, Lou Zer wrote: > >You missed the hole point. You read that BECAUSE their was no header, if > >it was ANARCHY you would have just deleted it. > > Not necessarily; I _am_ an anarchist, after all. No, you're a fucking statist. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 17:30:14 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:30:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: US Info Supremacy In-Reply-To: <199701261655.IAA18539@toad.com> Message-ID: blanc writes: > From: John Young > > Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons. > ........................................ > > He must be on vacation; he hasn't posted in quite a while. Other conjectures: * dead from AIDS * abducted by aliens, held captive in a flying saucer * moderated so heavily, his rants don't even make it to cypherpunks-unedited --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 17:30:25 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:30:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <01BC0B90.0B78E600@king2-16.cnw.com> Message-ID: blanc writes: > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis > > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should > not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their > civilians > in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. > ................................................................ > > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other > governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the > resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take > their chances and retaliate, etc. > > These things are done on a level not accessible to the most of us. All > that we individuals have are access to telephone lines, computers, and > modems. Yet even as we speak the world is being "wired" with cables to > further make this singular communication possible and open up avenues to > non-government organized activities: international corporations are se > tting up offices, services, and correspondence wherever in the world they > can find markets. All this is happening even while the governments are > complaining to each other about what their citizens are posting (tch, tch) > and threatening to deprive each other of that privilege. > > While governments and their True Believer citizens are dealing with each > other on one level, the rest of the world is reorganizing itself into a > different order of living and doing business. They are sharing ideas and > examining their concepts and beliefs, they are conducting a lot of their > disagreements on the net (instead of physically against each other on the > ground), opening up to a broader view of relationships between individuals, > or to governments, or to religions, sexuality, etc. And "cypher punks" bend over for a NSA stooge and allow U.S.G. to further curtail free speech. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 17:30:30 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:30:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: it aint successful until someone loses his temper In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970126212906.00acba20@earthlink.net> Message-ID: Paul Penrod writes: > Well, I see that you could'nt leave well enough alone... :-) > > Since Snow decided to jump into your face on this one, I might as well > throw my $0.02 on the table as well. Funny how my trashcan stays very empty > these days now that cypherpunks is in my bit bucket... I suggest you subscribe to cypherpunks-unedited. It may go away, but for now it's much more interesting than the censored version. > Frankly, it does not surprise me that homosexuality is yet another > pointless off-topic to be discussed on the list. Thanks to the moderation, only one side of the issue gets aired anyway. > >> +Thank God for AIDS. Amen. > >> when AIDS was relatively obscure, I always dismissed AIDS as > >> God's response to homosexuality (and other crimes against nature); > >> i.e. -settlement by a just God. > > > > I almost threw a dumb ass redneck of a ship in the middle of the ocean > >for a comment like this. ... > This politically correct bullshit response is just symptomatic of someone > who is uncomfortable with the position taken for expediency's sake and is > trying to justify to himself the course taken. The "politically correct" homosexuals, like snow and gilmore and sandfart consider (violent) action to be a reasonable response to speech they don't like (e.g. "homophobic") - not "more speech". Someone says something you disagree with on a mailing list? Unsubscribe him! Ban him from the list! Institute moderation to auto-discard everything he says! Curiously, African-American children are taught that violence is a correct response to "racist" speech. ObEbonics: "Dot's right, judge, I shot da mothafucka cuz he call me a nigga!" > > I've read a lot of your rantings on this list, and I agree with some of > >them, but statements like this prove that you are a bigoted idiot. You may > >have some areas where you know what you are talking about, and I wouldn't > want > >to be on the sharp end of a gun you were holding, but your head is > definately > >stuck firmly up your ass. > > Ok, we throw down the gauntlet here in true USENET style, and in keeping > with that, have nothing of value to say (just name calling). When they run out of things to say, they start pulling plugs, unsubscribing people, and "moderating"... > > 1) If homosexuality is a "choice", why would anyone choose that > lifestyle > >where the averge life expectancy is in the 40's, that causes so much pain > >among ones family, and so much conflict with the rest of society. I can answer this one, having worked for Jesuits: having deviant sexual desires may not be a choice, but willingly committing unnatural acts to satisfy your deviant desires is a choice. > > The answer is you can't. You adopt a knee-jerk position that reinforces > >your deliberate isolationism. Anything that may cause you to question your > >worldview gets sorted to /dev/evil and you plow ahead like some pig ignorant > >dough boy killing as ordered for king and country. > > Who's the ignorant one here? The name caller or the recipient. My vote goes > to the name caller, as he assumes this to be a debate of fact, when in > essence he's expressed only his opinion on the matter and not bothered to > show teacher his homework (the dog ate it - so give me an "A" anyway 'cause > I deserve it). ;-> And when the namecalling doesn't work, they respond with violence. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 17:30:33 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:30:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <8Z161D74w165w@bwalk.dm.com> paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk writes: > > > > > My perfectly crypto-relevant article regarding possible attacks > > > > on human relationships with the use of forged mail and anonymous > > > > remailers, has been tossed out (sorted) into cypherpunks-flames > > > > mailing list. > > > > > > I don`t think I read the article (even though I subscribe to the > > > unmoderated list), can you forward me a copy. > > > As I understand it though, from other comentaries, it was junked > > > because it was in response to a message by Dimitri who, given that it > > > is Sandy that is moderating the list, is no doubt filtered by > > > different criteria than anyone else on the list, in my opinion a > > > censorous and fascist restraint as Dimitri has recently been posting > > > more crypto relevant material, besides which whatever the content of > > > his posts they should be open to review before a decision is made on > > > if they are to be junked or not. > > > > Has Paul reversed his previous pro-censorship stand and decided to > > learn something about crypto from people who actually know some? > > There is no change of stance needed, I happen to believe you are > knowledgable about cryptography and sometimes post worthwhile > commentary and information, however, you also post a lot of dreck and > flammable material which means I respond in kind. That does not mean > I believe you, or anyone else, should be censored. I distinctly recall how Paul used to call for censoring me. If he's changed his mind and really doesn't think that anyone should be censored, it's a welcome development - even if it was brought on by the sandfart censoring Paul. > > > > Sandy also states rather plainly that crypto-relevance is not the > > > > criterion by which he moderates this list. I question this policy. > > > > > > Yes Sandy, please enlighten us, what is the criterion you use to > > > moderate the list if not crypto-relevancy. I suspect an element of > > > self preservation and protection of the list fuhrer and diktat maker > > > John Gilmore (who, until the disgraceful incident with Dimitri > > > commanded some respect on this list). > > > > I used to respect Gilmore until this series of incidents (unsubscribing > > me, turning list moderated). Now I only have disdain for him. > > I agree entirely, Gilmore was a respected man (despite the EFF being > a corporate whore) who threw any respect and admiration others had > for him away. I wonder what he thinks he got in exchange... > > > > I would like to hear your opinions as to whether such policies satisfy > > > > the current readership. > > > > > > I don`t think this is the point, John Gilmore is free to appoint > > > whoever he wants to moderate his list, he is free to censor all > > > messages which criticise him and his censorship, however, subscribers > > > to the list should be told they are being censored on these grounds > > > and not on some facade of "crypto relevancy" or another thin veil > > > drawn weakly over content based censorship to protect a certain class > > > of list members. > > > > Quite a few people have expressed interest in re-creating an unmoderated > > cypherpunks list at another site if Gilmore decided to stick to his > > "moderation experiment". > > I notice and appreciate the quotes around "moderation experiment", > this is, without doubt, a permenant measure to silence members of the > list who dare to offer criticism of anyone an element of {x: x a > friend or co-censor of John Gilmore} Yes - clearly the personality of the submitter is the most important factor in moderator's rejections, not even the content. > I do not have the resources to run such an unmoderated list but I > hope someone on this list does and is good enough to start such a > list, cypherpunks is a shell of what it once was. I notice that the sandfart has been challenging his enemies to create an alternative mailing list. I wonder what their contingency plan is. Without a doubt, such a competing list would be mailbombed and flooded with garbage by Gilmore and his entourage. What else? > Also, please note this message will be junked onto cypherpunks-flames > even though it contains no flames or flame bait because it dares to > criticise the censorship of the list (once again Sandy, I give you an > opportunity to prove me wrong). The sandfart has proven me right already. As I said, I think we're paying too much attention to him and his censorship, and he's just a front for Gilmore anyway. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 17:31:08 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:31:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701270041.SAA01716@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; love, oksas! From frankw at in.net Sun Jan 26 17:35:50 1997 From: frankw at in.net (Frank Willoughby) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:35:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: WinKrypt Message-ID: <9701270133.AA20096@su1.in.net> Out of curiosity, is anyone familiar with WinKrypt by Syncronsys? I picked up a copy & there is no mention in the documentation which encryption algorithm it uses & what the key lengths are. FWIW, my impression is that the documentation seems to deliberately avoid mentioning the algorithm/key lengths. Hmmmm. (food for thought) I was curious how it compares to McAfee's PC Crypto which uses 40-bit DES or 160-bit Blowfish (user-chooses) & other PC/laptop encryption products. BTW, I would also appreciate your input on any crypto products which you believe to be robust, easy-to-use & secure. (I know I can only have 2 out of 3, but it's worth a try anyway). 8^) Please send marketing info to me directly at: frankw at in.net and **NOT** to the entire mailing list. (BTW, I mentioned WinKrypt & PCcrypo because they are the only two which are available at many computer stores as COTS s/w). TIA for your help. Best Regards, Frank From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 17:40:21 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:40:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701270039.SAA01662@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: cypherpunks-errors at toad.com writes: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, > > 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that > > they've just left things as is. > > > Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold > > the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will > > hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). > > In case of 2, they are probably not worthy of your help. I wholeheartedly agree. By now everyone's painfully aware that there are 3 mailing lists. It's not my responsibily (or Dale's) to encourage cypherpunks subscribers to do what I think is best for them - resubscribe to cypherpunks-unedited. Folks who choose to let Sandy choose what they read and don't read should be free to do that. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From bernard at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 26 17:45:31 1997 From: bernard at xs4all.nl (bernard) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:45:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program In-Reply-To: <199701261600.KAA04355@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32EB2D79.7C5B@xs4all.nl> > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Newsgroups: comp.security.misc > > * DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program > > * at; http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard > > Bernard, thanks for an interesting post. I am Cc-ing your message to > > Cypherpunks mailing list which is ostensibly dedicated to discussions > > of cryptography. > > > > As follows from info on your home page, you do use simple XOR to > > encrypt your data. It was not clear to me though, how do you generate > > the keys to encrypt the data. I am sure that many readers of cypherpunks > > mailing list will be interested, so please send a copy of your reply > > to cypherpunks at toad.com. You can enter a short key or import one with command [Get Key]. This is, you point any file, and the key will become the 30000 first characters of this file. You can get this file any where on your machine, the network, the internet, foppy,,,,, If you add (paste or type) or delete characters at the begining of the imported key, the reste will shift right, and this imported key become a new key. You can't remember a key of 30000 chr (so you have to store it) but you can remenber the the change you made (10 to 100 or more chr) and of course, don't store it. Thank you for your interest. DPT dos / DPT16 / DPT32 http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 17:47:42 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:47:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <01BC0B90.0B78E600@king2-16.cnw.com> Message-ID: <32EC05D8.1650@gte.net> blanc wrote: > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should > not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their > civilians > in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other > governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the > resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take > their chances and retaliate, etc. I wish this were true, at least of nations which would be friendly to someone like me (white, Western, etc.). A bully on a school playground can always be knocked down, no matter how big or how vicious he is. Sadly, the U.S. bully cannot be knocked down. Bad enough you get nuclear, chemical, and/or biological stuff waved at you - if you get into a hot war like Desert Storm, your country is carpet-bombed with fleets of B-52's until it is thoroughly debilitated. How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" (quote approximate). People who read this might argue that the "true power" is international now, and not confined to the USA. I say it doesn't matter which end you look at it from, the "true power" has been concentrating and centralizing itself for some years now, and you can use any nation-label you like. From jimbell at pacifier.com Sun Jan 26 17:52:27 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 17:52:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701270151.RAA25415@mail.pacifier.com> At 12:03 AM 1/27/97 GMT, Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl wrote: >On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:32:56 GMT, John Savard wrote: > >>This is surprising, given that (in Kahn on Codes) Mr. Kahn expressed >>forceful opinions > >>- against certain aspects of export controls, > >>- questioning the value of the NSA's mission, in contrast to social >>demands on government revenues. > >I didn't find his opinions forceful in Codebreakers, 2nd. ed. > >Questioning the NSA's purpose vs. advoctating GAK are not incompatible. > >>However, while I oppose making key escrow mandatory in general, and >>share the general suspicion of a voluntary Clipper, if Mr. Kahn's >>support for Clipper is limited to cellular telephones, then I have no >>quarrel with such a position. > >>Encryption is illegal, without special permission, for use over the >>airwaves, particularly where mobile radio is involved. This is a >>long-standing restriction, and not unreasonable. Private communication >>between people at home is one thing, but allowing criminals to closely >>coordinate their activities on the move is another. It's odd that I can't seem to find the original message here. Contrary to the original claim, encryption over radio is generally legal. (One noted exception to this is ham radio...) Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 18:00:15 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:00:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Text files In-Reply-To: <19970126.202040.12382.0.SATAN_is_a_HACKER@juno.com> Message-ID: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) writes: > ho was the one who wanted a list of my texts? I deleted the message > accidentally Just post it to the whole mailing list. :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 18:00:32 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:00:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701270100.RAA21027@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: jim bell writes: > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study. Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > For the benefit of the masses, the AP ("Assassination Politics") solution > to, for example, the Iraq problem would be to allow anyone and everyone in > the world to donate money towards the death of Saddam Hussein, and any > leadership which survives him, until that leadership satisfies the public > that they won't be following in Hussein's footsteps. Simple. Economical. > And, dare I say it, fair. I have much respect for Saddam Hussein. I understand he's more admired by Iraqi people than, say, the kkklintons are by American people. Saddam even commands the respect of his Iranian enemies. > I believe that the Coalition spent $60 BILLION dollars doing the Iraq war, > and they didn't even get rid of Saddam. I'm sure AP would have done the > task for under $100 million, and possibly far less. (and that money would > have been collected by donation, not stolen in taxes. Much of that money > would have come from the Iraqi people themselves, BTW.) I doubt that they would collect much among the Iraqis: both because Saddam is pretty popular, and because they don't have much cash, thanks to the sanctions. I doubt they'd collect billions or even millions in the Western countries. These were involuntary taxes. Do people really hate Saddam so much as to bet that he'll live and hope to lose their bets to an assassin? I doubt it. And you can't do the standard fundraising trick of collecting some funds, then using them to run media ads soliciting more funds. I suppose Kiwaiti and Saudi sheikhs might bet a few million. (I hate these guys - I'd like to bet on the continuing existence of a basket of sheikhs :-) > There would be few if any civilian casualities, no hunger or poverty caused > among the people. Even their soldiers would be relatively unaffected, > except that their militaries (as well as ours) would be disbanded. > > Reminds me of the punchline to that joke. > > "He sent two boats and a helicopter! What more did you want?!?" Was it really Bush's goal to topple Saddam's government and bring in a U.S.-friendly one that would need billions of dollars of aid? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From express at shell.liberty.com Sun Jan 26 18:05:10 1997 From: express at shell.liberty.com (EXPRESS) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:05:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: 300 Money Making Reports Message-ID: <199701261250.EAA24457@shell.liberty.com> Please forgive me for this e-mail, but I felt I just had to let more people know about this and get in on the ground floor! 300 Money Making Reports AN OUTSTANDING MAIL ORDER OPPORTUNITY! Make 1000% Profit Sell 300 Popular Money Making Reports Do you have a sincere desire to succeed in your own mail order business ? If your answer is YES, then it will pay you to read on ... If you are like most people wanting to "HIT IT BIG" in the exciting mail order business, you are probably selling someone else's product - using their advertising material. Can money be made this way? The answer is yes - BUT - there are some vital ingredients necessary to make really BIG MONEY in mail order. FIRST: You must sell a product that many people want. SECOND: It must be a hard to find product. THIRD: Your profit per sale must be VERY LARGE. Well, we have found what is probably the most profitable line of products that can be sold by mail - and the public demand is virtually unlimited. This product is VALUABLE INFORMATION! You can prove it for yourself. Look through any magazine. Advertisements like "Wipe out debts Without bankruptcy","How to borrow thousands of dollars interest free", or "Get a free Cadillac, Mercedes, or any luxury car every year". These people are making a fortune selling this information because they have the know-how, plus the information. Having the INFORMATION to sell is the key. You can buy many books on how to sell information, but where to get the information to sell is always the problem in starting a profitable mail order business. NOW THAT PROBLEM HAS BEEN SOLVED FOR YOU ! We have put together a collection of 300 of the hottest money-making reports available. Our Offer A Complete Mail Order Business This is your opportunity to start your own profitable business selling information through the mail. Not only will you receive all 300 money making reports, YOU WILL RECEIVE COMPLETE RIGHTS TO REPRODUCE AND SELL THIS INFORMATION IN ANY MANNER YOU DESIRE. Think of it! You can now OWN OUTRIGHT this complete set of 300 money making reports and YOU become the PUBLISHER AND PRIME SOURCE for the unbelievably low price of $19.99. Nothing more to pay. You can sell these reports individually or you can sell the entire set. You can even sell the reprint rights to others, just as we do. You'll have your money back on the first order you sell and from that point on - watch your income skyrocket! Don't Wait To Get into This Incredible Business of Selling Information By Mail All reports are in text file format. You can email them and sell them for dollars. TO ORDER: Please send check or money order in the amount of $19.99 to: Express Marketing 10601-A Tierrasanta Blvd Suite 287 San Diego, CA 92124 TO ORDER ON-LINE: Visit Our Catalog at: http://www.express1.com NOTE: Reports will be emailed, so include your email address. Email: express at mail.liberty.com ************************************************** THE EXPRESS CYBERSTORE Home-Based Business Start-Up Guides & Reports Home of "Internet Madness" Visit us at: http://www.express1.com Email: express at mail.liberty.com ************************************************** From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 18:05:54 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:05:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net In-Reply-To: <199701261712.LAA00406@einstein> Message-ID: <32EC2A1D.1EDA@sk.sympatico.ca> Jim Choate wrote: > > From: Bill Stewart > > > > Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - > > The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of > 'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. > I have the right to do whatever I want to anything that comes through my part > of the net, including censoring or editing any mail that comes through it, so > that it reflects a point of view consistent with mine, since I am the one > paying for it. > The net is a bunch of computers, > running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and > EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility > support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody > else is along for the ride. > Those who pay the money, like myself and others who have bought the right > to control the net, are justified in acting without outside interference > on anything that passes through our part of the net. > If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then once a box goes on > the net it belongs to nobody/everybody. Clearly utter nonsense. > The net belongs to those with the money to control it, and people who do > not have money have no rights on the net. > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > understand what is going on. > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > anything that passes through his part of the net. > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. > Jim Choate > CyberTects > ravage at ssz.com Jim, Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over the part of the net that I have paid for. I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose they choose. As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was set up to espouse. Toto From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 18:11:04 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:11:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701270100.RAA21027@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <199701270207.UAA00452@manifold.algebra.com> jim bell wrote: > > "I have a solution to that problem." > > Seriously! > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. > Jim, why don't you stop bullshitting and write a real assassination bot. [as a beta, it can be a mailbombing bot] This bot would: 1) Accept bets as combinations of a) Some amount of cybercash b) A string that identifies an event that should happen such as "domain X is mailbombed" c) [optional] date of that event (no date means that you always lose) d) Return address (possibly a nym address) to send all cash from UNSUCCESSSFUL bets for the event in question. e) [optional] time limit after which the cash will be refunded. Note that for simplicity, the bot should identify the event as a unique string, without any understanding of any semantics of that string. 2) Store these bets in a database. 3) Have a trusted party (someone really honest, like myself) report to the bot the signed strings that, in the opinion of the trusted party, are "true". 4) Upon receipt of such event notifications, the bot will find all bets and forward them to the better whose date prediction was the closest. If several betters predicted the same date, the money is split between them in proportion to the amount of moneys submitted. Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, cjames at cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be a nym. The fact of mailbombing would become apparent when CEC-SERVICES's MX DNS record is pulled off. The trusted party will send a phrase (standardized) "domain cec-services.com disabled" to the bot. The bot sends my money to the mailbomber through his nym address. I estimate that this bot would take about 2000 lines of perl. You may need to use some real database, like postgres or sybase. Use a nym for it. It will take a while for this bot to develop a reputation (remember, there is real money involved!). - Igor. From satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com Sun Jan 26 18:25:43 1997 From: satan_is_a_hacker at juno.com (Lou Zer) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:25:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Text files Message-ID: <199701270225.SAA03507@toad.com> ho was the one who wanted a list of my texts? I deleted the message accidentally From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 18:25:58 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:25:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: US Info Supremacy Message-ID: <199701270225.SAA03528@toad.com> blanc writes: > From: John Young > > Hello, Tim May and our other solons and Solomons. > ........................................ > > He must be on vacation; he hasn't posted in quite a while. Other conjectures: * dead from AIDS * abducted by aliens, held captive in a flying saucer * moderated so heavily, his rants don't even make it to cypherpunks-unedited --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 18:26:05 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:26:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <199701270226.SAA03548@toad.com> From: Jim Choate blanc has put forth an interesting assertion relating to nationalism and the Internet. If he is correct then we will have a one world government (ie technocracy) whether we like it or not. ................................................................... When your little company grows up to become a big World Leader in robotics, will you then be a member of this technocracy, participating in a one-world government, whether we like it or not? Will you sit on the Board of Honchos making important decisions about net access for all, perhaps active in the Chamber of Borgs? :>) .. Blanc p.s. I be femme From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 18:26:08 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:26:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270226.SAA03551@toad.com> On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; love, oksas! From frankw at in.net Sun Jan 26 18:26:57 1997 From: frankw at in.net (Frank Willoughby) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:26:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: WinKrypt Message-ID: <199701270226.SAA03590@toad.com> Out of curiosity, is anyone familiar with WinKrypt by Syncronsys? I picked up a copy & there is no mention in the documentation which encryption algorithm it uses & what the key lengths are. FWIW, my impression is that the documentation seems to deliberately avoid mentioning the algorithm/key lengths. Hmmmm. (food for thought) I was curious how it compares to McAfee's PC Crypto which uses 40-bit DES or 160-bit Blowfish (user-chooses) & other PC/laptop encryption products. BTW, I would also appreciate your input on any crypto products which you believe to be robust, easy-to-use & secure. (I know I can only have 2 out of 3, but it's worth a try anyway). 8^) Please send marketing info to me directly at: frankw at in.net and **NOT** to the entire mailing list. (BTW, I mentioned WinKrypt & PCcrypo because they are the only two which are available at many computer stores as COTS s/w). TIA for your help. Best Regards, Frank From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 18:27:53 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:27:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270227.SAA03686@toad.com> blanc wrote: > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should > not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their > civilians > in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other > governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the > resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take > their chances and retaliate, etc. I wish this were true, at least of nations which would be friendly to someone like me (white, Western, etc.). A bully on a school playground can always be knocked down, no matter how big or how vicious he is. Sadly, the U.S. bully cannot be knocked down. Bad enough you get nuclear, chemical, and/or biological stuff waved at you - if you get into a hot war like Desert Storm, your country is carpet-bombed with fleets of B-52's until it is thoroughly debilitated. How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" (quote approximate). People who read this might argue that the "true power" is international now, and not confined to the USA. I say it doesn't matter which end you look at it from, the "true power" has been concentrating and centralizing itself for some years now, and you can use any nation-label you like. From jimbell at pacifier.com Sun Jan 26 18:27:55 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:27:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270227.SAA03694@toad.com> At 09:30 AM 1/26/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >blanc writes: >> The identifications of self as a citizen who must be identified with the >> vote of a majority, and consequently suffer the perception of oneself as >> someone who "voted to accept restrictions of the net, therefore should not >> be helped against it", is becoming irrelevant. When a distress call goes >> out from someone anywhere on the planet, the assistance and relief may come >> from anyone anywhere who chooses to rally others and provide assistance. >> >> It is not the traditional "we" against "them", and it is not the "citizens >> of the US" helping those who "voted themselves a Hitler into power" or >> "voted themselves into restrictions against free speech". It is "those of >> us who appreciate the liberty in communications technology" against "those >> who would take it away". > >However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should >not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their civilians >in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. "I have a solution to that problem." Seriously! Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see any recognition of this fact. For the benefit of the masses, the AP ("Assassination Politics") solution to, for example, the Iraq problem would be to allow anyone and everyone in the world to donate money towards the death of Saddam Hussein, and any leadership which survives him, until that leadership satisfies the public that they won't be following in Hussein's footsteps. Simple. Economical. And, dare I say it, fair. I believe that the Coalition spent $60 BILLION dollars doing the Iraq war, and they didn't even get rid of Saddam. I'm sure AP would have done the task for under $100 million, and possibly far less. (and that money would have been collected by donation, not stolen in taxes. Much of that money would have come from the Iraqi people themselves, BTW.) There would be few if any civilian casualities, no hunger or poverty caused among the people. Even their soldiers would be relatively unaffected, except that their militaries (as well as ours) would be disbanded. Reminds me of the punchline to that joke. "He sent two boats and a helicopter! What more did you want?!?" Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From bernard at xs4all.nl Sun Jan 26 18:28:01 1997 From: bernard at xs4all.nl (bernard) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:28:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program Message-ID: <199701270228.SAA03695@toad.com> > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Newsgroups: comp.security.misc > > * DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program > > * at; http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard > > Bernard, thanks for an interesting post. I am Cc-ing your message to > > Cypherpunks mailing list which is ostensibly dedicated to discussions > > of cryptography. > > > > As follows from info on your home page, you do use simple XOR to > > encrypt your data. It was not clear to me though, how do you generate > > the keys to encrypt the data. I am sure that many readers of cypherpunks > > mailing list will be interested, so please send a copy of your reply > > to cypherpunks at toad.com. You can enter a short key or import one with command [Get Key]. This is, you point any file, and the key will become the 30000 first characters of this file. You can get this file any where on your machine, the network, the internet, foppy,,,,, If you add (paste or type) or delete characters at the begining of the imported key, the reste will shift right, and this imported key become a new key. You can't remember a key of 30000 chr (so you have to store it) but you can remenber the the change you made (10 to 100 or more chr) and of course, don't store it. Thank you for your interest. DPT dos / DPT16 / DPT32 http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard From jimbell at pacifier.com Sun Jan 26 18:28:01 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:28:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: David Kahn advocates GAK Message-ID: <199701270228.SAA03696@toad.com> At 12:03 AM 1/27/97 GMT, Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl wrote: >On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:32:56 GMT, John Savard wrote: > >>This is surprising, given that (in Kahn on Codes) Mr. Kahn expressed >>forceful opinions > >>- against certain aspects of export controls, > >>- questioning the value of the NSA's mission, in contrast to social >>demands on government revenues. > >I didn't find his opinions forceful in Codebreakers, 2nd. ed. > >Questioning the NSA's purpose vs. advoctating GAK are not incompatible. > >>However, while I oppose making key escrow mandatory in general, and >>share the general suspicion of a voluntary Clipper, if Mr. Kahn's >>support for Clipper is limited to cellular telephones, then I have no >>quarrel with such a position. > >>Encryption is illegal, without special permission, for use over the >>airwaves, particularly where mobile radio is involved. This is a >>long-standing restriction, and not unreasonable. Private communication >>between people at home is one thing, but allowing criminals to closely >>coordinate their activities on the move is another. It's odd that I can't seem to find the original message here. Contrary to the original claim, encryption over radio is generally legal. (One noted exception to this is ham radio...) Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 18:28:04 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:28:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270228.SAA03698@toad.com> jim bell writes: > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study. Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > For the benefit of the masses, the AP ("Assassination Politics") solution > to, for example, the Iraq problem would be to allow anyone and everyone in > the world to donate money towards the death of Saddam Hussein, and any > leadership which survives him, until that leadership satisfies the public > that they won't be following in Hussein's footsteps. Simple. Economical. > And, dare I say it, fair. I have much respect for Saddam Hussein. I understand he's more admired by Iraqi people than, say, the kkklintons are by American people. Saddam even commands the respect of his Iranian enemies. > I believe that the Coalition spent $60 BILLION dollars doing the Iraq war, > and they didn't even get rid of Saddam. I'm sure AP would have done the > task for under $100 million, and possibly far less. (and that money would > have been collected by donation, not stolen in taxes. Much of that money > would have come from the Iraqi people themselves, BTW.) I doubt that they would collect much among the Iraqis: both because Saddam is pretty popular, and because they don't have much cash, thanks to the sanctions. I doubt they'd collect billions or even millions in the Western countries. These were involuntary taxes. Do people really hate Saddam so much as to bet that he'll live and hope to lose their bets to an assassin? I doubt it. And you can't do the standard fundraising trick of collecting some funds, then using them to run media ads soliciting more funds. I suppose Kiwaiti and Saudi sheikhs might bet a few million. (I hate these guys - I'd like to bet on the continuing existence of a basket of sheikhs :-) > There would be few if any civilian casualities, no hunger or poverty caused > among the people. Even their soldiers would be relatively unaffected, > except that their militaries (as well as ours) would be disbanded. > > Reminds me of the punchline to that joke. > > "He sent two boats and a helicopter! What more did you want?!?" Was it really Bush's goal to topple Saddam's government and bring in a U.S.-friendly one that would need billions of dollars of aid? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 18:29:37 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:29:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701270229.SAA03755@toad.com> cypherpunks-errors at toad.com writes: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, > > 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that > > they've just left things as is. > > > Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold > > the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will > > hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). > > In case of 2, they are probably not worthy of your help. I wholeheartedly agree. By now everyone's painfully aware that there are 3 mailing lists. It's not my responsibily (or Dale's) to encourage cypherpunks subscribers to do what I think is best for them - resubscribe to cypherpunks-unedited. Folks who choose to let Sandy choose what they read and don't read should be free to do that. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From rwright at adnetsol.com Sun Jan 26 18:29:40 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:29:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" Message-ID: <199701270229.SAA03756@toad.com> Thought this might interest you guys. ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:00:14 -0800 (PST) From: Audrie Krause Subject: Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" To: iaj-futuremedia at igc.apc.org * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ACTION ALERT Please re-post where appropriate * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dear Friends, On February 8, the first anniversary of the Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996, NetAction and the Center for Educational Priorities are launching a month-long Internet demonstration to call attention to the wide gap between the rhetoric and reality of this sweeping legislation. President Clinton and Congress promised the American people that enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act would lead to a cornucopia of technological innovations that would change the nation's cultural frontiers, expand our choices, dazzle our eyes, and inform our minds. Instead, we've been censored in cyberspace, subjected to TV ratings systems, and prevented from experiencing the benefits of a truly competitive marketplace by the emergence of "cartels" created by mega-mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. This is not reform! And it's not too late to demand that our decision makers deliver on what they promised us on February 8, 1996: MORE competition, MORE consumer choices, MORE widespread access to information technology. The Center for Educational Priorities and NetAction are spearheading this demonstration in an effort to pressure the Federal Communications Commission and other state and national regulatory agencies to ensure that the Act is implemented in a way that truly benefits the public. We invite you to join this effort by linking to the site at for one month beginning on February 8. By linking to the protest site, you will be adding your voice to a united demand for true telecommunications reform. The site is currently under development. When completed, it will feature brief summaries of the impact the Act has had in its first year on telecommunications and technology policy, media ownership and content, and censorship, along with suggested actions to help ensure that implementation of the Act truly benefits the public. We are also creating extensive links to other organizations working on these issues, as well as to other sites with current information on censorship, mega-mergers, universal service, school hook-ups, and the v-chip. We welcome suggestions for additional links to add. Please let us know if you will participate in the demonstration by contacting NetAction, by email at akrause at igc.org, or by phone at 415-775-8674. Thanks! =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 18:31:41 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:31:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701270207.UAA00452@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: [...] > Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, > cjames at cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to > mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if > CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). > > I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com > disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the > loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants > to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. > > Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will > be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce > mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be > a nym. That's my birthday... have a great week ahead everyone! From rwright at adnetsol.com Sun Jan 26 18:34:03 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:34:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270233.SAA03386@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >>>>>>>irrelevant at nowhere.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY OBJECT TO. =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 18:34:53 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:34:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EC1422.6E70@gte.net> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, approx. 3 years old. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 18:40:43 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:40:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net Message-ID: <199701270240.SAA04129@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: > > From: Bill Stewart > > > > Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - > > The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of > 'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. > I have the right to do whatever I want to anything that comes through my part > of the net, including censoring or editing any mail that comes through it, so > that it reflects a point of view consistent with mine, since I am the one > paying for it. > The net is a bunch of computers, > running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and > EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility > support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody > else is along for the ride. > Those who pay the money, like myself and others who have bought the right > to control the net, are justified in acting without outside interference > on anything that passes through our part of the net. > If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then once a box goes on > the net it belongs to nobody/everybody. Clearly utter nonsense. > The net belongs to those with the money to control it, and people who do > not have money have no rights on the net. > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > understand what is going on. > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > anything that passes through his part of the net. > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. > Jim Choate > CyberTects > ravage at ssz.com Jim, Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over the part of the net that I have paid for. I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose they choose. As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was set up to espouse. Toto From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 18:42:37 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:42:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270242.SAA04198@toad.com> jim bell wrote: > > "I have a solution to that problem." > > Seriously! > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. > Jim, why don't you stop bullshitting and write a real assassination bot. [as a beta, it can be a mailbombing bot] This bot would: 1) Accept bets as combinations of a) Some amount of cybercash b) A string that identifies an event that should happen such as "domain X is mailbombed" c) [optional] date of that event (no date means that you always lose) d) Return address (possibly a nym address) to send all cash from UNSUCCESSSFUL bets for the event in question. e) [optional] time limit after which the cash will be refunded. Note that for simplicity, the bot should identify the event as a unique string, without any understanding of any semantics of that string. 2) Store these bets in a database. 3) Have a trusted party (someone really honest, like myself) report to the bot the signed strings that, in the opinion of the trusted party, are "true". 4) Upon receipt of such event notifications, the bot will find all bets and forward them to the better whose date prediction was the closest. If several betters predicted the same date, the money is split between them in proportion to the amount of moneys submitted. Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, cjames at cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be a nym. The fact of mailbombing would become apparent when CEC-SERVICES's MX DNS record is pulled off. The trusted party will send a phrase (standardized) "domain cec-services.com disabled" to the bot. The bot sends my money to the mailbomber through his nym address. I estimate that this bot would take about 2000 lines of perl. You may need to use some real database, like postgres or sybase. Use a nym for it. It will take a while for this bot to develop a reputation (remember, there is real money involved!). - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 18:44:58 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:44:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EC1683.4DD0@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > jim bell writes: > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > > any recognition of this fact. > I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study. > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors). From haystack at holy.cow.net Sun Jan 26 18:48:45 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:48:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701270230.VAA08735@holy.cow.net> The only `culture' Timothy `C' May possesses is that cultivated from his foreskin scrapings. o o o o o /~> <><><> <> Timothy `C' May o...(\ |||||| || From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 18:59:11 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 18:59:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <32EC1422.6E70@gte.net> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > > > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; > > The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- > distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can > go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but > it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. i don't see why she would wear a bikini if she already is tan. She just goes to show off right??? California is know for very beautiful girls ... I like the pale look :) > > BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, > approx. 3 years old. only if you join us .. ;) From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 19:19:07 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:19:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <32EC1422.6E70@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701270315.VAA00323@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, > approx. 3 years old. > would appreciate - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 19:23:03 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:23:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701270316.VAA00352@manifold.algebra.com> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > California is know for very beautiful girls ... wrong. - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 19:30:27 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:30:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701270207.UAA00452@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > Jim, why don't you stop bullshitting and write a real assassination > bot. [as a beta, it can be a mailbombing bot] This bot would: I think this would be a very good demo project, but mailbombing may not be the best choice... > 1) Accept bets as combinations of > a) Some amount of cybercash Be careful about violating Chaumian patents... How about using funny money in the prototype? Or, look at some of the micropayment schemes. > b) A string that identifies an event that should happen > such as "domain X is mailbombed" Not a good idea (see below). > c) [optional] date of that event (no date means that you always > lose) I think the date must always be specified, and the event must occur (or not occur) on or before that date. > d) Return address (possibly a nym address) to send > all cash from UNSUCCESSSFUL bets for the event in > question. > e) [optional] time limit after which the cash will be refunded. > > Note that for simplicity, the bot should identify the event as > a unique string, without any understanding of any semantics of that > string. I think we should think about the kinds of events that a 'bot can verify. > 2) Store these bets in a database. > > 3) Have a trusted party (someone really honest, like myself) report to > the bot the signed strings that, in the opinion of the trusted party, > are "true". Why not start with a less destructive event... For example, "on or before a Usenet article will appear in newsgroup X saying Y". That's something the 'bot can verify and anyone with access to dejanews and the like can confirm. Eliminating the need for a trusted human is always desirable. > 4) Upon receipt of such event notifications, the bot will find all bets > and forward them to the better whose date prediction was the closest. > If several betters predicted the same date, the money is split between > them in proportion to the amount of moneys submitted. Have you ever dealt with a bookie? I think there need to be two distinct operations: 1. A user can create a new kind of event. For a fixed fee F, one can enter a new event into the table of events that can be bet on. (In a more generalized system, the creator might also specify the third party that determines whether or not the event took place.) A human bookie decides which events can be bet on (based mostly on the tradition and supply/demand). Here we let users bet on anything they want as long as they're willing to may be bookiebot for keeping track of who bet how much $ that the event will or will not happen. In fact, when creating an event, the user must immediately bet an amount >$F and the house enters an opposing bet for $F (or slightly less). 2. A user can bet $B that an existing event will/will not happen. Bookiebot accepts the $B and promises to pay back an amount that's a function of $B and the current amounts bet so far on yes and no (or escrows the winning with a 3rd party). I'll let Jim et al figure out how to compute the odds when there are offsetting bets for the same event at two different times. E.g. E1:"Saddam Hussen will die before April 1" and E2:"ditto June 1"; if the first one occurs, then the second one occurs too. If a lot of money is bet on E1, it should somehow affect E2 odds too. Also the bookiebot should never lose money no matter what the outcome; all the winnings should come from the losers' bets. > Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, > cjames at cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to > mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if > CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). > > I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com > disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the > loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants > to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. Here's an improved scenario. Say I pay the bot $10 to create the event "a homophobic article will appear in soc.motss by April 1". Then I bet $1000 that the event will NOT occur to skew the odds. > Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will > be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce > mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be > a nym. Someone looking to make a quick buck browses through the list of events and odds in the bookiebot and sees the very skewed odds for a homophobic article on soc.motss. He bets a small amount that the article will appear, so he gets really good odds. Then he posts an article that's recognized as the event, and collects a winning much larger than his bet. But if this doesn't happen, I get almost all of my $1000 investment back. In either event the bookiebot made a small profit for its owner. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 19:33:47 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:33:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" In-Reply-To: <199701270100.RAA01704@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> Message-ID: <32EC30E2.625D@sk.sympatico.ca> Ross Wright forwarded: > President Clinton and Congress promised the American people that > enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act would lead to a > cornucopia of technological innovations that would change the nation's > cultural frontiers, expand our choices, dazzle our eyes, and inform > our minds. Instead, we've been censored in cyberspace, subjected to > TV ratings systems, and prevented from experiencing the benefits of a > truly competitive marketplace by the emergence of "cartels" created by > mega-mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. Surprise, surprise! > This is not reform! And it's not too late to demand that our decision > makers deliver on what they promised us on February 8, 1996: Yes it is. Nobody in politics gives up the ground they've gained. The fact that they were able to hose the citizens the first time around only reinforces their certainty that they can continue to do so. While people are still fighting the earlier, lost battles, they are preparing for the next one. I fully support anyone who wants to continue to fight past battles, present battles, and future battles, on the level of surface politics. But I think that their efforts are most effective if they add the tools and weapons developed by the underground to their battles. Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to have one tucked in your boot, as well. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 19:35:33 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:35:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <01BC0B90.0B78E600@king2-16.cnw.com> Message-ID: <32EC38BC.5511@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By > following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people > on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't > comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" > (quote approximate). Dale, When I read posts like this, I wonder how any rationally thinking person can possibly believe that socio/politico concerns have no place in the discussion of crypto. It is my belief that many of the more atrocious acts being performed against the citizens by various governments are made possible by the fact that there are so few people who recognize a 'pirate' when they see one. While I appreciate that there are those who may be furthering the cause of crypto, privacy and freedom through official channels, the controlled media, and such, there needs to be a forum in which people are free to use what they consider to be the 'correct' terminology to refer to those who have usurped democracy in order to control the citizens for their own personal profit. i.e. 'Pirates' Toto From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 19:50:13 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:50:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Happy birthday to Oksas In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <6D861D84w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Nurdane Oksas writes: > That's my birthday... Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday dear Oksas, Happy birthday to you! > have a great week ahead everyone! Have a good year. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 19:50:24 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:50:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Censorship In-Reply-To: <199701270233.SAA03386@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> Message-ID: "Ross Wright" writes: > On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > > > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > >>>>>>>irrelevant at nowhere.com wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". > > THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY > OBJECT TO. Comversely, some people are willing to give up their own freedom of speech so as to silence others whose views they don't like. They hope that they'll be censored less than their "enemies". But a forum can't be "a little bit censored" just like a woman can't be "a little bit pregnant". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 19:50:27 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:50:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" In-Reply-To: <32EC30E2.625D@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: Toto writes: > Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to > censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing > up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to > have one tucked in your boot, as well. Certain unnamed people believe that "strong" crypto, like free speech, is only for those who use it "responsibly". Privacy is for the elite; and they wish to join the elite, rather then extend the right to privacy and/or free speech to the "unwashed masses". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 19:50:40 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:50:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <32EC1683.4DD0@gte.net> Message-ID: Dale Thorn writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > jim bell writes: > > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method > > > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > > > any recognition of this fact. > > > I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study > > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > > If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, > that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* > in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors). But they can't; and their efforts (ITAR, EAR, et al) are totally irrelevant and ineffective and not worth the time people spend fighting them. A prototype AP betting server, first limited to very innocent events (like usenet postings containing certain regexps) and using "funny money" for bets, would be a good demo. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 19:52:08 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:52:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list In-Reply-To: <199701262312.PAA26813@toad.com> Message-ID: Rabid Wombat writes: > Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue > was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list > "population." The list "population" (readers) is a couple of thousand people, almost all of whom are lurkers. All posters are an extremely small segment of the readership. It's true on most Internet forums. > The decision of that small segment to excercise its rights "in extreme" > passed the tolerance thresholds of increasing numbers of list members, > and the end result was a "restriction" adopted/elected/forced-on (colour > it however you chose) on the entire "population." > > "Rights" are derived from social responsibility; its either that, or the > "law of the jungle." V.I.Lenin said: "liberty is a recognized necessity". (I'll let Igor correct my translation is it's wrong.) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 19:55:50 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:55:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270355.TAA06621@toad.com> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > California is know for very beautiful girls ... wrong. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 19:56:03 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:56:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270356.TAA06648@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, > approx. 3 years old. > would appreciate - Igor. From rwright at adnetsol.com Sun Jan 26 19:56:24 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:56:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270356.TAA06702@toad.com> On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >>>>>>>irrelevant at nowhere.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY OBJECT TO. =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 19:56:28 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:56:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270356.TAA06710@toad.com> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, approx. 3 years old. From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 19:56:30 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:56:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270356.TAA06711@toad.com> On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: [...] > Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, > cjames at cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to > mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if > CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). > > I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com > disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the > loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants > to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. > > Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will > be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce > mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be > a nym. That's my birthday... have a great week ahead everyone! From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 19:57:05 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:57:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270357.TAA06744@toad.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > Jim, why don't you stop bullshitting and write a real assassination > bot. [as a beta, it can be a mailbombing bot] This bot would: I think this would be a very good demo project, but mailbombing may not be the best choice... > 1) Accept bets as combinations of > a) Some amount of cybercash Be careful about violating Chaumian patents... How about using funny money in the prototype? Or, look at some of the micropayment schemes. > b) A string that identifies an event that should happen > such as "domain X is mailbombed" Not a good idea (see below). > c) [optional] date of that event (no date means that you always > lose) I think the date must always be specified, and the event must occur (or not occur) on or before that date. > d) Return address (possibly a nym address) to send > all cash from UNSUCCESSSFUL bets for the event in > question. > e) [optional] time limit after which the cash will be refunded. > > Note that for simplicity, the bot should identify the event as > a unique string, without any understanding of any semantics of that > string. I think we should think about the kinds of events that a 'bot can verify. > 2) Store these bets in a database. > > 3) Have a trusted party (someone really honest, like myself) report to > the bot the signed strings that, in the opinion of the trusted party, > are "true". Why not start with a less destructive event... For example, "on or before a Usenet article will appear in newsgroup X saying Y". That's something the 'bot can verify and anyone with access to dejanews and the like can confirm. Eliminating the need for a trusted human is always desirable. > 4) Upon receipt of such event notifications, the bot will find all bets > and forward them to the better whose date prediction was the closest. > If several betters predicted the same date, the money is split between > them in proportion to the amount of moneys submitted. Have you ever dealt with a bookie? I think there need to be two distinct operations: 1. A user can create a new kind of event. For a fixed fee F, one can enter a new event into the table of events that can be bet on. (In a more generalized system, the creator might also specify the third party that determines whether or not the event took place.) A human bookie decides which events can be bet on (based mostly on the tradition and supply/demand). Here we let users bet on anything they want as long as they're willing to may be bookiebot for keeping track of who bet how much $ that the event will or will not happen. In fact, when creating an event, the user must immediately bet an amount >$F and the house enters an opposing bet for $F (or slightly less). 2. A user can bet $B that an existing event will/will not happen. Bookiebot accepts the $B and promises to pay back an amount that's a function of $B and the current amounts bet so far on yes and no (or escrows the winning with a 3rd party). I'll let Jim et al figure out how to compute the odds when there are offsetting bets for the same event at two different times. E.g. E1:"Saddam Hussen will die before April 1" and E2:"ditto June 1"; if the first one occurs, then the second one occurs too. If a lot of money is bet on E1, it should somehow affect E2 odds too. Also the bookiebot should never lose money no matter what the outcome; all the winnings should come from the losers' bets. > Examples of use: Suppose I do not like The Right Reverend Colin James III, > cjames at cec-services.com. I have a lot of money, but do not know how to > mailbomb. I set some nym address as my return address (for refunds if > CJ3 is not mailbombed within half a year). > > I place a bet with $1000 worth of money and phrase "domain cec-services.com > disabled". The date would be open which means that I will always be the > loser. I also post a message (anonymously) saying that anyone who wants > to mailbomb TRRCJ3 can be rewarded through your assassination bot. Here's an improved scenario. Say I pay the bot $10 to create the event "a homophobic article will appear in soc.motss by April 1". Then I bet $1000 that the event will NOT occur to skew the odds. > Someone with more knowledge of computers, a T1 link and no money will > be lured, submit a bet for, say, Feb 1, and on the 1st will start fierce > mailbombing of cec-services.com. The return address will, of course, be > a nym. Someone looking to make a quick buck browses through the list of events and odds in the bookiebot and sees the very skewed odds for a homophobic article on soc.motss. He bets a small amount that the article will appear, so he gets really good odds. Then he posts an article that's recognized as the event, and collects a winning much larger than his bet. But if this doesn't happen, I get almost all of my $1000 investment back. In either event the bookiebot made a small profit for its owner. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dthorn at gte.net Sun Jan 26 19:58:05 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:58:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270358.TAA06799@toad.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > jim bell writes: > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > > any recognition of this fact. > I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study. > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors). From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 19:58:10 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:58:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" Message-ID: <199701270358.TAA06802@toad.com> Ross Wright forwarded: > President Clinton and Congress promised the American people that > enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act would lead to a > cornucopia of technological innovations that would change the nation's > cultural frontiers, expand our choices, dazzle our eyes, and inform > our minds. Instead, we've been censored in cyberspace, subjected to > TV ratings systems, and prevented from experiencing the benefits of a > truly competitive marketplace by the emergence of "cartels" created by > mega-mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. Surprise, surprise! > This is not reform! And it's not too late to demand that our decision > makers deliver on what they promised us on February 8, 1996: Yes it is. Nobody in politics gives up the ground they've gained. The fact that they were able to hose the citizens the first time around only reinforces their certainty that they can continue to do so. While people are still fighting the earlier, lost battles, they are preparing for the next one. I fully support anyone who wants to continue to fight past battles, present battles, and future battles, on the level of surface politics. But I think that their efforts are most effective if they add the tools and weapons developed by the underground to their battles. Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to have one tucked in your boot, as well. Toto From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 19:59:55 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 19:59:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270359.TAA06867@toad.com> On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > > > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; > > The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- > distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can > go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but > it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. i don't see why she would wear a bikini if she already is tan. She just goes to show off right??? California is know for very beautiful girls ... I like the pale look :) > > BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, > approx. 3 years old. only if you join us .. ;) From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 20:00:19 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:00:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <32EC38BC.5511@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: Toto writes: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By > > following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people > > on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't > > comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" > > (quote approximate). > > Dale, > When I read posts like this, I wonder how any rationally thinking > person can possibly believe that socio/politico concerns have no > place in the discussion of crypto. > It is my belief that many of the more atrocious acts being performed > against the citizens by various governments are made possible by the > fact that there are so few people who recognize a 'pirate' when they > see one. > While I appreciate that there are those who may be furthering the > cause of crypto, privacy and freedom through official channels, the > controlled media, and such, there needs to be a forum in which > people are free to use what they consider to be the 'correct' > terminology to refer to those who have usurped democracy in order > to control the citizens for their own personal profit. > i.e. 'Pirates' Right now, you can still say anything you like in "cypherpunks-unedited". Anyone subscribed to the moderated cypherpunks list is free to resubscribe. If the masses of lurkers choose not to do it, it's their loss, and not your or my responsibility. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ravage at ssz.com Sun Jan 26 20:05:23 1997 From: ravage at ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:05:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270430.WAA02102@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:07:57 -0800 > From: Toto > Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net > > Jim Choate wrote: > > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > > understand what is going on. > > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > > anything that passes through his part of the net. > > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. > > > Jim Choate > > CyberTects > > ravage at ssz.com > > Jim, > Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over > the part of the net that I have paid for. > I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and > the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose > they choose. > As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more > closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was > set up to espouse. Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that party did not write them is a crime? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 20:07:07 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:07:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Assination In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701270404.WAA00777@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Dale Thorn writes: > > > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > > > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > > > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > > > > If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, > > that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* > > in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors). > > But they can't; and their efforts (ITAR, EAR, et al) are totally irrelevant > and ineffective and not worth the time people spend fighting them. > > A prototype AP betting server, first limited to very innocent events (like > usenet postings containing certain regexps) and using "funny money" for bets, > would be a good demo. I have a feeling that you are missing the point. The point of AP is not to bet on whether a certain event will occur or not. The point is that only a person who really makes it happen (assassinates someone) will know enough to get the money. All other betters who do NOT intend to bring the event about will expect to lose money, because they will not be able to make a sufficiently good prediction. It is not a bookie system, it is a collective anonymous hire-a-hitman scheme. Yuor suggestion about trying a demo about homophobic posts is good, BUT what needs to be added to make it a good demo is a danger for the poster to lose an account. I.e., the requirement to such a homophobic post should be that 1) it should be PGP signed by a real person and 2) it should have a correct return address. Any fool can send an anonymous message, and that would have no educational value and no value for the AP demo. - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 20:10:41 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:10:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Happy birthday to Oksas Message-ID: <199701270410.UAA07321@toad.com> Nurdane Oksas writes: > That's my birthday... Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday to you, Happy birthday dear Oksas, Happy birthday to you! > have a great week ahead everyone! Have a good year. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 20:10:46 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:10:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" Message-ID: <199701270410.UAA07332@toad.com> Toto writes: > Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to > censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing > up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to > have one tucked in your boot, as well. Certain unnamed people believe that "strong" crypto, like free speech, is only for those who use it "responsibly". Privacy is for the elite; and they wish to join the elite, rather then extend the right to privacy and/or free speech to the "unwashed masses". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 20:10:57 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:10:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: (Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" Message-ID: <199701270410.UAA07345@toad.com> Toto writes: > Let them know that if they want to censor you, they will have to > censor your 'strong' crypto. Even if you choose to fight by showing > up with your gun on your hip, at high-noon, it still doesn't hurt to > have one tucked in your boot, as well. Certain unnamed people believe that "strong" crypto, like free speech, is only for those who use it "responsibly". Privacy is for the elite; and they wish to join the elite, rather then extend the right to privacy and/or free speech to the "unwashed masses". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 20:12:25 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:12:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Censorship Message-ID: <199701270412.UAA07406@toad.com> "Ross Wright" writes: > On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > > > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > >>>>>>>irrelevant at nowhere.com wrote: > > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". > > THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY > OBJECT TO. Comversely, some people are willing to give up their own freedom of speech so as to silence others whose views they don't like. They hope that they'll be censored less than their "enemies". But a forum can't be "a little bit censored" just like a woman can't be "a little bit pregnant". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 20:12:27 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:12:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270412.UAA07410@toad.com> Dale Thorn writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > jim bell writes: > > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method > > > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > > > any recognition of this fact. > > > I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study > > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > > If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, > that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* > in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors). But they can't; and their efforts (ITAR, EAR, et al) are totally irrelevant and ineffective and not worth the time people spend fighting them. A prototype AP betting server, first limited to very innocent events (like usenet postings containing certain regexps) and using "funny money" for bets, would be a good demo. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 20:14:09 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:14:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270414.UAA07488@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By > following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people > on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't > comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" > (quote approximate). Dale, When I read posts like this, I wonder how any rationally thinking person can possibly believe that socio/politico concerns have no place in the discussion of crypto. It is my belief that many of the more atrocious acts being performed against the citizens by various governments are made possible by the fact that there are so few people who recognize a 'pirate' when they see one. While I appreciate that there are those who may be furthering the cause of crypto, privacy and freedom through official channels, the controlled media, and such, there needs to be a forum in which people are free to use what they consider to be the 'correct' terminology to refer to those who have usurped democracy in order to control the citizens for their own personal profit. i.e. 'Pirates' Toto From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 20:14:49 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:14:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701270430.WAA02102@einstein> Message-ID: <199701270410.WAA00864@manifold.algebra.com> Jim Choate wrote: > > > Forwarded message: > > > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:07:57 -0800 > > From: Toto > > Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net > > > > Jim Choate wrote: > > > > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > > > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > > > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > > > understand what is going on. > > > > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > > > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > > > anything that passes through his part of the net. > > > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > > > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > > > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > > > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. > > > > > Jim Choate > > > CyberTects > > > ravage at ssz.com > > > > Jim, > > Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over > > the part of the net that I have paid for. > > I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and > > the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose > > they choose. > > As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more > > closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was > > set up to espouse. > > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that > party did not write them is a crime? cite the statute - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 20:15:50 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:15:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list Message-ID: <199701270415.UAA07559@toad.com> Rabid Wombat writes: > Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue > was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list > "population." The list "population" (readers) is a couple of thousand people, almost all of whom are lurkers. All posters are an extremely small segment of the readership. It's true on most Internet forums. > The decision of that small segment to excercise its rights "in extreme" > passed the tolerance thresholds of increasing numbers of list members, > and the end result was a "restriction" adopted/elected/forced-on (colour > it however you chose) on the entire "population." > > "Rights" are derived from social responsibility; its either that, or the > "law of the jungle." V.I.Lenin said: "liberty is a recognized necessity". (I'll let Igor correct my translation is it's wrong.) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From minow at apple.com Sun Jan 26 20:44:42 1997 From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:44:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Xerox is watching you Message-ID: You'll find an article worth a visit to the dentist in the January 1997 issue of Popular Science. It tells a story from the 1960's cold war era. It seems that the only American who could get into the Soviet Embassy was the Xerox repairman. So the CIA and Xerox built a camera that took a picture of every copy that could be installed inside the 914 cabinet (where it would be invisble). Once a month, the repairman came by to do the ordinary cleaning and repair (those things broke down a lot). Part of the repair process exchanged the camera for a fresh load. The CIA could then read everything that was copied. The article suggests that other Xerox models had their own cameras. My back of the envelope (literally) computation suggests that one roll of 8-millimeter film would hold about 30,000 images. Martin Minow minow at apple.com From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 20:44:57 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:44:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Happy birthday to Oksas In-Reply-To: <6D861D84w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: Thank you Dr. Vulis ! :) oksas From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 20:54:04 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:54:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701270316.VAA00352@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > wrong. well, seems D. Thorn agrees with the song: 'california girls' From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 20:55:54 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:55:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Assination Message-ID: <199701270455.UAA08928@toad.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Dale Thorn writes: > > > Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for > > > a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? > > > Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > > > > If AP could really work, and AP is enabled by strong p-k crypto, > > that fact alone would justify the Washington boys doing *everything* > > in their power to stop *real* crypto (i.e., no back doors). > > But they can't; and their efforts (ITAR, EAR, et al) are totally irrelevant > and ineffective and not worth the time people spend fighting them. > > A prototype AP betting server, first limited to very innocent events (like > usenet postings containing certain regexps) and using "funny money" for bets, > would be a good demo. I have a feeling that you are missing the point. The point of AP is not to bet on whether a certain event will occur or not. The point is that only a person who really makes it happen (assassinates someone) will know enough to get the money. All other betters who do NOT intend to bring the event about will expect to lose money, because they will not be able to make a sufficiently good prediction. It is not a bookie system, it is a collective anonymous hire-a-hitman scheme. Yuor suggestion about trying a demo about homophobic posts is good, BUT what needs to be added to make it a good demo is a danger for the poster to lose an account. I.e., the requirement to such a homophobic post should be that 1) it should be PGP signed by a real person and 2) it should have a correct return address. Any fool can send an anonymous message, and that would have no educational value and no value for the AP demo. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 20:55:55 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:55:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270455.UAA08929@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: > > > Forwarded message: > > > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:07:57 -0800 > > From: Toto > > Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net > > > > Jim Choate wrote: > > > > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > > > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > > > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > > > understand what is going on. > > > > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > > > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > > > anything that passes through his part of the net. > > > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > > > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > > > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > > > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. > > > > > Jim Choate > > > CyberTects > > > ravage at ssz.com > > > > Jim, > > Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over > > the part of the net that I have paid for. > > I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and > > the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose > > they choose. > > As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more > > closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was > > set up to espouse. > > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that > party did not write them is a crime? cite the statute - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Sun Jan 26 20:57:38 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:57:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270457.UAA08979@toad.com> Toto writes: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By > > following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people > > on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't > > comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" > > (quote approximate). > > Dale, > When I read posts like this, I wonder how any rationally thinking > person can possibly believe that socio/politico concerns have no > place in the discussion of crypto. > It is my belief that many of the more atrocious acts being performed > against the citizens by various governments are made possible by the > fact that there are so few people who recognize a 'pirate' when they > see one. > While I appreciate that there are those who may be furthering the > cause of crypto, privacy and freedom through official channels, the > controlled media, and such, there needs to be a forum in which > people are free to use what they consider to be the 'correct' > terminology to refer to those who have usurped democracy in order > to control the citizens for their own personal profit. > i.e. 'Pirates' Right now, you can still say anything you like in "cypherpunks-unedited". Anyone subscribed to the moderated cypherpunks list is free to resubscribe. If the masses of lurkers choose not to do it, it's their loss, and not your or my responsibility. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 20:59:25 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:59:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270459.UAA09045@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 20:07:57 -0800 > From: Toto > Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net > > Jim Choate wrote: > > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > > understand what is going on. > > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > > anything that passes through his part of the net. > > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. > > > Jim Choate > > CyberTects > > ravage at ssz.com > > Jim, > Thank you for your support in my efforts to exert supreme control over > the part of the net that I have paid for. > I am sure that you will continue to fight for the right of myself and > the government of Singapore to use that control for whatever purpose > they choose. > As you can see above, I have enhanced your posting so that it more > closely conforms to the beliefs that my paid-for part of the net was > set up to espouse. Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that party did not write them is a crime? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 21:10:57 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:10:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EC4BD6.44A2@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, > approx. 3 years old. I don't go in for that sick, perverted stuff, myself, but I have a friend... From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 21:11:30 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:11:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EC50C7.5E9E@sk.sympatico.ca> Rabid Wombat wrote: > Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue > was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list > "population." Exactly. The same think happened at Kent State, when an extremely small segment of the student body forced U.S. Government forces to shoot them. > The decision of that small segment to excercise its rights "in extreme" > passed the tolerance thresholds of increasing numbers of list members, > and the end result was a "restriction" adopted/elected/forced-on (colour > it however you chose) on the entire "population." Speaking of 'colouring', Mr. Rabid Revisionist-smallsegmentinextreme, perhaps you might be so kind to explain the use of the word 'elected' as it applies to an announcement that a single individual had decided to act for the good of all, irregardless of the wishes of others. > "Rights" are derived from social responsibility; its either that, or the > "law of the jungle." Social responsibility includes speaking up when the king has no clothes, except for the armband with the Swastika on it. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 21:12:42 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:12:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. In-Reply-To: <199701261751.LAA00526@einstein> Message-ID: <32EC4818.6055@sk.sympatico.ca> Jim Choate wrote: > You can take a horse to water, you can't make him drink. You can drown him > however. Then you are walking, not riding. Thanks for clearing this up for us, Jim. I know that a lot of CypherPunks have been wondering about this, and many others as well. Hopefully, it will be posted on many conferences to enlighted others, as well. Toto From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:26:08 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:26:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: libel.html Message-ID: <199701270550.XAA02278@einstein> [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Libel and Slander "Libel" involves the publishing of a falsehood that harms someone. Slander is the same doctrine applied to the spoken word. Collectively, they are referred to as "defamation". Both are a matter of state laws, which usually (not always) require that the falsehood be intentional. In New York Times v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment requires that, before a public official can recover damages for a defamatory statement, he must prove it was made with "actual malice", even if state laws otherwise allow recovery for negligent defamation. The Court has since expanded this to cover not only public officials but "public figures", including individuals who involve themselves in controversies. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:27:22 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:27:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: libelfrm.htm Message-ID: <199701270551.XAA02285@einstein> LIBEL CHECKLIST _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Look for material that identifies a person or an entity. Keep in mind that it is possible to identify people or entities without actually using a name. If the material contains identifiable voices, likenesses, or descriptions, it could be a problem. ___ The material identifies a person or entity. STOP HERE if the material does not identify a person or entity. You can't have a libel without someone to complain about it! _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Is any identified person dead? There is little reason to be concerned with statements or other material reflecting badly on dead persons because the law only protects "the memory of the dead," giving no cause of action to decedents. So long as the material concerns only the dead person, you need not answer the rest of the questions on this form. ___The person identified is dead. STOP HERE if the person identified is dead. _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ If material identifies a living person, is it: A private individual. ___A public person. ___A political person. _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Would the material negatively influence a reasonable reader's opinion of the person or entity identified? ___a. It would reflect badly on the character of the person or entity. ___b. It could harm the reputation, diminish the esteem, respect or good will in which the person or entity's relevant community holds him, her or it. _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ If the material might reflect badly on character and/or harm reputation, would the harm be the result of: ___An explicit statement. ___An insinuation. ___A sarcastic statement. ___A parody or cartoon. ___An opinion that implies that there are unstated defamatory facts underlying it. ___Other. _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ There are several possible defenses to a claim of defamation, although none may apply in a particular case. Check one of the following defenses only if you are fairly certain it would apply. ___The statement or other material is true. ___The statement or other material is purely an expression of opinion and not an assertion of fact. ___The statement or other material constitutes a fair comment on a matter of public opinion, for example, the use of public money, disbarment of attorneys, management of public institutions and charities, management of private companies whose activities widely affect the public (pollution, delivery of medical services, common carriage, employment practices, discrimination, etc.) or the review of books, public entertainment, sports events or scientific discoveries. ___No one could reasonably interpret the statement or image to be an assertion of actual fact about the person or entity. ___The statement or image can be characterized as mere words of abuse, indicating dislike for the person or entity, but does not suggest any specific charge. ___The subject of the statement or image has given consent to or approved the material. _________________ __________ _________________________________________________________________ University Liability for the Wrongful Acts of Employee Publishers | Copyright Management Center Homepage | Intellectual Property Section Homepage _________________________________________________________________ 8 August 1995 University of Texas System Office of General Counsel Comments to gharper at utsystem.edu _________________________________________________________________ From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:27:43 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:27:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: 1a_c7p4.html Message-ID: <199701270552.XAA02289@einstein> [IMAGE] Chapter VII: Libel Identification _________________________________________________________________ A plaintiff must prove that the alleged defamatory publication refers to him or her. Relatives cannot sue on behalf of a deceased person. Governmental entities cannot bring libel claims, nor can members of large groups (usually 25 or more). However, if the statement can be interpreted as referring to a particular person in a group, that person can sue. Also, if the offending information pertains to a majority of the members of a small group, any member of the group has standing to sue. A corporation may bring a libel claim if the alleged defamatory statement raises doubts about the honesty, credit, efficiency or prestige of that business. However, if the statements refer only to corporate officers, the corporation cannot litigate on their behalf. _________________________________________________________________ [INLINE] Back to Table of Contents [INLINE] Jump to next section in this chapter From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:29:06 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:29:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm Message-ID: <199701270553.XAA02293@einstein> Landskroner, LTD. [INLINE] Libel / Slander Libel / Slander is an area that involves defamatory oral or written statements containing false and misleading material which causes damage or injury to reputation and/or monetary loss. We provide a quick review of their success stories , some media and newspaper articles about what they've been able to do for their clients, and published articles about this topic. Please e-mail us with questions about our service! Landskroner and Phillips [INLINE] Nationally Recognized Consumer Trial Advocates. Over 100 Years combined experience in both State and Federal Courts. 55 Public Square, Tenth Floor, Cleveland Ohio 44113-1904 Phone: (216) 241-7000 Fax: (216) 241-3135 Toll Free: (888) 241-7001 [INLINE] From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:30:07 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:30:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: prof_960318.html Message-ID: <199701270554.XAA02296@einstein> LIBEL CONCERNS ARE A REALITY FOR SCIENTISTS WHO SPEAK OUT IN PUBLIC Author: Robert Finn (The Scientist, Vol:10, #6, p. 15, March 18, 1996) In today's increasingly litigious society, anyone can become the target of a lawsuit. A potential libel action, for example, should not only be the concern of publishers and journalists. The threat of a libel suit is now a reality for anyone, including scientists who choose to speak out publicly-or even write letters to the editor-on controversial issues. A libel suit can come without warning when an ordinary scientist is engaged in ordinary scientific activities. For example, Arnold S. Relman, editor emeritus of the New England Journal of Medicine, was quoted in a newspaper article criticizing the advertising practices of a for-profit hospital. Victor J. Stenger, a professor of physics at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, incorrectly described Israeli psychic Uri Geller's legal history in a book debunking paranormal phenomena. And Jan Moor-Jankowski, as editor of the Journal of Medical Primatology, merely printed a letter from an animal activist opposing a pharmaceutical company's experiments. Each of these scientists soon found himself faced with the dreaded prospect of defending himself in a libel suit. All three eventually prevailed in court, or the charges ended up being dropped. But defending themselves was a painful, distracting, and often expensive process. The lessons they learned are instructive to all scientists who write or make public statements. Arnol Relman CASE DISMISSED: "I think they knew they had no case," says Arnold Relman of the suit files against him by a for-profit cancer-treatment center. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides powerful-but not impregnable-protection to anyone who speaks on controversial topics. "Libel is a civil action, a tort action that you can bring against somebody claiming that a statement, either written or oral, is false and defamatory and caused you injury," explains Charles S. Sims, a noted libel attorney and partner at Proskauer Rose Goetz and Mendelsohn, a New York law firm. (This firm handles libel matters for The Scientist.) Sims notes that legal bills for a libel defense can quickly mount up. Even if the case is dismissed quickly, one can easily run up $20,000 to $60,000 in costs, and if a case drags on, it can go into the millions. Libel insurance can cost publishers thousands of dollars per year, and is an additional factor in today's high cost of publishing. Victor Stenger ERRATUM SHEET INSERTED: Victor Stenger took measures to correct his text but was sued nonetheless. "If you are sued, you need to check with your employer or your institution or your professional group-anybody who might consider themselves morally bound to come to your aid," advises Sims. "And you also need to look at your home insurance policy. An astonishing number of home insurance policies have clauses which turn out to be usable to force an insurance company to pay for a defense." Landmark Case The legal axiom goes, "Truth is an absolute defense against libel," and indeed no true statement of fact can ever be libelous, and neither can statements of judgment or opinion, which are neither true nor false. Both these principles were put to the test in the landmark case that Immuno AG (a pharmaceutical company based in Austria) brought against Moor-Jankowski. The former editor of the Journal of Medical Primatology was then director of New York University's Laboratory for Experimental Medicine and Surgery in Primates. He has recently founded the Center for Academic Freedom, based in New York City. As chronicled in the book The Monkey Wars by Deborah Blum (Oxford University Press, 1994) and in interviews with Moor-Jankowski and his attorney Philip Byler (now at the New York firm Layton, Brooks and Hecht), it all started in January 1983, when Shirley McGreal wrote a letter to the Journal of Medical Primatology objecting to some experiments proposed by Immuno AG. McGreal is an animal activist and founder of the Charleston, S.C.-based International Primate Protection League. She learned that Immuno planned a study of non-A/non-B hepatitis in African chimpanzees, at a research station in Sierra Leone. Based on what she learned about the experiments, and the conclusions she drew from these facts, she had several objections. Among them were that the experimenters would be using wild-caught chimpanzees, whose numbers are dwindling; that they would release them after experimentally infecting them with hepatitis; and that the released chimps might transmit the disease to other animals. With McGreal's letter to the editor in hand, Moor-Jankowski tried to elicit a rebuttal from Immuno's research director. Instead, he soon received a letter from Immuno's lawyers asserting that McGreal's statements were inaccurate and reckless. It read, in part: "We would also like to advise you that our review of Dr. McGreal's letter indicated that it is not a fair comment regarding our client's activities, and should you proceed with publication, without giving us the opportunity for a meaningful response, we shall be compelled to take whatever actions we deem necessary to redress our client's rights." But though Moor-Jankowski waited until December 1983 before publishing McGreal's letter (S. McGreal, J. Med. Primatol., 12:280, 1983), Immuno never offered a substantive response to her charges. During that time Moor-Jankowski himself came to be critical of Immuno's planned experiments, and he was quoted to that effect in New Scientist (N. Heneson, 100:165, 1983). Immuno then brought suit against a number of institutions and individuals, including McGreal, Moor-Jankowski, the Journal of Medical Primatology, New Scientist, the distributors of both publications, and NYU. Although Immuno ultimately dropped plans for the experiments, it continued pursuing its libel cases. In response, almost all the defendants or their insurance companies chose to settle rather than fight. The exception was Moor-Jankowski. Born in Poland, he explains his decision to persist by saying, "As a very young boy I fought the Germans for freedom. I didn't want to stand up for muzzling." It cost him seven years and about $2 million in legal fees ($200,000 of which Moor-Jankowski paid himself), and it generated an eight-volume legal record as the case cycled among the New York County Supreme Court, the New York State Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. In the end, Moor-Jankowski was vindicated. The Court of Appeals ruled that the letter was a combination of truthful factual statements and opinion, both of which are protected by the First Amendment. Jan Moor-Jankowski HE CHOSE TO FIGHT: Jan Moor-Jankowski did not settle his libel case out of court because "I didn't want to stand up for muzzling." "When you're talking about a letter to the editor, you're talking about what the Court of Appeals in New York correctly viewed as a forum to air grievances and views on the part of the public," says Philip Byler, Moor-Jankowski's attorney. "It's a precedent because it's a . . . decision which adhered to a broad constitutional protection of opinion." Byler maintains that the decision makes clear that "you do have a right to express views that are not orthodox. You do have a right to express viewpoints which over the course of time will be shown to be wrong-minded. A letter to the editor is a forum for opinion, and quite frankly people should feel the leeway to express themselves without the fear that sometime in the future, in the libel courtroom, where money damages are at stake, they will be shown to be wrong. That doesn't say that you have a right to make false, defamatory statements that are really hurtful to somebody." Byler's advice to authors of letters to the editor: Clearly separate factual statements from statements of opinion. "To the extent you are making a statement that's based on inference or speculation or conjecture, use words that indicate that." Byler believes that as editor of the journal, Moor-Jankowski more than fulfilled his obligations by deliberating a considerable time before publication, all the while soliciting a substantive response from the criticized party. Public Figures For a statement to be libelous, the offended party must suffer actual damage, notes Sims. "It's got to be really harmful, not just something that offends somebody's sensibilities, but something that harms their reputation." This principle came into play in Cornell University astronomer Carl Sagan's suit against Apple Computer Inc. of Cupertino, Calif. Apple had been using "Carl Sagan" as its internal name for a new computer. Sagan got wind of this, and his lawyers sent Apple a letter instructing the company to cease and desist. In response, a project manager changed the computer's name to BHA, an acronym for Butt-Head Astronomer. Sagan sued Apple in the Central District of California for, among other things, libel, infliction of emotional distress, and improperly using his name. Judge Lourdes G. Baird dismissed the libel portion of the suit, holding that "one does not seriously attack the expertise of a scientist using the undefined phrase 'butt-head,' and that a reader aware of the context would understand the project manager was retaliating in a humorous and satirical way." Sagan, who declined to be interviewed for this article, later reached a settlement with Apple on the other aspects of the suit. But even when a statement is both false and harmful it still may not be libel, says Sims. "If it criticizes one particular event, in many states it's immune from prosecution under the single-instance rule. If you say that a doctor screwed up an operation, that's not libelous. If you say that he's a terrible surgeon, it might be. Similarly, if you're writing a review of a scientific article and say that scientist miscalculated the numbers... that's not going to be actionable. If you said, on the other hand, that somebody's research was fraudulent, it certainly would be." For individuals judged to be public figures, a statement must not only be false but also must be made with malice or with "reckless disregard for the truth." Explains Sims: "All 'reckless disregard' means is that you actually,subjectively entertained doubts and went ahead and published anyway. If you believe what you are saying, as a matter of law you cannot-if the jury or the judge believes you-lose a libel case." This would likely have been a factor had Uri Geller's suit against Victor Stenger not been dismissed before it ever got to trial. In his book Physics and Psychics: The Search for a World Beyond the Sensesm (Buffalo, N.Y., Prometheus Books, 1990), Stenger stated of Geller that "... he was once arrested for claiming his feats were performed with psychic power." In fact, Stenger had drawn an incorrect conclusion from some of his research material. The accounts Stenger relied upon mentioned that Geller had been "brought to court," but it had been in a civil case, and he had never been arrested. Once Stenger realized his error, he and his publisher voluntarily inserted an erratum sheet and changed the wording in later printings of the book. Nevertheless, Geller sued Stenger for libel in Florida, London, and Hawaii. Stenger is convinced that despite his error he would have prevailed had the case come to trial. "You can say something that is incorrect if at the time it was to the best of your knowledge correct," he explains. "That never came up, because as often happens in legal cases, you get out on technicalities before the merits are really discussed." Geller's Florida and Hawaii cases were dismissed because he brought them after those states' statutes of limitations had expired. And his case against Stenger in London was dropped as part of a global settlement of several related cases between Geller and the Amherst, N.Y.-based Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal. New Sources Of Trouble Typically, libel law says that only a corporation or a living person can be disparaged. But in 12 states (Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas) it has recently become possible to libel a fruit or vegetable. Farmers in those states can now sue those who make false claims about agricultural products. These "agricultural disparagement" laws were apparently inspired by a 1989 report from the New York City-based Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) linking the apple additive Alar to cancer. Growers turned to state legislators in an effort to fend off criticism by NRDC and other watchdog organizations. Lawrie Mott, senior scientist at NRDC's San Francisco office, calls them "veggie hate-crimes laws," and says of the states that have passed them, "They're attempting to silence those people who have raised questions about the food supply. "It's not clear that these laws are constitutional," Mott continues. "If it's based on 'reliable scientific fact,' it's not considered disparagement under the law. That's a very vague term, and one that's primed for litigation. But the ultimate advice I would have [for scientists] is: If what you say is accurate, stick to your guns. If you have scientific concerns about the safety of the food supply, don't be silenced by people with obvious interests in keeping it quiet." Lawrie Mott LETTUCE LIBELED? Lawrie Mott describes the "agricultural disparagement" laws as "veggie hate-crimes laws". Additionally, new modes of scientific communication-E-mail, Usenet newsgroups, and the World Wide Web-have become further sources of libel-related worries. As Dan L. Burk, an assistant professor at Seton Hall University's School of Law, writes: "For the first time in history, global computer networks have in essence made everyone a publisher-with a few keystrokes, ordinary citizens can make their opinions known to thousands of others... This is an exciting development for individual freedom of expression, but there is a dark side to this unprecedented opportunity: Such computer-mediated communication may also expose ordinary citizens to liability on an unprecedented scale" (D.L. Burk, The Scientist, April 3, 1995, page 12). One thing is certain: Legal liability issues in electronic communication are in a highly unsettled state. For example, there is no agreement on the critical issue of whether service providers such as CompuServe and America Online should be thought of as publishers, and hence at least partially responsible for the content of their service, or "common carriers" and thus no more responsible than is the phone company for conversations over its wires. Another recently developed legal scheme for silencing criticism of corporate practices has come to be called the "SLAPP suit." SLAPP stands for Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation. The law has long allowed just about anyone to sue anyone else for anything, and a SLAPP suit often takes the form of an unwinnable libel suit that is intended to harass and deplete the resources of critics. Arnold Relman, a longtime critic of what he calls the "medical-industrial complex," found himself the target of a what he considered a harassing libel suit after a reporter for the Dallas Morning News asked for his comment on some newspaper and radio ads placed by a for-profit cancer-treatment center, the Zion, Ill.-based Cancer Treatment Centers of America. (This is not technically a SLAPP suit because Relman's statement was quoted in a newspaper account and not made in the course of a public proceeding.) According to Relman, the ads implied that the center was able to help people with advanced cancer who had failed to respond to conventional medical treatments. "I said [to the reporter] I didn't know anything about the company, hadn't heard of it before, but on the face of what he read me those ads were misleading and they were unethical. . . . I said that . . . it was unfortunate that they would hold out this kind of hope to people with advanced metastatic cancer," recalls Relman. The center sued Relman and several other physicians quoted in the article (J. Weiss, Dallas Morning News, June 21, 1992, page 1A). A Texas court issued a subpoena to Relman requiring that he give a deposition at a lawyer's offices in Boston. But Relman's lawyers successfully argued that the Texas court had no jurisdiction in Massachusetts, and the case was ultimately dropped. "I think they knew they had no case," comments Relman. "I was expressing an opinion, and what I said as an opinion was true. I didn't say it with malicious intention. I didn't even know the company. I had nothing personal against them. I was just talking on a matter of public policy and medical ethics. "It seems to me that honest and well-intentioned scientific disputes ought to be off limits to litigation," continues Relman. "Many scientific advances are made by the resolution of disputes, the correction of well-intentioned or honest error by better data, new information... It ought to be possible for scientists to express honest disagreements, to make honest mistakes... without involving them in litigation.... I think it would be a terrible damage to the scientific process if lawyers began to get involved in scientific debates." Robert Finn, a freelance science writer based in Long Beach, Calif., is online at finn at nasw.org. [home] [top] [search] [previous] [next] _________________________________________________________________ (The Scientist, Vol:10, #6, pg.15-16 , March 18, 1996) (Copyright � The Scientist, Inc.) WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE FOLLOWING ADDRESSES: 71764.2561 at compuserve.com or The Scientist, 3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104, U.S.A. From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:38:06 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:38:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: cc.300.html Message-ID: <199701270602.AAA02303@einstein> PUNISHMENT OF LIBEL KNOWN TO BE FALSE. 300. Every one who publishes a defamatory libel that he knows is false is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. [R.S., c.C-34, s.264.] _________________________________________________________________ Next, Section 301 ... From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:38:42 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:38:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: cc.317.html Message-ID: <199701270603.AAA02306@einstein> VERDICTS IN CASES OF DEFAMATORY LIBEL. 317. Where, on the trial of an indictment for publishing a defamatory libel, a plea of not guilty is pleaded, the jury that is sworn to try the issue may give a general verdict of guilty or not guilty on the whole matter put in issue on the indictment, and shall not be required or directed by the judge to find the defendant guilty merely on proof of publication by the defendant of the alleged defamatory libel, and of the sense ascribed thereto in the indictment, but the judge may, in his discretion, give a direction or opinion to the jury on the matter in issue as in other criminal proceedings, and the jury may, on the issue, find a special verdict. [R.S., c.C-34, s.281.] _________________________________________________________________ Next, Section 318 ... From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:39:14 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:39:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: PublicF_j385.html Message-ID: <199701270603.AAA02309@einstein> Libel Plaintiffs - Public or Private Person Status Recent Examples PUBLIC OFFICIALS: * High School Teacher, Elstrom v. Independent Sch. District (Minn. 1995) * Elementary School Principal, 20 MLR 1640 (VT.) * Former County Employee w/ Financial Responsiblity, 20 MLR 2159 (Tenn.) * Police Officer, 21 MLR 1588 (Az.) * Federal Strike Force Attorney, 20 MLR 1649 (Az.) * TVA Official, 20 MLR 1873 (6th) * Athletic Director/Football Coach, 21 MLR 1746 (Tx.) * Special-Agent-In-Charge of President Ford's Secret Service Detail, 21 MLR 1842 (D.D.C.) * Mississippi Public Defender, 22 MLR 1413 (DC S. Miss. 1994) * Former Deputy Sheriff, 22 MLR 2013 (Fla CirCt. 1994) * Commissioned National Guard Officers, 22 MLR 2046 (Ga. SuperCt 1994) * Police Lieutenant, 22 MLR 2129 (NJ SupCt 1994) * President of State Troopers' association, 22 MLR (NY SupCt AppDiv. 1993) NOT PUBLIC OFFICIALS: High School Principal, 20 MLR 2095 (GA.) Deputy Public Defender, 21 MLR 1624 (CA) Street & Traffic Supervisor, LeDoux v. Northstar Pub., 521 N.W. 2d (Mn. 1994) LIMITED PUBLIC FIGURES: * Charity seeking donations and organizer, 21 MLR 1449 (4th Cir.) * Attorney in private practice representing several school districts, 20 MLR 1992 (NJ) * Physician who sought media attention for practice and technique, 20 MLR 1613 (NY) * Star Witness in Jim Garrison case who "sought limelight", 20 MLR 2113 (La.) * Lawn Mower Repair Co., 22 MLR 1461 (NJ SuperCt. AppDiv. 1994)* * Police Officer/Subject of Book, 22 MLR 1385 (5th Cir. 1994)* * Paycologists/authors, 22 MLR 1852 (7th Cir. 1994) * Convicted Murderer, 22 MLR 2239 (DC Sind. 1994)* * Actress/Model, 22 MLR 2147 (DC E Wis. 1994) * * Appointed tax collector who never took office, 22 MLR 2157 (Ariz SuperCt 1994) * Brother who "voluntarily thrust himself" into controversy surrounding his brothers arrest, 22 MLR 1434 (Ca Ct App 1994) *Note: It is not clear that these individuals would be limited public figures in Oregon. NOT PUBLIC FIGURES: * Host of a loud party, 21 MLR 1378 (Pa.) * Woman at home where MLK had dinner night before shot who was alledged to have had extramarital affair with King, 21 MLR 1353 (S.D.N.Y) * Person accused of of sexual misconduct, 22 MLR 2353 (4th Cir. 1994) Return to J385 Home page From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:40:27 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:40:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: 1a_c7p6.html Message-ID: <199701270604.AAA02312@einstein> [IMAGE] Chapter VII: Libel Fault _________________________________________________________________ The Supreme Court has recognized different standards for different types of libel plaintiffs, with public officials and public figures required to show a high degree of fault. Celebrities and others with power in a community are usually considered public figures. Politicians and high-ranking government personnel are public officials. Courts generally consider public officials to include public employees who have substantial responsibility for or control over the conduct of governmental affairs. Some courts have found that public school teachers and police officers are public officials. But determining if other people are private or public figures is not always easy. In some instances, there may be overlapping in the private and public category. For example, a businessperson who has high visibility because of fundraising efforts in a community may or may not be a public figure for all purposes. A plaintiff who is considered a public figure or official must prove that the publisher or broadcaster acted with "actual malice" in reporting derogatory information. "Actual malice" does not mean ill will or intent to harm. Instead, the term applies to whether the defendant knew that the challenged statements were false or acted with reckless disregard of the truth. Courts may examine reporting procedures in testing for actual malice. While carelessness is not usually considered reckless disregard, ignoring obvious ways of substantiating allegations could be considered reckless. In Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton, the Supreme Court held that even an extreme deviation from professional standards, or the publication of a story to increase circulation, do not in themselves prove actual malice. The Court also said that while failure to investigate facts does not necessarily prove actual malice, a "purposeful avoidance of the truth" may. Use of quotations that are not literally accurate will not necessarily be considered proof of actual malice as long as the altered quotes do not materially change the meaning of the words the speaker used. In Masson v. The New Yorker Magazine, the Supreme Court acknowledged that some editing of quotations is often necessary, but refused to extend protection to all edits that are at least a "rational interpretation" of what the speaker said. If the plaintiff is a private litigant, he or she must at least prove that the publisher or broadcaster was negligent in failing to ascertain that the statement was false and defamatory. Some states may impose a higher burden on private-figure litigants, especially if the story in question concerns a matter of public importance. _________________________________________________________________ [INLINE] Back to Table of Contents [INLINE] Jump to next section in this chapter From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 21:41:45 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:41:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: 1a_c7p7.html Message-ID: <199701270606.AAA02316@einstein> [IMAGE] Chapter VII: Libel Defenses _________________________________________________________________ Truth is generally a complete bar to recovery by any plaintiff who sues for libel. Making sure that any potentially libelous material can be proven true can avoid needless litigation. Fair Report. Libelous statements made by others in certain settings are often conditionally privileged if the reporter, in good faith, accurately reports information of public interest. This privilege usually applies to official meetings such as judicial proceedings, legislative hearings and grand jury deliberations. Opinion is still protected speech under the First Amendment, although the Supreme Court limited the formerly broad reach of opinion protection in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal. The court ruled that there is no separate opinion privilege, but because factual truth is a defense to a libel claim an opinion with no "provably false factual connotation" is still protected. As a result of this decision, courts will examine statements of opinion to see if they are based on or presume underlying facts. If these facts are false or defamatory, the "opinion" statements will not be protected. Consent. If a person gives permission for the publication of the information, that person cannot later sue for libel. However, denial, refusal to answer or silence concerning the statement do not constitute consent. The statute of limitations for bringing libel suits varies from state to state. Generally the time limit for filing a libel lawsuit starts at the time of the first publication of the alleged defamation. If the plaintiff does not sue within the statutory time period, the litigation can be barred. Although a retraction is not usually considered a defense to a libel claim, it may reduce the damages a defendant must pay if found liable for defamation. Before agreeing to publish a retraction, consult an attorney. _________________________________________________________________ [INLINE] Back to Table of Contents [INLINE] Jump to next section in this chapter From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 21:55:47 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:55:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270555.VAA11235@toad.com> On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > wrong. well, seems D. Thorn agrees with the song: 'california girls' From minow at apple.com Sun Jan 26 21:55:48 1997 From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:55:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Xerox is watching you Message-ID: <199701270555.VAA11234@toad.com> You'll find an article worth a visit to the dentist in the January 1997 issue of Popular Science. It tells a story from the 1960's cold war era. It seems that the only American who could get into the Soviet Embassy was the Xerox repairman. So the CIA and Xerox built a camera that took a picture of every copy that could be installed inside the 914 cabinet (where it would be invisble). Once a month, the repairman came by to do the ordinary cleaning and repair (those things broke down a lot). Part of the repair process exchanged the camera for a fresh load. The CIA could then read everything that was copied. The article suggests that other Xerox models had their own cameras. My back of the envelope (literally) computation suggests that one roll of 8-millimeter film would hold about 30,000 images. Martin Minow minow at apple.com From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Sun Jan 26 21:58:00 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 21:58:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Happy birthday to Oksas Message-ID: <199701270558.VAA11325@toad.com> Thank you Dr. Vulis ! :) oksas From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:05:59 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:05:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fantasy quotes & libel Message-ID: <199701270630.AAA02364@einstein> Hi, After review of the material I forwarded by request it is clear that 'fantasy' quotes are libel provided: * the person being quoted is not a public figure. On a 'private' mailing list like the cypherpunks this is a given unless similar statements can be found in the public records. * the section added to the original quote is not clearly seperated or otherwise dilineated such that a reader will be able to tell what the original quote was and the extrapolation by the 'editor' is. * there is clear intent to effect the perception of the original authors reputation in a negative or otherwise harmful manner. * the 'fantasy' quote is not clearly marked as the opinion of the editor. While quoting persons with editing is allowed under the 1st Amendment as understood by the courts the attributation of extrapolations by a third party (meaning a party other than the original author and the reader) as 'true' quotes of the original author is not. 'Truth' is usually ascribed as protection against libel, however, opinions are not 'true', they are opinions not facts as accepted by a court. With the current 'editorial control' as provided by the cypherpunks mailing list the mailing list operator/censor may also be held in some situations accountable as well. This occurs because the relationship between list operator and the quoter is similar to that of editor and reporter in a newspaper. For the quoter to get his quote distributed the list operator must ok it. The reasoning used is that the editor 'should have known' the boundaries and applied them. Not only is ignorance not an excuse but neither is negligence. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From woody at hi.net Sun Jan 26 22:07:59 1997 From: woody at hi.net (Howard Campbell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:07:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270611.UAA04805@pohaku.hi.net> A recent publication "The Sovereign Individual"('97) discusses many of the issues discussed on Cypherpunks. The authors, James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg, sketch the likely totalitarian scenarios that will emerge in the coming years. Just as we see every day in the media, they predict that we ain't seen nothing yet when it comes to the attempts to regulate cyberspace, cryptography, and the content of online information. Portraying cellular phone triangulation as a public health concern, etc., are just the beginning. The authors also paint a bleak picture for blanc's 'True Believer' types. They will continue to be milked "as a farmer milks his cows" while those with techno-savvy and 'extranational' savoir faire will grow wings and take their wealth and marketable skills to other jurisdictions where predatory taxmen and arbitrary civil forfeiture laws don't exist. The book is sort of Toffleresque, but written better and full of historical parallels that help the reader to understand social upheavals of the past and how the demise of failing contemporary institutions are likely to affect Joe windowz95. Example: chapter 4- "The Last Days of Politics: Parallels Betwen the Senile Decline of the Holy Mother Church and the Nanny State". aloha, wc From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 22:10:48 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:10:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701270610.WAA11802@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > BTW, if y'all can't stay away, I have a list of So. Cal. nude beaches, > approx. 3 years old. I don't go in for that sick, perverted stuff, myself, but I have a friend... From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Sun Jan 26 22:10:53 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:10:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <199701270610.WAA11804@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: > You can take a horse to water, you can't make him drink. You can drown him > however. Then you are walking, not riding. Thanks for clearing this up for us, Jim. I know that a lot of CypherPunks have been wondering about this, and many others as well. Hopefully, it will be posted on many conferences to enlighted others, as well. Toto From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:11:04 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:11:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: cc.300.html Message-ID: <199701270611.WAA11826@toad.com> PUNISHMENT OF LIBEL KNOWN TO BE FALSE. 300. Every one who publishes a defamatory libel that he knows is false is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years. [R.S., c.C-34, s.264.] _________________________________________________________________ Next, Section 301 ... From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:11:09 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:11:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: cc.317.html Message-ID: <199701270611.WAA11828@toad.com> VERDICTS IN CASES OF DEFAMATORY LIBEL. 317. Where, on the trial of an indictment for publishing a defamatory libel, a plea of not guilty is pleaded, the jury that is sworn to try the issue may give a general verdict of guilty or not guilty on the whole matter put in issue on the indictment, and shall not be required or directed by the judge to find the defendant guilty merely on proof of publication by the defendant of the alleged defamatory libel, and of the sense ascribed thereto in the indictment, but the judge may, in his discretion, give a direction or opinion to the jury on the matter in issue as in other criminal proceedings, and the jury may, on the issue, find a special verdict. [R.S., c.C-34, s.281.] _________________________________________________________________ Next, Section 318 ... From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:11:28 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:11:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm Message-ID: <199701270611.WAA11844@toad.com> Landskroner, LTD. [INLINE] Libel / Slander Libel / Slander is an area that involves defamatory oral or written statements containing false and misleading material which causes damage or injury to reputation and/or monetary loss. We provide a quick review of their success stories , some media and newspaper articles about what they've been able to do for their clients, and published articles about this topic. Please e-mail us with questions about our service! Landskroner and Phillips [INLINE] Nationally Recognized Consumer Trial Advocates. Over 100 Years combined experience in both State and Federal Courts. 55 Public Square, Tenth Floor, Cleveland Ohio 44113-1904 Phone: (216) 241-7000 Fax: (216) 241-3135 Toll Free: (888) 241-7001 [INLINE] From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:12:02 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:12:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: 1a_c7p4.html Message-ID: <199701270612.WAA11879@toad.com> [IMAGE] Chapter VII: Libel Identification _________________________________________________________________ A plaintiff must prove that the alleged defamatory publication refers to him or her. Relatives cannot sue on behalf of a deceased person. Governmental entities cannot bring libel claims, nor can members of large groups (usually 25 or more). However, if the statement can be interpreted as referring to a particular person in a group, that person can sue. Also, if the offending information pertains to a majority of the members of a small group, any member of the group has standing to sue. A corporation may bring a libel claim if the alleged defamatory statement raises doubts about the honesty, credit, efficiency or prestige of that business. However, if the statements refer only to corporate officers, the corporation cannot litigate on their behalf. _________________________________________________________________ [INLINE] Back to Table of Contents [INLINE] Jump to next section in this chapter From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:12:27 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:12:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: 1a_c7p7.html Message-ID: <199701270612.WAA11911@toad.com> [IMAGE] Chapter VII: Libel Defenses _________________________________________________________________ Truth is generally a complete bar to recovery by any plaintiff who sues for libel. Making sure that any potentially libelous material can be proven true can avoid needless litigation. Fair Report. Libelous statements made by others in certain settings are often conditionally privileged if the reporter, in good faith, accurately reports information of public interest. This privilege usually applies to official meetings such as judicial proceedings, legislative hearings and grand jury deliberations. Opinion is still protected speech under the First Amendment, although the Supreme Court limited the formerly broad reach of opinion protection in Milkovich v. Lorain Journal. The court ruled that there is no separate opinion privilege, but because factual truth is a defense to a libel claim an opinion with no "provably false factual connotation" is still protected. As a result of this decision, courts will examine statements of opinion to see if they are based on or presume underlying facts. If these facts are false or defamatory, the "opinion" statements will not be protected. Consent. If a person gives permission for the publication of the information, that person cannot later sue for libel. However, denial, refusal to answer or silence concerning the statement do not constitute consent. The statute of limitations for bringing libel suits varies from state to state. Generally the time limit for filing a libel lawsuit starts at the time of the first publication of the alleged defamation. If the plaintiff does not sue within the statutory time period, the litigation can be barred. Although a retraction is not usually considered a defense to a libel claim, it may reduce the damages a defendant must pay if found liable for defamation. Before agreeing to publish a retraction, consult an attorney. _________________________________________________________________ [INLINE] Back to Table of Contents [INLINE] Jump to next section in this chapter From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:12:37 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:12:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: PublicF_j385.html Message-ID: <199701270612.WAA11921@toad.com> Libel Plaintiffs - Public or Private Person Status Recent Examples PUBLIC OFFICIALS: * High School Teacher, Elstrom v. Independent Sch. District (Minn. 1995) * Elementary School Principal, 20 MLR 1640 (VT.) * Former County Employee w/ Financial Responsiblity, 20 MLR 2159 (Tenn.) * Police Officer, 21 MLR 1588 (Az.) * Federal Strike Force Attorney, 20 MLR 1649 (Az.) * TVA Official, 20 MLR 1873 (6th) * Athletic Director/Football Coach, 21 MLR 1746 (Tx.) * Special-Agent-In-Charge of President Ford's Secret Service Detail, 21 MLR 1842 (D.D.C.) * Mississippi Public Defender, 22 MLR 1413 (DC S. Miss. 1994) * Former Deputy Sheriff, 22 MLR 2013 (Fla CirCt. 1994) * Commissioned National Guard Officers, 22 MLR 2046 (Ga. SuperCt 1994) * Police Lieutenant, 22 MLR 2129 (NJ SupCt 1994) * President of State Troopers' association, 22 MLR (NY SupCt AppDiv. 1993) NOT PUBLIC OFFICIALS: High School Principal, 20 MLR 2095 (GA.) Deputy Public Defender, 21 MLR 1624 (CA) Street & Traffic Supervisor, LeDoux v. Northstar Pub., 521 N.W. 2d (Mn. 1994) LIMITED PUBLIC FIGURES: * Charity seeking donations and organizer, 21 MLR 1449 (4th Cir.) * Attorney in private practice representing several school districts, 20 MLR 1992 (NJ) * Physician who sought media attention for practice and technique, 20 MLR 1613 (NY) * Star Witness in Jim Garrison case who "sought limelight", 20 MLR 2113 (La.) * Lawn Mower Repair Co., 22 MLR 1461 (NJ SuperCt. AppDiv. 1994)* * Police Officer/Subject of Book, 22 MLR 1385 (5th Cir. 1994)* * Paycologists/authors, 22 MLR 1852 (7th Cir. 1994) * Convicted Murderer, 22 MLR 2239 (DC Sind. 1994)* * Actress/Model, 22 MLR 2147 (DC E Wis. 1994) * * Appointed tax collector who never took office, 22 MLR 2157 (Ariz SuperCt 1994) * Brother who "voluntarily thrust himself" into controversy surrounding his brothers arrest, 22 MLR 1434 (Ca Ct App 1994) *Note: It is not clear that these individuals would be limited public figures in Oregon. NOT PUBLIC FIGURES: * Host of a loud party, 21 MLR 1378 (Pa.) * Woman at home where MLK had dinner night before shot who was alledged to have had extramarital affair with King, 21 MLR 1353 (S.D.N.Y) * Person accused of of sexual misconduct, 22 MLR 2353 (4th Cir. 1994) Return to J385 Home page From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:13:47 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:13:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: libel.html Message-ID: <199701270613.WAA11974@toad.com> [IMAGE] [IMAGE] Libel and Slander "Libel" involves the publishing of a falsehood that harms someone. Slander is the same doctrine applied to the spoken word. Collectively, they are referred to as "defamation". Both are a matter of state laws, which usually (not always) require that the falsehood be intentional. In New York Times v. Sullivan, the Supreme Court held that the First Amendment requires that, before a public official can recover damages for a defamatory statement, he must prove it was made with "actual malice", even if state laws otherwise allow recovery for negligent defamation. The Court has since expanded this to cover not only public officials but "public figures", including individuals who involve themselves in controversies. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:15:45 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:15:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: libelfrm.htm Message-ID: <199701270615.WAA12017@toad.com> LIBEL CHECKLIST _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Look for material that identifies a person or an entity. Keep in mind that it is possible to identify people or entities without actually using a name. If the material contains identifiable voices, likenesses, or descriptions, it could be a problem. ___ The material identifies a person or entity. STOP HERE if the material does not identify a person or entity. You can't have a libel without someone to complain about it! _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Is any identified person dead? There is little reason to be concerned with statements or other material reflecting badly on dead persons because the law only protects "the memory of the dead," giving no cause of action to decedents. So long as the material concerns only the dead person, you need not answer the rest of the questions on this form. ___The person identified is dead. STOP HERE if the person identified is dead. _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ If material identifies a living person, is it: A private individual. ___A public person. ___A political person. _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ Would the material negatively influence a reasonable reader's opinion of the person or entity identified? ___a. It would reflect badly on the character of the person or entity. ___b. It could harm the reputation, diminish the esteem, respect or good will in which the person or entity's relevant community holds him, her or it. _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ If the material might reflect badly on character and/or harm reputation, would the harm be the result of: ___An explicit statement. ___An insinuation. ___A sarcastic statement. ___A parody or cartoon. ___An opinion that implies that there are unstated defamatory facts underlying it. ___Other. _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ There are several possible defenses to a claim of defamation, although none may apply in a particular case. Check one of the following defenses only if you are fairly certain it would apply. ___The statement or other material is true. ___The statement or other material is purely an expression of opinion and not an assertion of fact. ___The statement or other material constitutes a fair comment on a matter of public opinion, for example, the use of public money, disbarment of attorneys, management of public institutions and charities, management of private companies whose activities widely affect the public (pollution, delivery of medical services, common carriage, employment practices, discrimination, etc.) or the review of books, public entertainment, sports events or scientific discoveries. ___No one could reasonably interpret the statement or image to be an assertion of actual fact about the person or entity. ___The statement or image can be characterized as mere words of abuse, indicating dislike for the person or entity, but does not suggest any specific charge. ___The subject of the statement or image has given consent to or approved the material. _________________ __________ _________________________________________________________________ University Liability for the Wrongful Acts of Employee Publishers | Copyright Management Center Homepage | Intellectual Property Section Homepage _________________________________________________________________ 8 August 1995 University of Texas System Office of General Counsel Comments to gharper at utsystem.edu _________________________________________________________________ From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:16:56 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:16:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: 1a_c7p6.html Message-ID: <199701270616.WAA12070@toad.com> [IMAGE] Chapter VII: Libel Fault _________________________________________________________________ The Supreme Court has recognized different standards for different types of libel plaintiffs, with public officials and public figures required to show a high degree of fault. Celebrities and others with power in a community are usually considered public figures. Politicians and high-ranking government personnel are public officials. Courts generally consider public officials to include public employees who have substantial responsibility for or control over the conduct of governmental affairs. Some courts have found that public school teachers and police officers are public officials. But determining if other people are private or public figures is not always easy. In some instances, there may be overlapping in the private and public category. For example, a businessperson who has high visibility because of fundraising efforts in a community may or may not be a public figure for all purposes. A plaintiff who is considered a public figure or official must prove that the publisher or broadcaster acted with "actual malice" in reporting derogatory information. "Actual malice" does not mean ill will or intent to harm. Instead, the term applies to whether the defendant knew that the challenged statements were false or acted with reckless disregard of the truth. Courts may examine reporting procedures in testing for actual malice. While carelessness is not usually considered reckless disregard, ignoring obvious ways of substantiating allegations could be considered reckless. In Harte-Hanks Communications, Inc. v. Connaughton, the Supreme Court held that even an extreme deviation from professional standards, or the publication of a story to increase circulation, do not in themselves prove actual malice. The Court also said that while failure to investigate facts does not necessarily prove actual malice, a "purposeful avoidance of the truth" may. Use of quotations that are not literally accurate will not necessarily be considered proof of actual malice as long as the altered quotes do not materially change the meaning of the words the speaker used. In Masson v. The New Yorker Magazine, the Supreme Court acknowledged that some editing of quotations is often necessary, but refused to extend protection to all edits that are at least a "rational interpretation" of what the speaker said. If the plaintiff is a private litigant, he or she must at least prove that the publisher or broadcaster was negligent in failing to ascertain that the statement was false and defamatory. Some states may impose a higher burden on private-figure litigants, especially if the story in question concerns a matter of public importance. _________________________________________________________________ [INLINE] Back to Table of Contents [INLINE] Jump to next section in this chapter From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:18:45 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:18:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: prof_960318.html Message-ID: <199701270618.WAA12182@toad.com> LIBEL CONCERNS ARE A REALITY FOR SCIENTISTS WHO SPEAK OUT IN PUBLIC Author: Robert Finn (The Scientist, Vol:10, #6, p. 15, March 18, 1996) In today's increasingly litigious society, anyone can become the target of a lawsuit. A potential libel action, for example, should not only be the concern of publishers and journalists. The threat of a libel suit is now a reality for anyone, including scientists who choose to speak out publicly-or even write letters to the editor-on controversial issues. A libel suit can come without warning when an ordinary scientist is engaged in ordinary scientific activities. For example, Arnold S. Relman, editor emeritus of the New England Journal of Medicine, was quoted in a newspaper article criticizing the advertising practices of a for-profit hospital. Victor J. Stenger, a professor of physics at the University of Hawaii at Manoa, incorrectly described Israeli psychic Uri Geller's legal history in a book debunking paranormal phenomena. And Jan Moor-Jankowski, as editor of the Journal of Medical Primatology, merely printed a letter from an animal activist opposing a pharmaceutical company's experiments. Each of these scientists soon found himself faced with the dreaded prospect of defending himself in a libel suit. All three eventually prevailed in court, or the charges ended up being dropped. But defending themselves was a painful, distracting, and often expensive process. The lessons they learned are instructive to all scientists who write or make public statements. Arnol Relman CASE DISMISSED: "I think they knew they had no case," says Arnold Relman of the suit files against him by a for-profit cancer-treatment center. The First Amendment to the United States Constitution provides powerful-but not impregnable-protection to anyone who speaks on controversial topics. "Libel is a civil action, a tort action that you can bring against somebody claiming that a statement, either written or oral, is false and defamatory and caused you injury," explains Charles S. Sims, a noted libel attorney and partner at Proskauer Rose Goetz and Mendelsohn, a New York law firm. (This firm handles libel matters for The Scientist.) Sims notes that legal bills for a libel defense can quickly mount up. Even if the case is dismissed quickly, one can easily run up $20,000 to $60,000 in costs, and if a case drags on, it can go into the millions. Libel insurance can cost publishers thousands of dollars per year, and is an additional factor in today's high cost of publishing. Victor Stenger ERRATUM SHEET INSERTED: Victor Stenger took measures to correct his text but was sued nonetheless. "If you are sued, you need to check with your employer or your institution or your professional group-anybody who might consider themselves morally bound to come to your aid," advises Sims. "And you also need to look at your home insurance policy. An astonishing number of home insurance policies have clauses which turn out to be usable to force an insurance company to pay for a defense." Landmark Case The legal axiom goes, "Truth is an absolute defense against libel," and indeed no true statement of fact can ever be libelous, and neither can statements of judgment or opinion, which are neither true nor false. Both these principles were put to the test in the landmark case that Immuno AG (a pharmaceutical company based in Austria) brought against Moor-Jankowski. The former editor of the Journal of Medical Primatology was then director of New York University's Laboratory for Experimental Medicine and Surgery in Primates. He has recently founded the Center for Academic Freedom, based in New York City. As chronicled in the book The Monkey Wars by Deborah Blum (Oxford University Press, 1994) and in interviews with Moor-Jankowski and his attorney Philip Byler (now at the New York firm Layton, Brooks and Hecht), it all started in January 1983, when Shirley McGreal wrote a letter to the Journal of Medical Primatology objecting to some experiments proposed by Immuno AG. McGreal is an animal activist and founder of the Charleston, S.C.-based International Primate Protection League. She learned that Immuno planned a study of non-A/non-B hepatitis in African chimpanzees, at a research station in Sierra Leone. Based on what she learned about the experiments, and the conclusions she drew from these facts, she had several objections. Among them were that the experimenters would be using wild-caught chimpanzees, whose numbers are dwindling; that they would release them after experimentally infecting them with hepatitis; and that the released chimps might transmit the disease to other animals. With McGreal's letter to the editor in hand, Moor-Jankowski tried to elicit a rebuttal from Immuno's research director. Instead, he soon received a letter from Immuno's lawyers asserting that McGreal's statements were inaccurate and reckless. It read, in part: "We would also like to advise you that our review of Dr. McGreal's letter indicated that it is not a fair comment regarding our client's activities, and should you proceed with publication, without giving us the opportunity for a meaningful response, we shall be compelled to take whatever actions we deem necessary to redress our client's rights." But though Moor-Jankowski waited until December 1983 before publishing McGreal's letter (S. McGreal, J. Med. Primatol., 12:280, 1983), Immuno never offered a substantive response to her charges. During that time Moor-Jankowski himself came to be critical of Immuno's planned experiments, and he was quoted to that effect in New Scientist (N. Heneson, 100:165, 1983). Immuno then brought suit against a number of institutions and individuals, including McGreal, Moor-Jankowski, the Journal of Medical Primatology, New Scientist, the distributors of both publications, and NYU. Although Immuno ultimately dropped plans for the experiments, it continued pursuing its libel cases. In response, almost all the defendants or their insurance companies chose to settle rather than fight. The exception was Moor-Jankowski. Born in Poland, he explains his decision to persist by saying, "As a very young boy I fought the Germans for freedom. I didn't want to stand up for muzzling." It cost him seven years and about $2 million in legal fees ($200,000 of which Moor-Jankowski paid himself), and it generated an eight-volume legal record as the case cycled among the New York County Supreme Court, the New York State Court of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. In the end, Moor-Jankowski was vindicated. The Court of Appeals ruled that the letter was a combination of truthful factual statements and opinion, both of which are protected by the First Amendment. Jan Moor-Jankowski HE CHOSE TO FIGHT: Jan Moor-Jankowski did not settle his libel case out of court because "I didn't want to stand up for muzzling." "When you're talking about a letter to the editor, you're talking about what the Court of Appeals in New York correctly viewed as a forum to air grievances and views on the part of the public," says Philip Byler, Moor-Jankowski's attorney. "It's a precedent because it's a . . . decision which adhered to a broad constitutional protection of opinion." Byler maintains that the decision makes clear that "you do have a right to express views that are not orthodox. You do have a right to express viewpoints which over the course of time will be shown to be wrong-minded. A letter to the editor is a forum for opinion, and quite frankly people should feel the leeway to express themselves without the fear that sometime in the future, in the libel courtroom, where money damages are at stake, they will be shown to be wrong. That doesn't say that you have a right to make false, defamatory statements that are really hurtful to somebody." Byler's advice to authors of letters to the editor: Clearly separate factual statements from statements of opinion. "To the extent you are making a statement that's based on inference or speculation or conjecture, use words that indicate that." Byler believes that as editor of the journal, Moor-Jankowski more than fulfilled his obligations by deliberating a considerable time before publication, all the while soliciting a substantive response from the criticized party. Public Figures For a statement to be libelous, the offended party must suffer actual damage, notes Sims. "It's got to be really harmful, not just something that offends somebody's sensibilities, but something that harms their reputation." This principle came into play in Cornell University astronomer Carl Sagan's suit against Apple Computer Inc. of Cupertino, Calif. Apple had been using "Carl Sagan" as its internal name for a new computer. Sagan got wind of this, and his lawyers sent Apple a letter instructing the company to cease and desist. In response, a project manager changed the computer's name to BHA, an acronym for Butt-Head Astronomer. Sagan sued Apple in the Central District of California for, among other things, libel, infliction of emotional distress, and improperly using his name. Judge Lourdes G. Baird dismissed the libel portion of the suit, holding that "one does not seriously attack the expertise of a scientist using the undefined phrase 'butt-head,' and that a reader aware of the context would understand the project manager was retaliating in a humorous and satirical way." Sagan, who declined to be interviewed for this article, later reached a settlement with Apple on the other aspects of the suit. But even when a statement is both false and harmful it still may not be libel, says Sims. "If it criticizes one particular event, in many states it's immune from prosecution under the single-instance rule. If you say that a doctor screwed up an operation, that's not libelous. If you say that he's a terrible surgeon, it might be. Similarly, if you're writing a review of a scientific article and say that scientist miscalculated the numbers... that's not going to be actionable. If you said, on the other hand, that somebody's research was fraudulent, it certainly would be." For individuals judged to be public figures, a statement must not only be false but also must be made with malice or with "reckless disregard for the truth." Explains Sims: "All 'reckless disregard' means is that you actually,subjectively entertained doubts and went ahead and published anyway. If you believe what you are saying, as a matter of law you cannot-if the jury or the judge believes you-lose a libel case." This would likely have been a factor had Uri Geller's suit against Victor Stenger not been dismissed before it ever got to trial. In his book Physics and Psychics: The Search for a World Beyond the Sensesm (Buffalo, N.Y., Prometheus Books, 1990), Stenger stated of Geller that "... he was once arrested for claiming his feats were performed with psychic power." In fact, Stenger had drawn an incorrect conclusion from some of his research material. The accounts Stenger relied upon mentioned that Geller had been "brought to court," but it had been in a civil case, and he had never been arrested. Once Stenger realized his error, he and his publisher voluntarily inserted an erratum sheet and changed the wording in later printings of the book. Nevertheless, Geller sued Stenger for libel in Florida, London, and Hawaii. Stenger is convinced that despite his error he would have prevailed had the case come to trial. "You can say something that is incorrect if at the time it was to the best of your knowledge correct," he explains. "That never came up, because as often happens in legal cases, you get out on technicalities before the merits are really discussed." Geller's Florida and Hawaii cases were dismissed because he brought them after those states' statutes of limitations had expired. And his case against Stenger in London was dropped as part of a global settlement of several related cases between Geller and the Amherst, N.Y.-based Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal. New Sources Of Trouble Typically, libel law says that only a corporation or a living person can be disparaged. But in 12 states (Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Texas) it has recently become possible to libel a fruit or vegetable. Farmers in those states can now sue those who make false claims about agricultural products. These "agricultural disparagement" laws were apparently inspired by a 1989 report from the New York City-based Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) linking the apple additive Alar to cancer. Growers turned to state legislators in an effort to fend off criticism by NRDC and other watchdog organizations. Lawrie Mott, senior scientist at NRDC's San Francisco office, calls them "veggie hate-crimes laws," and says of the states that have passed them, "They're attempting to silence those people who have raised questions about the food supply. "It's not clear that these laws are constitutional," Mott continues. "If it's based on 'reliable scientific fact,' it's not considered disparagement under the law. That's a very vague term, and one that's primed for litigation. But the ultimate advice I would have [for scientists] is: If what you say is accurate, stick to your guns. If you have scientific concerns about the safety of the food supply, don't be silenced by people with obvious interests in keeping it quiet." Lawrie Mott LETTUCE LIBELED? Lawrie Mott describes the "agricultural disparagement" laws as "veggie hate-crimes laws". Additionally, new modes of scientific communication-E-mail, Usenet newsgroups, and the World Wide Web-have become further sources of libel-related worries. As Dan L. Burk, an assistant professor at Seton Hall University's School of Law, writes: "For the first time in history, global computer networks have in essence made everyone a publisher-with a few keystrokes, ordinary citizens can make their opinions known to thousands of others... This is an exciting development for individual freedom of expression, but there is a dark side to this unprecedented opportunity: Such computer-mediated communication may also expose ordinary citizens to liability on an unprecedented scale" (D.L. Burk, The Scientist, April 3, 1995, page 12). One thing is certain: Legal liability issues in electronic communication are in a highly unsettled state. For example, there is no agreement on the critical issue of whether service providers such as CompuServe and America Online should be thought of as publishers, and hence at least partially responsible for the content of their service, or "common carriers" and thus no more responsible than is the phone company for conversations over its wires. Another recently developed legal scheme for silencing criticism of corporate practices has come to be called the "SLAPP suit." SLAPP stands for Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation. The law has long allowed just about anyone to sue anyone else for anything, and a SLAPP suit often takes the form of an unwinnable libel suit that is intended to harass and deplete the resources of critics. Arnold Relman, a longtime critic of what he calls the "medical-industrial complex," found himself the target of a what he considered a harassing libel suit after a reporter for the Dallas Morning News asked for his comment on some newspaper and radio ads placed by a for-profit cancer-treatment center, the Zion, Ill.-based Cancer Treatment Centers of America. (This is not technically a SLAPP suit because Relman's statement was quoted in a newspaper account and not made in the course of a public proceeding.) According to Relman, the ads implied that the center was able to help people with advanced cancer who had failed to respond to conventional medical treatments. "I said [to the reporter] I didn't know anything about the company, hadn't heard of it before, but on the face of what he read me those ads were misleading and they were unethical. . . . I said that . . . it was unfortunate that they would hold out this kind of hope to people with advanced metastatic cancer," recalls Relman. The center sued Relman and several other physicians quoted in the article (J. Weiss, Dallas Morning News, June 21, 1992, page 1A). A Texas court issued a subpoena to Relman requiring that he give a deposition at a lawyer's offices in Boston. But Relman's lawyers successfully argued that the Texas court had no jurisdiction in Massachusetts, and the case was ultimately dropped. "I think they knew they had no case," comments Relman. "I was expressing an opinion, and what I said as an opinion was true. I didn't say it with malicious intention. I didn't even know the company. I had nothing personal against them. I was just talking on a matter of public policy and medical ethics. "It seems to me that honest and well-intentioned scientific disputes ought to be off limits to litigation," continues Relman. "Many scientific advances are made by the resolution of disputes, the correction of well-intentioned or honest error by better data, new information... It ought to be possible for scientists to express honest disagreements, to make honest mistakes... without involving them in litigation.... I think it would be a terrible damage to the scientific process if lawyers began to get involved in scientific debates." Robert Finn, a freelance science writer based in Long Beach, Calif., is online at finn at nasw.org. [home] [top] [search] [previous] [next] _________________________________________________________________ (The Scientist, Vol:10, #6, pg.15-16 , March 18, 1996) (Copyright ) The Scientist, Inc.) WE WELCOME YOUR OPINION. IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COMMENT ON THIS STORY, PLEASE WRITE TO US AT EITHER ONE OF THE FOLLOWING ADDRESSES: 71764.2561 at compuserve.com or The Scientist, 3600 Market Street, Suite 450, Philadelphia, PA 19104, U.S.A. From furballs at netcom.com Sun Jan 26 22:29:44 1997 From: furballs at netcom.com (furballs) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:29:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: it aint REALLY successful until someone loses his temper Message-ID: <199701270629.XAA02039@infowest.com> >In-Response-To: Atilla T. Hun Well, I see that you could'nt leave well enough alone... :-) Since Snow decided to jump into your face on this one, I might as well throw my $0.02 on the table as well. Funny how my trashcan stays very empty these days now that cypherpunks is in my bit bucket... Frankly, it does not surprise me that homosexuality is yet another pointless off-topic to be discussed on the list. My comments appear below in Snow's exchange... At 08:07 AM 1/26/97 +0000, Attila T. Hun wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > it aint successful until someone loses his temper > > well, I do need to admit my slam was a bit hard; but > homosexuality is an abomination before God. > > ...but I did make one impression: Snow does not wish to be on > the "sharp" end of gun with me.... > > I think I sent you a copy of my original slam; if not, it's > worth reading and I will resend; > > scores of comments and sub topics have been generated, some > nitpicking over carrier #1, etc. --but this is the first flame > which surprises me on a list with so many known faggots --you tell > the boys from the girls in SF by grabbing their crotch. > > accutally, I thought my original post was rather 'sympathetic.' > > ------ > forwarded by Attila T. Hun > original sender was snow > ------ > > Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 00:23:18 -0600 (CST) > From: snow > To: "Attila T. Hun" > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Sort this directly to Flames, was Re: Homosexuals > Sender: owner-cypherpunks-unedited at toad.com > >> In <199701241414.GAA25350 at toad.com>, on 01/24/97 >> at 07:17 AM, "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" said: >> +Anything? My good friend TRRCJ3 reports from San Francisco that the >> +city is much nicer now that so many homosexuals are 6 feet under. >> +Thank God for AIDS. > > attila: >> when AIDS was relatively obscure, I always dismissed AIDS as >> God's response to homosexuality (and other crimes against nature); >> i.e. -settlement by a just God. > > I almost threw a dumb ass redneck of a ship in the middle of the ocean >for a comment like this. Everyone's entitled to an opinion. By stating the above, what he accuses you of, he is just as guilty of in reverse. Frankly, having grown up in a red neck crowd, and then coming to grips with the offbeat communities in So. Cal. was a real eye opener. One can choose to fight it outloud and create havoc whereever they go, or realize that what others do in the privacy of their own domain is their business and doesn't affect your manhood one way or another. This politically correct bullshit response is just symptomatic of someone who is uncomfortable with the position taken for expediency's sake and is trying to justify to himself the course taken. > > I've read a lot of your rantings on this list, and I agree with some of >them, but statements like this prove that you are a bigoted idiot. You may >have some areas where you know what you are talking about, and I wouldn't want >to be on the sharp end of a gun you were holding, but your head is definately >stuck firmly up your ass. Ok, we throw down the gauntlet here in true USENET style, and in keeping with that, have nothing of value to say (just name calling). > >> Unfortunately, some of these boy-girls could not keep it among >> themselves, and the closet queens brought it home. AIDS replicates > > Let's not forget the Hemophilliacs(spelling) and IV drug users. He does bring up a point, which does in some ways support your poistion here. > >> asexually, knowing no boundaries. > > It was purely by accident that HIV was first noticed in the Homosexual >population in this country. > Not true. Aids has been here for many years. They have historically traced it back to Africa where they have records delineating the disease amongst the Eurpoeans and those not indiginous to the area. Interesting that the WHO and other medical groups are studying tribes in Zaire and Congo right now that have a natural immunity to the bug. Considering they have lived in the areas for countless years, it would make sense that natural genetic selection would propogate those who would be resistent and live long enough to have children. Also of interest, is the fact that the living population under study does not practice homosexual behavoir, as it is by virtue of the practice, pointless to the continuance of the tribe. As to the "discovery" of AIDS in the gay population in the US. There was no discovery, as it was a health problem that started spinning out of control within the community. Ofcourse the Murdock press loved the setup as it introduced the proper shock value needed to sell subscriptions - much like the macabre sense of curiosity at viewing a terrible auto accident. Human nature... it never changes. > Viruses don't know anything about a persons sexual preference, and any >so called "god" that would use such a non-selective weapon is not a god >intelligent people should worship. Such a god would be a blind ignorant god. Now Snow is dictating his view of God onto yours. Bad form. No justifiable position to defend. but we do it with vim and vigor... :-) > >> I would not wish the disease upon anyone, but if you play, you >> just might pay --as in "...reap what thy hath sown." > > Tell that to some 1 month old whose mother infected him/her. Tell that >to a 5 year old who got it from a blood transfusion. Someone ought to teach him about the difference between agency and responsibility - nah, he'd use his agency to deny it anyay... :-) > >> To be strongly opposed to homosexuality has nothing to do with >> bigotry, political correctness, or aberrationist apologists; it is >> an exposition of the natural order among the species. > > Answer me 2 questions: > > 1) If homosexuality is a "choice", why would anyone choose that lifestyle >where the averge life expectancy is in the 40's, that causes so much pain >among ones family, and so much conflict with the rest of society. > > 2) If it is not a choice, why would "god" punish those who had no choice? > These two points deny the existence of agency in it's basic form, and deny God by denying his omniscience, and omnipoitence; two basic characteristics of the office. If God were fallable, or human (fallable), then logic would dictate a being of higher plane and that our explict trust in him would be subject to condition, thus invalidating the purpose and scope of religion from a immutable definite to a maybe. Again, a position impossible to defend. Purely opinion. >> and for those who deny God, read Darwin as to the relative >> rate of survival for deviant and/or abnormal species. > > Then how do you explain homosexual behavior in several other species >that seem to be doing quite well? > Donald Woomer answered that question, by pointing out that in the Ag business, it has been observed that ~10% of livestock of many breeds exhibit homosexual tendencies. It doesn't matter the sex of the animal, it's genes do not get passed on to the next generation as it refuses to propogate with the opposite sex in many instances. This does not mean the livestock population is threatened in toto. Infact, the population will continue to thrive. It is when a large percentage of a given herd shows this tendency that the herd declines, dissolves or is taken over by a healthy herd to promulgate the species. The instict for self-preservation is strong, and it is falacious to assume that we has humans can attribute human attributes to such as cattle or sheep. Given the the above claim by Snow, does this mean that man kind is nothing more than livestock? Again, this denies agency and denies the greater intellect that humans enjoy. To wit: when was the last time you saw a cow expressing a global concern about politics on USENET? :-) > The answer is you can't. You adopt a knee-jerk position that reinforces >your deliberate isolationism. Anything that may cause you to question your >worldview gets sorted to /dev/evil and you plow ahead like some pig ignorant >dough boy killing as ordered for king and country. Who's the ignorant one here? The name caller or the recipient. My vote goes to the name caller, as he assumes this to be a debate of fact, when in essence he's expressed only his opinion on the matter and not bothered to show teacher his homework (the dog ate it - so give me an "A" anyway 'cause I deserve it). ;-> ...Paul From harka at nycmetro.com Sun Jan 26 22:30:40 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:30:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, I have a question reg. passphrases: If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? If so, how would that be done? Also, if I am online, is it possible for somebody to access my hard drive? Thanks in advance for your help... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMucA7jltEBIEF0MBAQFdewf/Q74ATvi+OZzSCdyFrIRQ5aRjychCd6hO DbfM+/NQ6EcZseKp30JyjmV2VW4Y+HrxIYPtFKii4XzOJ8YCE2Cvtvn9gP8mAntY oIgsUZG36t+L4nmANpsiEHyzEIMlhjcgW7alKTr+hFbnRjlPwX8W0gdEIXAgIl2k 4uYEB+P+cfUhy1xPQgWfAk6VFspNIHIlFJ3mUqEIJTAOguV//UfIjyNFoGrZhiG7 ocy6YaQ2LiNpoh5xHBIvMf8YSz+FJORVLTucsmA0DYSHMKatNNutXGHoEI5kW1Ww 1O5YAoIuvCLyg/4AEgPBVeU2ClJjARmKrzBcw1bMZDp3wv/DkZdoEQ== =Xtu7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From gt at kdn0.attnet.or.jp Sun Jan 26 22:52:49 1997 From: gt at kdn0.attnet.or.jp (Gemini Thunder) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:52:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: WinKrypt In-Reply-To: <199701270226.SAA03590@toad.com> Message-ID: <32ed4fa1.277575631@kdn0.attnet.or.jp> Thus sprach Frank Willoughby : >Out of curiosity, is anyone familiar with WinKrypt by Syncronsys? Syncronsys [sp?] Software is the maker of SoftRam95, a program that supposedly doubled your memory through memory compression and other quasi-magical means. It was later revealed that not only did it not work as advertised, but it actually did not do anything at all (except display graphs indicating non-existant improvements). IIRC, they lost a class action suit over this issue. I would trust an encryption program relased to the public by the NSA more than anything these charlatans released. [snip] >I was curious how it compares to McAfee's PC Crypto which uses >40-bit DES or 160-bit Blowfish (user-chooses) & other PC/laptop >encryption products. BTW, I would also appreciate your input >on any crypto products which you believe to be robust, easy-to-use >& secure. (I know I can only have 2 out of 3, but it's worth a try >anyway). 8^) I consider PGP to be robust, easy-to-use (with some front-end assistance), and secure. However, I am by no means an authority on crypto. __________ - 2[b]||!2[b] /* What's the question? It's a tautology! */ - 0x2B|!0x2B /* == FFFFFFFF */ From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 22:52:51 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:52:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <01BC0BDC.334C99A0@king1-05.cnw.com> From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see any recognition of this fact. ........................................................ 1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? 2) Why do you suppose the Iraqis haven't already thought of doing this themselves? 3) The Mafia uses this method all the time - why then haven't they achieved a more rational society among themselves? 4) Weren't governments (like the U.S.) instituted to prevent this sort of thing (even if they don't work out as expected)? i.e., there were systems of courts and lawyers and such instituted to openly deal with "criminal" activity so that a) people could receive assistance against low-life degenerate killers, and b) it could be proven that the accused were indeed deserving of punishment. Humans being what they are, this hasn't worked like it's supposed to, but the point is that there is a reason why such ideas for systems of justice were introduced in the first place. That reason, as I eloquently read in a book, was "So That Reason May Live". That is, so that people who choose to live in a "society" may do so by the method of solving problems through the application of intelligence, rather than merely knocking each other off because a voting majority decides they don't like someone. Destructive people often ascend to positions of power not simply because they are ruthless, but because they have 1) many sycophantic followers and 2) many ignorant, vulnerable people unable to prevent it. You might be able to kill off one Saddam, but potentially many others would be waiting in the wings to take his place. The situation surrounding the existence of someone like Saddam is part of the contributing factors which keeps him there, not simply that one man himself. It was the same with Hitler and with so many others - they don't just have an excess of "power" concentrated within themselves which puts them in positions of control over others - there will have been many people who will have helped put them there, expecting to derive benefits from it. And what will be done about all those people who made this "power" possible? You don't just kill the one man and be done with it - you have to also "kill" the conditions which maintained him. .. Blanc From blancw at cnw.com Sun Jan 26 22:53:29 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:53:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net Message-ID: <01BC0BDC.389300C0@king1-05.cnw.com> From: Toto Jim Choate wrote: > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > anything that passes through his part of the net. > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. .......................................................... I believe it, Jim. .. Blanc From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 22:56:07 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:56:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fantasy quotes & libel Message-ID: <199701270656.WAA13546@toad.com> Hi, After review of the material I forwarded by request it is clear that 'fantasy' quotes are libel provided: * the person being quoted is not a public figure. On a 'private' mailing list like the cypherpunks this is a given unless similar statements can be found in the public records. * the section added to the original quote is not clearly seperated or otherwise dilineated such that a reader will be able to tell what the original quote was and the extrapolation by the 'editor' is. * there is clear intent to effect the perception of the original authors reputation in a negative or otherwise harmful manner. * the 'fantasy' quote is not clearly marked as the opinion of the editor. While quoting persons with editing is allowed under the 1st Amendment as understood by the courts the attributation of extrapolations by a third party (meaning a party other than the original author and the reader) as 'true' quotes of the original author is not. 'Truth' is usually ascribed as protection against libel, however, opinions are not 'true', they are opinions not facts as accepted by a court. With the current 'editorial control' as provided by the cypherpunks mailing list the mailing list operator/censor may also be held in some situations accountable as well. This occurs because the relationship between list operator and the quoter is similar to that of editor and reporter in a newspaper. For the quoter to get his quote distributed the list operator must ok it. The reasoning used is that the editor 'should have known' the boundaries and applied them. Not only is ignorance not an excuse but neither is negligence. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From harka at nycmetro.com Sun Jan 26 22:56:07 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:56:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: <199701270656.WAA13547@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, I have a question reg. passphrases: If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? If so, how would that be done? Also, if I am online, is it possible for somebody to access my hard drive? Thanks in advance for your help... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMucA7jltEBIEF0MBAQFdewf/Q74ATvi+OZzSCdyFrIRQ5aRjychCd6hO DbfM+/NQ6EcZseKp30JyjmV2VW4Y+HrxIYPtFKii4XzOJ8YCE2Cvtvn9gP8mAntY oIgsUZG36t+L4nmANpsiEHyzEIMlhjcgW7alKTr+hFbnRjlPwX8W0gdEIXAgIl2k 4uYEB+P+cfUhy1xPQgWfAk6VFspNIHIlFJ3mUqEIJTAOguV//UfIjyNFoGrZhiG7 ocy6YaQ2LiNpoh5xHBIvMf8YSz+FJORVLTucsmA0DYSHMKatNNutXGHoEI5kW1Ww 1O5YAoIuvCLyg/4AEgPBVeU2ClJjARmKrzBcw1bMZDp3wv/DkZdoEQ== =Xtu7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From woody at hi.net Sun Jan 26 22:57:47 1997 From: woody at hi.net (Howard Campbell) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 22:57:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701270657.WAA13589@toad.com> A recent publication "The Sovereign Individual"('97) discusses many of the issues discussed on Cypherpunks. The authors, James Dale Davidson and Lord William Rees-Mogg, sketch the likely totalitarian scenarios that will emerge in the coming years. Just as we see every day in the media, they predict that we ain't seen nothing yet when it comes to the attempts to regulate cyberspace, cryptography, and the content of online information. Portraying cellular phone triangulation as a public health concern, etc., are just the beginning. The authors also paint a bleak picture for blanc's 'True Believer' types. They will continue to be milked "as a farmer milks his cows" while those with techno-savvy and 'extranational' savoir faire will grow wings and take their wealth and marketable skills to other jurisdictions where predatory taxmen and arbitrary civil forfeiture laws don't exist. The book is sort of Toffleresque, but written better and full of historical parallels that help the reader to understand social upheavals of the past and how the demise of failing contemporary institutions are likely to affect Joe windowz95. Example: chapter 4- "The Last Days of Politics: Parallels Betwen the Senile Decline of the Holy Mother Church and the Nanny State". aloha, wc From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Sun Jan 26 23:09:40 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 23:09:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Austin Cypherpunks Feb. Meeting Message-ID: <199701270734.BAA02669@einstein> The Austin Cypherpunks (austin-cpunks at ssz.com) will be holding their next physical meeting on Saturday, February 18, 1997 at 6pm. It will be held at the Central Market HEB Restaurant, look for the red covered 'Applied Cryptography' book. In addition to the local cpunks the Experimental Science Instrumentation and Advanced Computer Experimentation groups have been invited. The meeting is open to all. If you have any questions or need further directions please send email to the Austin Cypherpunks. Hope to see you there. From ichudov at algebra.com Sun Jan 26 23:18:48 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 23:18:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? In-Reply-To: <199701270553.XAA02293@einstein> Message-ID: <199701270714.BAA00545@manifold.algebra.com> [Cc: to Dr. John Martin Grubor, Law Systems Institute, Medical-Cannabis Assn] Jim Choate wrote: > > > Landskroner, LTD. [INLINE] > > Libel / Slander I am not sure if you posted this information in response to my request to cite a statute that would prove that libel is a crime. Me> Jim Choate wrote: Me> > Me> > Me> > Me> > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that Me> > party did not write them is a crime? Me> Me> cite the statute These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured (libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. I would appreciate if someone more knowledgeable about the law could comment on this. I may be mistaken. igor > Libel / Slander is an area that involves defamatory oral or written > statements containing false and misleading material which causes > damage or injury to reputation and/or monetary loss. > > We provide a quick review of their success stories , some media and > newspaper articles about what they've been able to do for their > clients, and published articles about this topic. > > Please e-mail us with questions about our service! Landskroner and > Phillips > [INLINE] > > Nationally Recognized Consumer Trial Advocates. > Over 100 Years combined experience in both State and Federal Courts. > > 55 Public Square, Tenth Floor, Cleveland Ohio 44113-1904 > Phone: (216) 241-7000 > Fax: (216) 241-3135 > Toll Free: (888) 241-7001 > [INLINE] > - Igor. From dsmith at prairienet.org Sun Jan 26 23:56:49 1997 From: dsmith at prairienet.org (David E. Smith) Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 23:56:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970127014244.00685360@midwest.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I >type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private >Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? >If so, how would that be done? It certainly _could_ but hopefully isn't. Let's say that Joel McNamara hadn't released the sources to Private Idaho. It's certainly possible that he hooked into the windows created when PI shells out to DOS, and left a snippet of code that mails your keyID and passphrase to some throwaway AOL account, or a nym address that bounces through a dozen remailers, or whatever. Anything you give to a program, especially one that you know accesses the Internet, is a potential security risk. (Special note to Joel, if he's still on this list: Yes, I know better. I've read through all of your released Private Idaho sources. You just seemed like a handy example :) Paranoid yet? Good. That's a healthy state to be in. Fortunately, most developers (like Joel) don't put any such evil hooks into their software. Having access to the source, to be able to read through it yourself, is IMO one of the better ways to be sure about such things. Reading the source and recompiling it yourself is probably the best. >Also, if I am online, is it possible for somebody to access my hard >drive? Depends on what kind of computer and software you're running. I'll assume a Windows-style machine. If we assume that Microsoft didn't leave any lurking backdoors in their implementation of wsock32.dll and winsock.dll, and all you run is your usual Web browser and mail client and you trust _those_ you are probably safe. However, if you're running any server daemons on your machine, such as the MS Personal Web Server or WFTPD or whatever, the possibilities go up _a_lot. Those programs were designed to let others access your hard drive, so there's a much higher chance that they'll let someone get something they're not supposed to. Again, if you trust the people that developed your software to not stab you in the back, you should be alright. Still paranoid? Excellent. dave -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMuxcVHEZTZHwCEpFAQEIKQf8CMV/7NmaJy50DUmiWV8Pg8iYPv8N3Xcl M+Fr0HRO08nxy9uRJ+C+aLhnwmXWYfiXyeSbsy9veHepZfTzsEBIYntlk4wOs7eZ Lk4mjRVI0bLNE60lxmd+8znL0E0QqzVaw5K7t3W0VEe2AMP7aN+ktZGLuIZ8epTg TSQz4u8Q908r+Od/Ojh2BkG13po63ORPu+wKOzMyLeLWgx5Nz252Xot345tHJSJF QqM9SQkDW3AZQgiz+we4qocXE8XQ1VbrMJ+qhTQ6GgsVjpfwJegvOqgIC7hgbpDd gj8lQuEKRqYIPxCqnbh3GbzIQvIwrr4PhvIOuxHX4RPaRacFjrE4iQ== =F/ib -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From snow at smoke.suba.com Mon Jan 27 00:07:09 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 00:07:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701270357.TAA06744@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701270824.CAA00742@smoke.suba.com> > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > Jim, why don't you stop bullshitting and write a real assassination > > bot. [as a beta, it can be a mailbombing bot] This bot would: > I think this would be a very good demo project, but mailbombing may not > be the best choice... > > 1) Accept bets as combinations of Well, I have made a less destructive proposal along these lines. http://www.bounty.org Version .3 should be up in a day or two. From harka at nycmetro.com Mon Jan 27 00:17:50 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 00:17:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: <199701270833.DAA31377@linux.nycmetro.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I >type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private >Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? >If so, how would that be done? :Paranoid yet? Good. That's a healthy state to be in. Fortunately, :most developers (like Joel) don't put any such evil hooks into :their software. Having access to the source, to be able to read :through it yourself, is IMO one of the better ways to be sure about :such things. Reading the source and recompiling it yourself is :probably the best. :Still paranoid? Excellent. Paranoia!! I love that word :)...What about somebody snooping on my phoneline, while I type the passphrase? :) Harka -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMucbDzltEBIEF0MBAQH/Wwf8DeH6rBzczDPjc00sEAV649EHmZu3Fm5W QCIbtRT9+NWHb4jHmbB5jBkUpkswBDwbisQoZ/XKKhCKeMHbUKWApWiq9jPuvg9w aSsal+8uqVyHLnKEiq1xqjih7rurwRC3qsWWq6Mr7XDgICzfh4XonKgp7ln6LuQj HKk+ewTNND+7WDYGQFAz6VkGzELSjKuPgNRv614IwyC0VXDHH/DJRaEOnBUYa9e2 FfcHUyZANWuHVscHwDCPKIVy+tR8UzsYhhwrIOf1e2KZhTfRMLiP/Tqaaup/C0Nr r5Bjp76e5VPtQ4GsdhrzQT9wjaV2apWq4eDRvkLMq8fVSkV/+ZaTKg== =qEst -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ja94a08 at tdi.itm.edu.my Mon Jan 27 00:49:19 1997 From: ja94a08 at tdi.itm.edu.my (iamme) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 00:49:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: casio dialer Message-ID: <199701270612.OAA00823@ss5-28.itm.edu.my> anyone heard of casio .. phone dialer watch ? it's stated that user can phone for free using public phone .. anyone ? From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Mon Jan 27 00:58:52 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 00:58:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cyclic codes Message-ID: <199701270859.BAA24297@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timothy Mayonnaise's wee-wee is so tiny that only his mommy is allowed to touch it. __o _ \<_ Timothy Mayonnaise (_)/(_) From BradStevens at ezin.net Mon Jan 27 01:10:38 1997 From: BradStevens at ezin.net (BradStevens at ezin.net) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:10:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cable Television Descrambler - Easy To Make !!! Message-ID: <199701270848.AAA03757@dfw-ix12.ix.netcom.com> Hello {:-) !!! ======= > > > > Cable Television Descrambler - Easy To Make !!! Build your own Cable Television Descrambler with ONLY 7 parts from Radio Shack for UNDER $12.00. Required Supplies: 1 - Radio Shack mini-box (part #270-235) 1 - � watt resistor. 2.2k-2.4k ohm (part #271-1325) 1 - 75pf-100pf variable capacitor (special order) 2 - F61A chassis-type connectors (part #278-212) 12" - No. 12 solid copper wire 12" - RG59 coaxial cable Tools required: screwdriver & drill. Soldering gun & solder (optional). Get ALL the Premium Movie Channels, Pay per View and Adult Entertainment Channels for... FREE, FREE, FREE !!! Now, if I have your attention... let me tell you how this fantastic opportunity came about. My name is Brad. I live in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. I have season tickets to our city�s hockey team. I invited a friend of mine to one of the games this last November. He said, "I�d love to go if you can have me back home by 10:00 p.m." I told him that some games run just past 10:00 p.m. and would he mind we stay if the game was close. His response was, "No, tonight is the Mike Tyson - Evander Holyfield boxing match and I have it on pay per view" I said, "do you mind if I watch the fight with you"? He said, "sure, no problem". So we go watch this great fight on cable pay per view and we are the only two guys at my friends house. After the fight (since it was so good) I offered to pay half of the cost for the fight. My friends anwser was, "no, no, that�s not necessary... I got the fight for FREE!". I said to him, "for free, don�t those fights cost around $40.00 a pop?" He told me, "yes, they do, but I bought a cable descrambler box from an acquaintance of mine for $300.00". He further explained that this "little black box" gets ALL the pay per view events available! It also tunes in ALL the premium movie channels and ALL the adult entertainment channels. My response (without hesitation) was, "I gotta have one!" "$300.00, no problem where do I pay !!!" I�m serious, I was excited. Lifetime premium movie channels, pay per view and adult entertainment all for a one-time fee of $300.00... no way!!! "No way" was right. The guy that sold my buddy the box was no where to be found. I was really disappointed. It was now time for desperate measures. I begged and pleaded with my friend until he agreed to let me take his box apart piece by piece to see how to make one for myself. Luckily it was very easy, if it wasn�t simple I knew their was a slight chance it was not going back together so pretty. Now the rest is history... I�ve got my own box which I built with my own two hands. Would you like to build one yourself ?!?! If so, would you pay $300.00. Maybe so, maybe not. Probably not, unless you saw one work first. But since that is not possible, I will sell you a complete set of instructions on how to build one yourself for a measly $12.00. However, at that price YOU MUST ALSO ENCLOSE A SELF ADDRESSED STAMPED ENVELOPE WITH 55 CENTS POSTAGE AFFIXED. You might ask, is this some type of rip-off scam deal. The answer is NO! Everything has specific mechanics of how and why they do what they do. We are just used to flipping a switch or pushing a button or moving the mouse across our computer pads. It all happens because of a certain set of processes. The cable television descrambler is no different. However, for legal purposes I must add to this letter that this offer and set of instructions shall be void where prohibited by law and the assembling of parts necessary to make this "little jewel" work is for educational purposes only. To order a set of the instructions send $12.00 by cash, check or money order payable to: Brad Stevens Elder. Send to: 10443 N. May Ave. #604, OKC, OK 73120 USA I will mail your order out within 24 hours of receiving it. Further, I will give you a refund upon written request if you are unsatisfied for any reason. Have a great 1997 !!! Sincerely, Brad Stevens Elder P.S.: The experimental use of this box if you choose to see if your creation works requires no alteration of your existing cable system. You simply screw it in, right behind your television. P.P.S.: Without the instructions it�s like figuring out how to set the clock on your VCR. With the instructions, you are guaranteed success. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 01:13:00 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:13:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EC6BAF.2674@gte.net> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > > > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > > > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > > > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; > > The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- > > distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can > > go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but > > it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. > i don't see why she would wear a bikini if she already is tan. > She just goes to show off right??? California is know for > very beautiful girls ... I like the pale look :) There are two really major beaches in the L.A. area that I know of. One is Bolsa Chica, several miles long, north of Huntington Beach, which attracts most of the young'uns south of L.A., and Zuma in the northmost points of Malibu, which gets a lot of Valley people (fer sure). To quote the L.A. Weekly of a few years ago, in a "Best of L.A." review, "Why do all those hot young girls go to Zuma? Because that's where all the hot young boys are." But the real babes don't go there. They get skates and nifty little costumes and zip up and down the boardwalks in Santa Monica and Pacific Palisades mostly, in case some hot producer/director should happen along. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 01:13:04 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:13:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EC6D24.2FD4@gte.net> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > wrong. > well, seems D. Thorn agrees with the song: 'california girls' Depends on where you go, and what time of year. So. Cal. is no doubt a revolving door for the girl markets, especially on the beach board- walks, or on San Vicente where a lot of joggers run. Anywhere else and it's no different from Cleveland or Pittsburgh. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 01:13:11 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:13:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <01BC0B90.0B78E600@king2-16.cnw.com> Message-ID: <32EC6F84.6FFE@gte.net> Toto wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By > > following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people > > on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't > > comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" > > (quote approximate). > Dale, > When I read posts like this, I wonder how any rationally thinking > person can possibly believe that socio/politico concerns have no > place in the discussion of crypto. > It is my belief that many of the more atrocious acts being performed > against the citizens by various governments are made possible by the > fact that there are so few people who recognize a 'pirate' when they > see one. > While I appreciate that there are those who may be furthering the > cause of crypto, privacy and freedom through official channels, the > controlled media, and such, there needs to be a forum in which > people are free to use what they consider to be the 'correct' > terminology to refer to those who have usurped democracy in order > to control the citizens for their own personal profit. > i.e. 'Pirates' When I recall my growing up years and the political/social arguments I participated in, I can hardly believe the things I've learned since, esp. things like government agencies sharing asset forfeitures as a means of funding further seizures (kind of snowballs, if you know what I mean). Check out H.R. 3355 of late 1993, which authorizes Janet Reno to personally treaty up with the local cops in every U.S. city of 100,000 pop. or more, i.e., most of the U.S. population, and virtually all of the "crime". There was a previous post today, perhaps yours, which made the point that while erstwhile freedom fighters are trying to put out one fire or another, the govt. boys are lighting dozens more. I guess that means we'll have to pony up a lot more tax money to pay those guys. Whoops! I forgot - they can self-fund now with the asset seizures. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 01:37:06 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:37:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sharon / Re: Scott's Legal Problems In-Reply-To: <970126164357_1446227788@emout17.mail.aol.com> Message-ID: <32EC93AF.DB8@sk.sympatico.ca> Sharon, While I don't have a lot of details regarding Scott's personal history, as such, I have a lifetime of experience with TS, the medical system, and the legal system, as well. I spent more than a little time in court and at seminars, as a counsellor, addressing the issues of physical and mental disabilities and the resulting behavior patterns that are engendered by them. I have found that both judges and prosecutors inherently understand the issues themselves, but that defendants rarely have anyone able to effectively speak for them in regard to these issues. The fact of the matter is, the legal system is geared toward 'punishment' as a means of impressing upon people that they need to modify their behavior in order to act within the boundaries required by society. In order for people with special needs to be afforded an opportunity to meet society's requirements, there is an onus upon them to be able to show reasonable cause to the judge as to why a 'generic' solution to the problem they present to society is neither feasible, nor just. As a result of being afflicted with Tourette Syndrome, your son has problems that I am very familiar with, since I have had to deal with the results of the affliction myself for almost a half-century, without proper diagnosis. So I will endeavor to explain some of the life-experiences that I have been through, personally, as a result of this disease's influence on my life. The fact is, I was unjustly charged and convicted of a minor drug offense at the age of 19, for the simple reason that I was 'different' from the other 'suspects', and thus was more suspicious. I was fortunate enough to recognize that I was, indeed, different from others, and that this would be something that would affect my life greatly in the future. The result was that I made an effort to fully understand the intricacies of the law and to take actions to protect myself in the future, no matter whether my actions were in line with societies dictates, or beyond the acceptable boundaries of society. When you are 'different', then you are subject to a much closer scrutiny than the rest of society, and to a much harsher punishment, as a rule. I have spent hours on end at the border crossing near my hometown while customs officials called down the drug dogs from the big city, because I couldn't explain to them why I was 'twitching'. I have spent many days in jail waiting to answer to charges that would later be dismissed because there was no substance to them. I have been subjected to personal debasement and humiliating libel because of various authorities deeming that the manifestations of my disability were signs of my lack of morality, or of evil intentions on my part. You say your son has problems over possessing pills that a friend gave him to try in order to help his TS? My father and mother have given me, over the years, various of their medications to try in order to see if it would help me. They did so because, for all of their care and concern, helping me as much as possible within the 'proper boundaries' of medical science, I was not getting what I needed in order to become a functional human being. My father and mother are respected business people and leading members of the community. They never had to fear getting 'busted' for stepping outside the bounds of society--but I did. I found a drug, amphetamine, that helped me to become a functional member of society, but I was subject to arrest and imprisonment if I got caught possessing it. After over three decades of occasional 'illegal' use of the drug, it is now prescribed for my by a doctor who is allowed to do so because it is now a 'recognized' treatment for TS. But, from a legal standpoint, I was supposed to forego use of the drug and lead a more dysfunctional life. DWI's? The most functional period of my life was spent self-medicating with alcohol and nicotine. I acted as president of a small computer company while smoking a carton of cigarettes a day and drinking a case (24) of beer a day. It made me functional. I put on 30-50,000 miles a year, accident free, and there were times that I would not drive if I didn't have my 'medicine/beer' because I didn't feel it was safe to do so. I had the foresight to buy my own breathalyzer so that I could guage my drinking according to the legal standard, but I did so only for legal reasons, not for reasons of safety. Public intoxication? I was recently 'forced' to show up in court in a state of legally defined 'public intoxication' in order not to be locked in a cage like an animal as a result of my disabilities. I missed a court appearance because the prescribed medications I was taking could not get me onto the 'day schedule' required by the legal system. Under threat of imprisonment for failing to show up at the next court date, I spent the previous night imbibing my 'old faithful' medication, Scotch. I had a friend drive me to court, and I drank Scotch and Coke while pleading my case (which I won). I had no desire to 'break the law'. I did not have an 'attitude problem'. I was not trying to 'flaunt the rules of society'. I was trying to survive. I was trying to keep from being locked in a cage for not being able to function according to society's wishes without performing actions which also went against society's wishes, but which would enable me to avoid 'punishment', nonetheless. I take it that Scott is 'hiding out' to avoid being locked in a cage for violating the rules of society. I have spent a great deal of my life 'hiding out' so that I would not have to come into contact with society and be punished for trying to survive while not fitting into the common mold. There have been times when I was forced to 'hide out' from showing up in court to answer this-or-that charge which I knew would be dismissed if I could hold out until I was functional enough to deal with the situation. I had the foresight and the knowledge to do so using the same 'techniques' as a lawyer who isn't ready to plead a case because he stayed up too late drinking the night before. I 'fudged' the truth, as lawyers do every day, but I did so in order to compensate for a dysfunctionality which was very real, but undiagnosed and therefore unrecognized by the legal system. I have been blessed enough in life to have 'escaped' many situations which could have turned out badly for me, by virtue of learning at a young age that I needed to institute my own methods of dealing with a dysfunctionality which I recognized, but which, in many ways, remained a mystery to me. I have also been blessed by having the extreme good fortune to have encountered a number of judges and prosecutors who were truly concerned about justice, and who had the ability to judge me as a human being, and take into account the fact that I was being honest with them about my attitude, intentions and circumstances, even when my outward actions or appearance did not correspond to what they were used to seeing in 'normal' people. And I have been blessed to be able to make a difference in the lives of others by pleading their case to those in authority over them, when they were unable to effectively do so themselves. During my years as a consellor and court-appointed advisor, I was only vaguely aware that I understood the circumstances of the people I was helping to defend because I shared their disabilities and their dysfunctionality. In regard to Scott, I don't know him personally, but the trials and tribulations that you have shared on the pov-twitch forum are not foreign to me, as they mirror my own life in many ways. What I would say to a judge and a prosecutor who are charged with the duty of protecting both society and the individual, is this: 1. Please have the compassion and the wisdom to take a close look at Scott as a human being, and seriously consider what special circumstances may be raised by the fact that he is afflicted with a medical condition that affects his life in ways that he has little control over. 2. Try to make a distinction between actions, behaviors and attitudes that are a result of a 'bad attitude' or a 'criminal intent', and the actions, behaviors and attitudes of an individual who is trying desperately to survive in a world in which he is ill-equipped to function as a result of his disabilities. 3. Please make an attempt to review his past history of involvement with the legal system with an eye toward recognizing that perhaps the judgements made about him, and the resulting legal decisions regarding the disposition of his cases, did not fully take into account his physical and mental disabilities and thus did not reflect the best course of resolution of his case for the greatest benefit of both society and the individual himself. (The Tourette-support forums regularly contain postings by loving and concerned parents who are horrified by the mistaken judgements--and resulting punishments-they made concerning their children before they came to realize that their child had physical and mental disabilities which required them to view his or her actions in a new light, and find unique solutions for the problems that these disabilities presented.) 4. Keep in mind the fact that resistance to authority and the tendency to 'flee' from the face of society are common traits among many who suffer from Tourette Syndrome and its accompanying afflictions. (I posted a message to pov-twitch in which I spoke of feeling like a "hunted animal" for much of my life, and I received a huge outpouring of responses from TS-adults which reflected the pain and fear that they still carried inside of themselves as a result of a lifetime of persecution for the 'small sin' of being different from those around them.) 5. Please realize that you are judging an individual, whose future lies in your hands, who has a genuine need for special understanding in order to bring his case to a resolution which will benefit society and the individual himself. It is easy to recognize the special circumstances and needs necessary to dispense true justice in the case of the 'obviously' and the 'acceptably' disabled. When one is confronted with a retarded individual, or a person in a wheel-chair, the special circumstances regarding the disposition of their case are obvious. When judging a person who is rambling on disjointedly about the voices in his or her head, and truly hears them, then the need to take this into consideration is equally obvious. It is much more difficult to put Tourette Syndrome-type behaviors and attitudes into proper perspective, and to judge the part they play in an individuals actions and behaviors. TS traits encompass ADHD and OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder), and a variety of 'borderline' dysfunctionalities which result in actions and behaviors which are easy to classify as 'willful', 'disrespectful', etc. (Children who won't sit still in their chairs; who utter obscenities; who perform impulsive actions based on irrational, illogical thought processes.) I recognize that there are certain instances in which society's interest is best served by locking up an individual so that they do not do irrepairable harm to others, but if this concept is extended to the point where it becomes the preferred method of dealing with psychological disabilities, out of convenience, then I feel that justice is no longer being served. Society, in return for abridging the rights of an individual to act in any manner that he or she pleases, also takes on the responsibility to ensure that the individual will not unduly suffer as a result of the dictates of society. If society chooses to judge Scott for stepping outside the boundaries of its rule of law, then society must ensure that Scott is afforded the opportunity to gain the medical assistance that he needs in order to deal with his disabilities within the bounds of society's laws. Imprisonment is hardly likely to be a solution that will result in changes to Scott's medical disabilities. If the legal system is not able to propose an alternative to imprisonment, then what hope is there, really, for anyone who is engaged in a daily battle to overcome the trials, tribulations and stigmatism associated with the affliction of Tourette Syndrome. I wish you and Scott all the best in dealing with his present situation, and I hope that you are blessed with a judge who understands that society is composed of individuals and that, in judging the individual, he or she is judging society itself. Love, Toto From gbroiles at netbox.com Mon Jan 27 01:42:12 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 01:42:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fantasy quotes & libel Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970127014516.006f53e4@mail.io.com> At 12:30 AM 1/27/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >Hi, > >After review of the material I forwarded by request it is clear that >'fantasy' quotes are libel provided: [gibberish deleted] You're mixing up elements of a prima facie case for libel, defenses, and standards for liability and damages. You're missing some elements, and adding some extra (contradictory) elements. You're also ignoring at least two other potential causes of action where a quote is misattributed, as well as trying to simultaneously discuss criminal and civil actions. Your summary of defamation law is not an accurate one. Your original message suggested that misattribution could be criminal. While this may be true in some jurisdictions (modulo the First Amendment), no prosecutor is going to waste his or her time with this sort of silliness. Also, go watch _The People v. Larry Flynt_ and meditate on the reason why Jerry Falwell lost his libel claim in the trial court. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 02:31:34 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 02:31:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fantasy quotes & libel In-Reply-To: <199701270630.AAA02364@einstein> Message-ID: <32ECA081.7C76@sk.sympatico.ca> Jim, I enjoyed the 250,000 legalese-spams that you posted to the cypherpunks list. You are certainly handy with a search-engine. You have certainly shown that the shotgun-approach to legal issues is a valid one, as one of your posts actually came close to being relevant. Jim Choate wrote: > With the current 'editorial control' as provided by the cypherpunks mailing > list the mailing list operator/censor may also be held in some situations > accountable as well. This occurs because the relationship between list > operator and the quoter is similar to that of editor and reporter in a > newspaper. For the quoter to get his quote distributed the list operator > must ok it. The reasoning used is that the editor 'should have known' the > boundaries and applied them. Well, I'm certainly glad to hear that you feel you have the legal standing to sue the pants off of Sandy and John. When you're done with them, you might want to check out Canadian law and think about suing myself, as well. Of course, I realize that, given your strong position in regard to the need not to interfere in the rights of others to exert dicatatorial control over the content which passes through systems that they have paid for with their own money, you would not be so hypocritical as to attempt to interfere with those rights. An intelligent fellow such as yourself certainly wouldn't be so ignorant as to stand up in court and declare that the right to exert dicatatorial power by virtue of money and position should be negated only when it affects you personally. I am sincerely in your debt for pointing out to me that the purchase of my hardware and software, and the money I spend in maintaining it, give me license to exert total control over anything that passes through it. It was only the knowledge that you are a man who stands behind his statements that enabled me to recognize your post expressing whining outrage that the principles you espouse should apply equally to all were meant as humor, despite your failure to add the little happy-face grin :). Toto > Not only is ignorance not an excuse but neither is negligence. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 02:59:37 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 02:59:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypher-Apology Message-ID: <32ECA741.2E2B@sk.sympatico.ca> I seem to have posted one of my private emails to the conference by mistake. It was in regard to a lady whose son is going to court in the morning and has nothing to do with crypto. (unless I try to make a supremely long leap in relating Tourette Syndrome to the Timmy May 'cocksucker' postings) My first instinct was to blame Bill Gates for holding me hostage and forcing me to use Win95. My second instinct was to try to excuse my error by blaming the ingestion of large amounts of drugs and alcohol for my misdirection of my email. However, after consultation with the space aliens who speak to me through the mercury filling in my teeth, I have come to the realization that the error was the result of the fact that I am a fucking idiot. I imagine that my apology will not be received by those on the censored list, as I have just 'flamed' myself. I would apologize for this, as well, but I am still sober enough to realize that this could quite possibly result in an endless-apology-loop which would interfere with the rights of those on the cypherpunks-uncensored list to receive the "Make $$Money$$ Fast" postings that Sandy has been so kind to forward to those who oppose censorship of list subscribers. Toto From aga at dhp.com Mon Jan 27 04:00:22 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 04:00:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? In-Reply-To: <199701270714.BAA00545@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: drgrubor is now at the pgh.org instead of aol.com On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > [Cc: to Dr. John Martin Grubor, Law Systems Institute, Medical-Cannabis Assn] > > Jim Choate wrote: > > > > > > Landskroner, LTD. [INLINE] > > > > Libel / Slander > > I am not sure if you posted this information in response to my request > to cite a statute that would prove that libel is a crime. > > Me> Jim Choate wrote: > Me> > > Me> > > Me> > > Me> > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that > Me> > party did not write them is a crime? > Me> > Me> cite the statute > > > These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel > is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government > cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured > (libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. > That is correct. Libel is a tort and not a crime. > I would appreciate if someone more knowledgeable about the law could > comment on this. I may be mistaken. > > igor No, you are correct Igor. Libel is written defamation, and defamation is NEVER a crime in the USA. It may be in other countries, but not the good old USA. > > > Libel / Slander is an area that involves defamatory oral or written > > statements containing false and misleading material which causes > > damage or injury to reputation and/or monetary loss. > > And it is tough to prove. Just where was this article posted at? > > We provide a quick review of their success stories , some media and > > newspaper articles about what they've been able to do for their > > clients, and published articles about this topic. > > > > Please e-mail us with questions about our service! Landskroner and > > Phillips > > [INLINE] > > > > Nationally Recognized Consumer Trial Advocates. > > Over 100 Years combined experience in both State and Federal Courts. > > These guys do not know what they are talking about. > > 55 Public Square, Tenth Floor, Cleveland Ohio 44113-1904 > > Phone: (216) 241-7000 > > Fax: (216) 241-3135 > > Toll Free: (888) 241-7001 > > [INLINE] > > > > > > - Igor. > The assholes are not Criminal Lawyers, and I will give them a call to check them out... I left a mesage with them. and told the InterNet lawyer to call be back. This is just a Civil Law firm looking for business. -aga From dharter at harter.pg.md.us Mon Jan 27 04:47:38 1997 From: dharter at harter.pg.md.us (Daniel Harter) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 04:47:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701260655.WAA10146@toad.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > > > problems. > > > > > Jim and Dale, I agree. > > > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. > > > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. > > > > One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to > > a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that > > they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a > > reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should > > be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are > > heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. > > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. To treat various Venerial Diseases whose standard treatments are antibiotics. > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > has that been proven? What does seem to have credence is that the use of antibiotics breeds resistant strains of bacteria, which may or may not be contagious. A book that poses an opposing viewpoint to the current AIDS epidemic is _The AIDS War_ by John Lauritsen (1993, Asklepios, New York, ISBN 0-943742-08-0). It is written from a Gay man's perspective dissenting from the current HIV-AIDS theory. Another book he wrote is _Poison by Prescription: The AZT Story_. Also search on Peter H. Duesberg for primary sources in various Journals. Dan Harter dharter at harter.pg.md.us From ja94a08 at tdi.itm.edu.my Mon Jan 27 06:25:35 1997 From: ja94a08 at tdi.itm.edu.my (iamme) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:25:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: casio dialer Message-ID: <199701271425.GAA23737@toad.com> anyone heard of casio .. phone dialer watch ? it's stated that user can phone for free using public phone .. anyone ? From blancw at cnw.com Mon Jan 27 06:25:36 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:25:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Jim Choate Speaks Out on My Part of the Net Message-ID: <199701271425.GAA23738@toad.com> From: Toto Jim Choate wrote: > For instance, since Toto pays for the hardware and software that comprises > his part of the net, he is free to limit, control, and edit for content, > anything that passes through his part of the net. > Although I sometimes disagree with Toto because of my limited ability to > understand things on a conceptual level, his rugged good looks, charm, > and superior intelligence show that he should be allowed to control his > own privately owned part of the net and anything that passes through it. .......................................................... I believe it, Jim. .. Blanc From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 27 06:26:07 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:26:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Austin Cypherpunks Feb. Meeting Message-ID: <199701271426.GAA23756@toad.com> The Austin Cypherpunks (austin-cpunks at ssz.com) will be holding their next physical meeting on Saturday, February 18, 1997 at 6pm. It will be held at the Central Market HEB Restaurant, look for the red covered 'Applied Cryptography' book. In addition to the local cpunks the Experimental Science Instrumentation and Advanced Computer Experimentation groups have been invited. The meeting is open to all. If you have any questions or need further directions please send email to the Austin Cypherpunks. Hope to see you there. From snow at smoke.suba.com Mon Jan 27 06:26:10 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:26:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701271426.GAA23763@toad.com> > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > Jim, why don't you stop bullshitting and write a real assassination > > bot. [as a beta, it can be a mailbombing bot] This bot would: > I think this would be a very good demo project, but mailbombing may not > be the best choice... > > 1) Accept bets as combinations of Well, I have made a less destructive proposal along these lines. http://www.bounty.org Version .3 should be up in a day or two. From gt at kdn0.attnet.or.jp Mon Jan 27 06:26:16 1997 From: gt at kdn0.attnet.or.jp (Gemini Thunder) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:26:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: WinKrypt Message-ID: <199701271426.GAA23772@toad.com> Thus sprach Frank Willoughby : >Out of curiosity, is anyone familiar with WinKrypt by Syncronsys? Syncronsys [sp?] Software is the maker of SoftRam95, a program that supposedly doubled your memory through memory compression and other quasi-magical means. It was later revealed that not only did it not work as advertised, but it actually did not do anything at all (except display graphs indicating non-existant improvements). IIRC, they lost a class action suit over this issue. I would trust an encryption program relased to the public by the NSA more than anything these charlatans released. [snip] >I was curious how it compares to McAfee's PC Crypto which uses >40-bit DES or 160-bit Blowfish (user-chooses) & other PC/laptop >encryption products. BTW, I would also appreciate your input >on any crypto products which you believe to be robust, easy-to-use >& secure. (I know I can only have 2 out of 3, but it's worth a try >anyway). 8^) I consider PGP to be robust, easy-to-use (with some front-end assistance), and secure. However, I am by no means an authority on crypto. __________ - 2[b]||!2[b] /* What's the question? It's a tautology! */ - 0x2B|!0x2B /* == FFFFFFFF */ From harka at nycmetro.com Mon Jan 27 06:26:22 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:26:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: <199701271426.GAA23780@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I >type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private >Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? >If so, how would that be done? :Paranoid yet? Good. That's a healthy state to be in. Fortunately, :most developers (like Joel) don't put any such evil hooks into :their software. Having access to the source, to be able to read :through it yourself, is IMO one of the better ways to be sure about :such things. Reading the source and recompiling it yourself is :probably the best. :Still paranoid? Excellent. Paranoia!! I love that word :)...What about somebody snooping on my phoneline, while I type the passphrase? :) Harka -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMucbDzltEBIEF0MBAQH/Wwf8DeH6rBzczDPjc00sEAV649EHmZu3Fm5W QCIbtRT9+NWHb4jHmbB5jBkUpkswBDwbisQoZ/XKKhCKeMHbUKWApWiq9jPuvg9w aSsal+8uqVyHLnKEiq1xqjih7rurwRC3qsWWq6Mr7XDgICzfh4XonKgp7ln6LuQj HKk+ewTNND+7WDYGQFAz6VkGzELSjKuPgNRv614IwyC0VXDHH/DJRaEOnBUYa9e2 FfcHUyZANWuHVscHwDCPKIVy+tR8UzsYhhwrIOf1e2KZhTfRMLiP/Tqaaup/C0Nr r5Bjp76e5VPtQ4GsdhrzQT9wjaV2apWq4eDRvkLMq8fVSkV/+ZaTKg== =qEst -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 06:26:27 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:26:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701271426.GAA23788@toad.com> [Cc: to Dr. John Martin Grubor, Law Systems Institute, Medical-Cannabis Assn] Jim Choate wrote: > > > Landskroner, LTD. [INLINE] > > Libel / Slander I am not sure if you posted this information in response to my request to cite a statute that would prove that libel is a crime. Me> Jim Choate wrote: Me> > Me> > Me> > Me> > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that Me> > party did not write them is a crime? Me> Me> cite the statute These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured (libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. I would appreciate if someone more knowledgeable about the law could comment on this. I may be mistaken. igor > Libel / Slander is an area that involves defamatory oral or written > statements containing false and misleading material which causes > damage or injury to reputation and/or monetary loss. > > We provide a quick review of their success stories , some media and > newspaper articles about what they've been able to do for their > clients, and published articles about this topic. > > Please e-mail us with questions about our service! Landskroner and > Phillips > [INLINE] > > Nationally Recognized Consumer Trial Advocates. > Over 100 Years combined experience in both State and Federal Courts. > > 55 Public Square, Tenth Floor, Cleveland Ohio 44113-1904 > Phone: (216) 241-7000 > Fax: (216) 241-3135 > Toll Free: (888) 241-7001 > [INLINE] > - Igor. From blancw at cnw.com Mon Jan 27 06:26:33 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:26:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701271426.GAA23803@toad.com> From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see any recognition of this fact. ........................................................ 1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? 2) Why do you suppose the Iraqis haven't already thought of doing this themselves? 3) The Mafia uses this method all the time - why then haven't they achieved a more rational society among themselves? 4) Weren't governments (like the U.S.) instituted to prevent this sort of thing (even if they don't work out as expected)? i.e., there were systems of courts and lawyers and such instituted to openly deal with "criminal" activity so that a) people could receive assistance against low-life degenerate killers, and b) it could be proven that the accused were indeed deserving of punishment. Humans being what they are, this hasn't worked like it's supposed to, but the point is that there is a reason why such ideas for systems of justice were introduced in the first place. That reason, as I eloquently read in a book, was "So That Reason May Live". That is, so that people who choose to live in a "society" may do so by the method of solving problems through the application of intelligence, rather than merely knocking each other off because a voting majority decides they don't like someone. Destructive people often ascend to positions of power not simply because they are ruthless, but because they have 1) many sycophantic followers and 2) many ignorant, vulnerable people unable to prevent it. You might be able to kill off one Saddam, but potentially many others would be waiting in the wings to take his place. The situation surrounding the existence of someone like Saddam is part of the contributing factors which keeps him there, not simply that one man himself. It was the same with Hitler and with so many others - they don't just have an excess of "power" concentrated within themselves which puts them in positions of control over others - there will have been many people who will have helped put them there, expecting to derive benefits from it. And what will be done about all those people who made this "power" possible? You don't just kill the one man and be done with it - you have to also "kill" the conditions which maintained him. .. Blanc From dsmith at prairienet.org Mon Jan 27 06:26:35 1997 From: dsmith at prairienet.org (David E. Smith) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:26:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: <199701271426.GAA23804@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I >type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private >Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? >If so, how would that be done? It certainly _could_ but hopefully isn't. Let's say that Joel McNamara hadn't released the sources to Private Idaho. It's certainly possible that he hooked into the windows created when PI shells out to DOS, and left a snippet of code that mails your keyID and passphrase to some throwaway AOL account, or a nym address that bounces through a dozen remailers, or whatever. Anything you give to a program, especially one that you know accesses the Internet, is a potential security risk. (Special note to Joel, if he's still on this list: Yes, I know better. I've read through all of your released Private Idaho sources. You just seemed like a handy example :) Paranoid yet? Good. That's a healthy state to be in. Fortunately, most developers (like Joel) don't put any such evil hooks into their software. Having access to the source, to be able to read through it yourself, is IMO one of the better ways to be sure about such things. Reading the source and recompiling it yourself is probably the best. >Also, if I am online, is it possible for somebody to access my hard >drive? Depends on what kind of computer and software you're running. I'll assume a Windows-style machine. If we assume that Microsoft didn't leave any lurking backdoors in their implementation of wsock32.dll and winsock.dll, and all you run is your usual Web browser and mail client and you trust _those_ you are probably safe. However, if you're running any server daemons on your machine, such as the MS Personal Web Server or WFTPD or whatever, the possibilities go up _a_lot. Those programs were designed to let others access your hard drive, so there's a much higher chance that they'll let someone get something they're not supposed to. Again, if you trust the people that developed your software to not stab you in the back, you should be alright. Still paranoid? Excellent. dave -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMuxcVHEZTZHwCEpFAQEIKQf8CMV/7NmaJy50DUmiWV8Pg8iYPv8N3Xcl M+Fr0HRO08nxy9uRJ+C+aLhnwmXWYfiXyeSbsy9veHepZfTzsEBIYntlk4wOs7eZ Lk4mjRVI0bLNE60lxmd+8znL0E0QqzVaw5K7t3W0VEe2AMP7aN+ktZGLuIZ8epTg TSQz4u8Q908r+Od/Ojh2BkG13po63ORPu+wKOzMyLeLWgx5Nz252Xot345tHJSJF QqM9SQkDW3AZQgiz+we4qocXE8XQ1VbrMJ+qhTQ6GgsVjpfwJegvOqgIC7hgbpDd gj8lQuEKRqYIPxCqnbh3GbzIQvIwrr4PhvIOuxHX4RPaRacFjrE4iQ== =F/ib -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 06:40:42 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:40:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701271440.GAA24042@toad.com> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > wrong. > well, seems D. Thorn agrees with the song: 'california girls' Depends on where you go, and what time of year. So. Cal. is no doubt a revolving door for the girl markets, especially on the beach board- walks, or on San Vicente where a lot of joggers run. Anywhere else and it's no different from Cleveland or Pittsburgh. From gbroiles at netbox.com Mon Jan 27 06:40:47 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:40:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fantasy quotes & libel Message-ID: <199701271440.GAA24050@toad.com> At 12:30 AM 1/27/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >Hi, > >After review of the material I forwarded by request it is clear that >'fantasy' quotes are libel provided: [gibberish deleted] You're mixing up elements of a prima facie case for libel, defenses, and standards for liability and damages. You're missing some elements, and adding some extra (contradictory) elements. You're also ignoring at least two other potential causes of action where a quote is misattributed, as well as trying to simultaneously discuss criminal and civil actions. Your summary of defamation law is not an accurate one. Your original message suggested that misattribution could be criminal. While this may be true in some jurisdictions (modulo the First Amendment), no prosecutor is going to waste his or her time with this sort of silliness. Also, go watch _The People v. Larry Flynt_ and meditate on the reason why Jerry Falwell lost his libel claim in the trial court. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 06:40:52 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:40:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701271440.GAA24061@toad.com> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > > > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > > > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > > > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; > > The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- > > distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can > > go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but > > it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. > i don't see why she would wear a bikini if she already is tan. > She just goes to show off right??? California is know for > very beautiful girls ... I like the pale look :) There are two really major beaches in the L.A. area that I know of. One is Bolsa Chica, several miles long, north of Huntington Beach, which attracts most of the young'uns south of L.A., and Zuma in the northmost points of Malibu, which gets a lot of Valley people (fer sure). To quote the L.A. Weekly of a few years ago, in a "Best of L.A." review, "Why do all those hot young girls go to Zuma? Because that's where all the hot young boys are." But the real babes don't go there. They get skates and nifty little costumes and zip up and down the boardwalks in Santa Monica and Pacific Palisades mostly, in case some hot producer/director should happen along. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 06:40:57 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:40:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cypher-Apology Message-ID: <199701271440.GAA24073@toad.com> I seem to have posted one of my private emails to the conference by mistake. It was in regard to a lady whose son is going to court in the morning and has nothing to do with crypto. (unless I try to make a supremely long leap in relating Tourette Syndrome to the Timmy May 'cocksucker' postings) My first instinct was to blame Bill Gates for holding me hostage and forcing me to use Win95. My second instinct was to try to excuse my error by blaming the ingestion of large amounts of drugs and alcohol for my misdirection of my email. However, after consultation with the space aliens who speak to me through the mercury filling in my teeth, I have come to the realization that the error was the result of the fact that I am a fucking idiot. I imagine that my apology will not be received by those on the censored list, as I have just 'flamed' myself. I would apologize for this, as well, but I am still sober enough to realize that this could quite possibly result in an endless-apology-loop which would interfere with the rights of those on the cypherpunks-uncensored list to receive the "Make $$Money$$ Fast" postings that Sandy has been so kind to forward to those who oppose censorship of list subscribers. Toto From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 06:40:58 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:40:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701271440.GAA24074@toad.com> Toto wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By > > following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people > > on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't > > comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" > > (quote approximate). > Dale, > When I read posts like this, I wonder how any rationally thinking > person can possibly believe that socio/politico concerns have no > place in the discussion of crypto. > It is my belief that many of the more atrocious acts being performed > against the citizens by various governments are made possible by the > fact that there are so few people who recognize a 'pirate' when they > see one. > While I appreciate that there are those who may be furthering the > cause of crypto, privacy and freedom through official channels, the > controlled media, and such, there needs to be a forum in which > people are free to use what they consider to be the 'correct' > terminology to refer to those who have usurped democracy in order > to control the citizens for their own personal profit. > i.e. 'Pirates' When I recall my growing up years and the political/social arguments I participated in, I can hardly believe the things I've learned since, esp. things like government agencies sharing asset forfeitures as a means of funding further seizures (kind of snowballs, if you know what I mean). Check out H.R. 3355 of late 1993, which authorizes Janet Reno to personally treaty up with the local cops in every U.S. city of 100,000 pop. or more, i.e., most of the U.S. population, and virtually all of the "crime". There was a previous post today, perhaps yours, which made the point that while erstwhile freedom fighters are trying to put out one fire or another, the govt. boys are lighting dozens more. I guess that means we'll have to pony up a lot more tax money to pay those guys. Whoops! I forgot - they can self-fund now with the asset seizures. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 06:41:04 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:41:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fantasy quotes & libel Message-ID: <199701271441.GAA24082@toad.com> Jim, I enjoyed the 250,000 legalese-spams that you posted to the cypherpunks list. You are certainly handy with a search-engine. You have certainly shown that the shotgun-approach to legal issues is a valid one, as one of your posts actually came close to being relevant. Jim Choate wrote: > With the current 'editorial control' as provided by the cypherpunks mailing > list the mailing list operator/censor may also be held in some situations > accountable as well. This occurs because the relationship between list > operator and the quoter is similar to that of editor and reporter in a > newspaper. For the quoter to get his quote distributed the list operator > must ok it. The reasoning used is that the editor 'should have known' the > boundaries and applied them. Well, I'm certainly glad to hear that you feel you have the legal standing to sue the pants off of Sandy and John. When you're done with them, you might want to check out Canadian law and think about suing myself, as well. Of course, I realize that, given your strong position in regard to the need not to interfere in the rights of others to exert dicatatorial control over the content which passes through systems that they have paid for with their own money, you would not be so hypocritical as to attempt to interfere with those rights. An intelligent fellow such as yourself certainly wouldn't be so ignorant as to stand up in court and declare that the right to exert dicatatorial power by virtue of money and position should be negated only when it affects you personally. I am sincerely in your debt for pointing out to me that the purchase of my hardware and software, and the money I spend in maintaining it, give me license to exert total control over anything that passes through it. It was only the knowledge that you are a man who stands behind his statements that enabled me to recognize your post expressing whining outrage that the principles you espouse should apply equally to all were meant as humor, despite your failure to add the little happy-face grin :). Toto > Not only is ignorance not an excuse but neither is negligence. From dharter at harter.pg.md.us Mon Jan 27 06:41:17 1997 From: dharter at harter.pg.md.us (Daniel Harter) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:41:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701271441.GAA24105@toad.com> ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > > > > Both homosexual males and IV drug users are well known to take a lot > > > > > of antobiotics, which lowers the efficacy of the immune system enough > > > > > to allow most anything to happen, ultimately leading to auto-immune > > > > > problems. > > > > > Jim and Dale, I agree. > > > Also shooting one's bloodstream full of fecal matter hardly helps. > > > > My point about the antibiotics is that the male gays take a dis- > > proportionate amount of them, which compounds their problems. It > > suggests to me that the immune system is already seriously debilitated > > or damaged before AIDS can take hold, rather than the notion that a > > healthy person can get it from the virii alone. > > > > One could argue that in the cases where the cures (antibiotics) add to > > a person's problems by further corrupting their immune system, that > > they should simply change their habits. Since I don't see that as a > > reasonable possibility, the only thing left is that the public should > > be made aware of *all* of the relevant facts, even those which are > > heavily suppressed now for PC reasons. > > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. To treat various Venerial Diseases whose standard treatments are antibiotics. > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > has that been proven? What does seem to have credence is that the use of antibiotics breeds resistant strains of bacteria, which may or may not be contagious. A book that poses an opposing viewpoint to the current AIDS epidemic is _The AIDS War_ by John Lauritsen (1993, Asklepios, New York, ISBN 0-943742-08-0). It is written from a Gay man's perspective dissenting from the current HIV-AIDS theory. Another book he wrote is _Poison by Prescription: The AZT Story_. Also search on Peter H. Duesberg for primary sources in various Journals. Dan Harter dharter at harter.pg.md.us From aga at dhp.com Mon Jan 27 06:41:19 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:41:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701271441.GAA24106@toad.com> drgrubor is now at the pgh.org instead of aol.com On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > [Cc: to Dr. John Martin Grubor, Law Systems Institute, Medical-Cannabis Assn] > > Jim Choate wrote: > > > > > > Landskroner, LTD. [INLINE] > > > > Libel / Slander > > I am not sure if you posted this information in response to my request > to cite a statute that would prove that libel is a crime. > > Me> Jim Choate wrote: > Me> > > Me> > > Me> > > Me> > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that > Me> > party did not write them is a crime? > Me> > Me> cite the statute > > > These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel > is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government > cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured > (libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. > That is correct. Libel is a tort and not a crime. > I would appreciate if someone more knowledgeable about the law could > comment on this. I may be mistaken. > > igor No, you are correct Igor. Libel is written defamation, and defamation is NEVER a crime in the USA. It may be in other countries, but not the good old USA. > > > Libel / Slander is an area that involves defamatory oral or written > > statements containing false and misleading material which causes > > damage or injury to reputation and/or monetary loss. > > And it is tough to prove. Just where was this article posted at? > > We provide a quick review of their success stories , some media and > > newspaper articles about what they've been able to do for their > > clients, and published articles about this topic. > > > > Please e-mail us with questions about our service! Landskroner and > > Phillips > > [INLINE] > > > > Nationally Recognized Consumer Trial Advocates. > > Over 100 Years combined experience in both State and Federal Courts. > > These guys do not know what they are talking about. > > 55 Public Square, Tenth Floor, Cleveland Ohio 44113-1904 > > Phone: (216) 241-7000 > > Fax: (216) 241-3135 > > Toll Free: (888) 241-7001 > > [INLINE] > > > > > > - Igor. > The assholes are not Criminal Lawyers, and I will give them a call to check them out... I left a mesage with them. and told the InterNet lawyer to call be back. This is just a Civil Law firm looking for business. -aga From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 06:42:15 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:42:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sharon / Re: Scott's Legal Problems Message-ID: <199701271442.GAA24133@toad.com> Sharon, While I don't have a lot of details regarding Scott's personal history, as such, I have a lifetime of experience with TS, the medical system, and the legal system, as well. I spent more than a little time in court and at seminars, as a counsellor, addressing the issues of physical and mental disabilities and the resulting behavior patterns that are engendered by them. I have found that both judges and prosecutors inherently understand the issues themselves, but that defendants rarely have anyone able to effectively speak for them in regard to these issues. The fact of the matter is, the legal system is geared toward 'punishment' as a means of impressing upon people that they need to modify their behavior in order to act within the boundaries required by society. In order for people with special needs to be afforded an opportunity to meet society's requirements, there is an onus upon them to be able to show reasonable cause to the judge as to why a 'generic' solution to the problem they present to society is neither feasible, nor just. As a result of being afflicted with Tourette Syndrome, your son has problems that I am very familiar with, since I have had to deal with the results of the affliction myself for almost a half-century, without proper diagnosis. So I will endeavor to explain some of the life-experiences that I have been through, personally, as a result of this disease's influence on my life. The fact is, I was unjustly charged and convicted of a minor drug offense at the age of 19, for the simple reason that I was 'different' from the other 'suspects', and thus was more suspicious. I was fortunate enough to recognize that I was, indeed, different from others, and that this would be something that would affect my life greatly in the future. The result was that I made an effort to fully understand the intricacies of the law and to take actions to protect myself in the future, no matter whether my actions were in line with societies dictates, or beyond the acceptable boundaries of society. When you are 'different', then you are subject to a much closer scrutiny than the rest of society, and to a much harsher punishment, as a rule. I have spent hours on end at the border crossing near my hometown while customs officials called down the drug dogs from the big city, because I couldn't explain to them why I was 'twitching'. I have spent many days in jail waiting to answer to charges that would later be dismissed because there was no substance to them. I have been subjected to personal debasement and humiliating libel because of various authorities deeming that the manifestations of my disability were signs of my lack of morality, or of evil intentions on my part. You say your son has problems over possessing pills that a friend gave him to try in order to help his TS? My father and mother have given me, over the years, various of their medications to try in order to see if it would help me. They did so because, for all of their care and concern, helping me as much as possible within the 'proper boundaries' of medical science, I was not getting what I needed in order to become a functional human being. My father and mother are respected business people and leading members of the community. They never had to fear getting 'busted' for stepping outside the bounds of society--but I did. I found a drug, amphetamine, that helped me to become a functional member of society, but I was subject to arrest and imprisonment if I got caught possessing it. After over three decades of occasional 'illegal' use of the drug, it is now prescribed for my by a doctor who is allowed to do so because it is now a 'recognized' treatment for TS. But, from a legal standpoint, I was supposed to forego use of the drug and lead a more dysfunctional life. DWI's? The most functional period of my life was spent self-medicating with alcohol and nicotine. I acted as president of a small computer company while smoking a carton of cigarettes a day and drinking a case (24) of beer a day. It made me functional. I put on 30-50,000 miles a year, accident free, and there were times that I would not drive if I didn't have my 'medicine/beer' because I didn't feel it was safe to do so. I had the foresight to buy my own breathalyzer so that I could guage my drinking according to the legal standard, but I did so only for legal reasons, not for reasons of safety. Public intoxication? I was recently 'forced' to show up in court in a state of legally defined 'public intoxication' in order not to be locked in a cage like an animal as a result of my disabilities. I missed a court appearance because the prescribed medications I was taking could not get me onto the 'day schedule' required by the legal system. Under threat of imprisonment for failing to show up at the next court date, I spent the previous night imbibing my 'old faithful' medication, Scotch. I had a friend drive me to court, and I drank Scotch and Coke while pleading my case (which I won). I had no desire to 'break the law'. I did not have an 'attitude problem'. I was not trying to 'flaunt the rules of society'. I was trying to survive. I was trying to keep from being locked in a cage for not being able to function according to society's wishes without performing actions which also went against society's wishes, but which would enable me to avoid 'punishment', nonetheless. I take it that Scott is 'hiding out' to avoid being locked in a cage for violating the rules of society. I have spent a great deal of my life 'hiding out' so that I would not have to come into contact with society and be punished for trying to survive while not fitting into the common mold. There have been times when I was forced to 'hide out' from showing up in court to answer this-or-that charge which I knew would be dismissed if I could hold out until I was functional enough to deal with the situation. I had the foresight and the knowledge to do so using the same 'techniques' as a lawyer who isn't ready to plead a case because he stayed up too late drinking the night before. I 'fudged' the truth, as lawyers do every day, but I did so in order to compensate for a dysfunctionality which was very real, but undiagnosed and therefore unrecognized by the legal system. I have been blessed enough in life to have 'escaped' many situations which could have turned out badly for me, by virtue of learning at a young age that I needed to institute my own methods of dealing with a dysfunctionality which I recognized, but which, in many ways, remained a mystery to me. I have also been blessed by having the extreme good fortune to have encountered a number of judges and prosecutors who were truly concerned about justice, and who had the ability to judge me as a human being, and take into account the fact that I was being honest with them about my attitude, intentions and circumstances, even when my outward actions or appearance did not correspond to what they were used to seeing in 'normal' people. And I have been blessed to be able to make a difference in the lives of others by pleading their case to those in authority over them, when they were unable to effectively do so themselves. During my years as a consellor and court-appointed advisor, I was only vaguely aware that I understood the circumstances of the people I was helping to defend because I shared their disabilities and their dysfunctionality. In regard to Scott, I don't know him personally, but the trials and tribulations that you have shared on the pov-twitch forum are not foreign to me, as they mirror my own life in many ways. What I would say to a judge and a prosecutor who are charged with the duty of protecting both society and the individual, is this: 1. Please have the compassion and the wisdom to take a close look at Scott as a human being, and seriously consider what special circumstances may be raised by the fact that he is afflicted with a medical condition that affects his life in ways that he has little control over. 2. Try to make a distinction between actions, behaviors and attitudes that are a result of a 'bad attitude' or a 'criminal intent', and the actions, behaviors and attitudes of an individual who is trying desperately to survive in a world in which he is ill-equipped to function as a result of his disabilities. 3. Please make an attempt to review his past history of involvement with the legal system with an eye toward recognizing that perhaps the judgements made about him, and the resulting legal decisions regarding the disposition of his cases, did not fully take into account his physical and mental disabilities and thus did not reflect the best course of resolution of his case for the greatest benefit of both society and the individual himself. (The Tourette-support forums regularly contain postings by loving and concerned parents who are horrified by the mistaken judgements--and resulting punishments-they made concerning their children before they came to realize that their child had physical and mental disabilities which required them to view his or her actions in a new light, and find unique solutions for the problems that these disabilities presented.) 4. Keep in mind the fact that resistance to authority and the tendency to 'flee' from the face of society are common traits among many who suffer from Tourette Syndrome and its accompanying afflictions. (I posted a message to pov-twitch in which I spoke of feeling like a "hunted animal" for much of my life, and I received a huge outpouring of responses from TS-adults which reflected the pain and fear that they still carried inside of themselves as a result of a lifetime of persecution for the 'small sin' of being different from those around them.) 5. Please realize that you are judging an individual, whose future lies in your hands, who has a genuine need for special understanding in order to bring his case to a resolution which will benefit society and the individual himself. It is easy to recognize the special circumstances and needs necessary to dispense true justice in the case of the 'obviously' and the 'acceptably' disabled. When one is confronted with a retarded individual, or a person in a wheel-chair, the special circumstances regarding the disposition of their case are obvious. When judging a person who is rambling on disjointedly about the voices in his or her head, and truly hears them, then the need to take this into consideration is equally obvious. It is much more difficult to put Tourette Syndrome-type behaviors and attitudes into proper perspective, and to judge the part they play in an individuals actions and behaviors. TS traits encompass ADHD and OCD (Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder), and a variety of 'borderline' dysfunctionalities which result in actions and behaviors which are easy to classify as 'willful', 'disrespectful', etc. (Children who won't sit still in their chairs; who utter obscenities; who perform impulsive actions based on irrational, illogical thought processes.) I recognize that there are certain instances in which society's interest is best served by locking up an individual so that they do not do irrepairable harm to others, but if this concept is extended to the point where it becomes the preferred method of dealing with psychological disabilities, out of convenience, then I feel that justice is no longer being served. Society, in return for abridging the rights of an individual to act in any manner that he or she pleases, also takes on the responsibility to ensure that the individual will not unduly suffer as a result of the dictates of society. If society chooses to judge Scott for stepping outside the boundaries of its rule of law, then society must ensure that Scott is afforded the opportunity to gain the medical assistance that he needs in order to deal with his disabilities within the bounds of society's laws. Imprisonment is hardly likely to be a solution that will result in changes to Scott's medical disabilities. If the legal system is not able to propose an alternative to imprisonment, then what hope is there, really, for anyone who is engaged in a daily battle to overcome the trials, tribulations and stigmatism associated with the affliction of Tourette Syndrome. I wish you and Scott all the best in dealing with his present situation, and I hope that you are blessed with a judge who understands that society is composed of individuals and that, in judging the individual, he or she is judging society itself. Love, Toto From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 27 06:44:51 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:44:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <199701271444.GAA24207@toad.com> At 12:48 AM 1/24/97 -0800, Greg Broiles wrote: ... >While I think it's always useful to consider unintended (or otherwise >unexpected) consequences, Gladwell's argument sent a shiver down my spine >with its shameless paternalism. This bit (from roughly the middle of his >piece) is what I found creepiest: > >"According to one recent study, somewhere between twenty and twenty-seven >per cent of the parents of four-to six-year-olds never restrict their >children's viewing hours, never decide what programs they can watch, never >change the channel when something objectionable comes on, and never forbid >the watching of certain programs. It has apparently never occurred to these >parents that television can be a bad influence, and it strains credulity to >think that the advent of the V-chip is going to wake them up. Yet their >families - mainly lower-income, ill-educated - are the very ones most in >need of protection from television violence. Here is a rearranging effect >with a vengeance: not only does the V-chip make television worse, it makes >television worse precisely for those already most vulnerable to its excesses." > >I understood Gladwell's point to be, in essence, that the V-chip will allow >TV producers to generate higher levels of morally impure content which he >fears will pollute the minds of poor children because their parents are too >stupid to protect them from the harmful content and too poor to buy new >televisions which will include V-chips. ... What this means is, subsidized v-chip upgrades, and v-chips turned on by default. Now to watch the really good stuff you have to subscribe to "tv-un v-chipped" Sorry, I couldn't resist the pot shot. From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU Mon Jan 27 06:53:17 1997 From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:53:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: List of reliable remailers Message-ID: <199701271450.GAA19056@kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu> I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = " cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{'alpha'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{'nymrod'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle ?"; $remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"death"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent post"; $remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; catalyst at netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth at ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura at replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 27 Jan 97 6:48:19 PST remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- nym config at nym.alias.net ****#**#**## 1:33 99.99% balls remailer at huge.cajones.com *****++###*# 2:40 99.98% dustbin dustman at athensnet.com --+---+---+ 2:14:49 99.92% winsock winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net ------------ 4:55:21 99.87% exon remailer at remailer.nl.com ###*### #### :37 99.76% haystack haystack at holy.cow.net ###+*##***#* 29:02 99.72% weasel config at weasel.owl.de ++++++-++++ 1:17:40 99.33% squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de +++-++++++ 1:16:21 99.16% extropia remail at miron.vip.best.com ----------- 3:58:51 99.13% lead mix at zifi.genetics.utah.edu +*+*+ +++--+ 2:05:09 98.97% middle middleman at jpunix.com -- .-*++. 8:38:28 98.42% mix mixmaster at remail.obscura.com __.-+-.- 25:34:03 97.98% cyber alias at alias.cyberpass.net +*+**+++*+ * 1:28:18 96.80% reno middleman at cyberpass.net -+--- +--+ 1:16:40 95.45% lucifer lucifer at dhp.com ++++++++ + 1:24:25 95.15% replay remailer at replay.com *** * * 16:22 69.31% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Mon Jan 27 06:58:52 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:58:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTP security Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970127095802.0093fa20@gateway.grumman.com> I was thinking about the thread we had a week or so ago about OTPs. Say I'm going to burn a CD of what I think are cryptographically random bits, but somehow I end up with part of my stream being predictable (say every 16th bit). What does this do to the security of my CD? _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ Sam Jones on the Nine Types of User: Shaman - "Last week, when the moon was full, the clouds were thick, and formahaut was above the horizon, I typed f77, and lo, it did compile." Advantages: Gives insight into primative mythology. Disadvantages: Few scons are anthropology majors. Symptoms: Frequent questions about irrelavent objects. Real Case: One user complained that all information on one of their disks got erased (as Norton Utilities showed nothing but empty sectors, I suspect nothing had ever been on it). Reasoning that the deleted information went *somewhere*, they wouldn't shut up until the scon checked four different disks for the missing information. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 07:27:23 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 07:27:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32ECC930.9EE@gte.net> Daniel Harter wrote: > ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. > To treat various Venerial Diseases whose standard treatments are > antibiotics. > > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > > has that been proven? > What does seem to have credence is that the use of antibiotics breeds > resistant strains of bacteria, which may or may not be contagious. > A book that poses an opposing viewpoint to the current AIDS epidemic > is _The AIDS War_ by John Lauritsen (1993, Asklepios, New York, ISBN > 0-943742-08-0). It is written from a Gay man's perspective dissenting > from the current HIV-AIDS theory. Another book he wrote is _Poison by > Prescription: The AZT Story_. Also search on Peter H. Duesberg for > primary sources in various Journals. According to my AIDS database, a possible reason for the "hotly debated" theories of Duesberg is that because of the suspicion falling on the govt. and the WHO in regard to creating the HIV virus, the govt. was happy to have Duesberg and ilk deflecting a lot of that criticism. This doesn't make Duesberg wrong by implication, but there were suggestions of disinformation.... From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 27 07:29:04 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 07:29:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <854378751.95282.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > It is obvious to me that those who are waving the bloody flag of > "censorship" are doing so for either of two reasons. The ones to > whom I am the most sympathetic are those who simply do not have > a clear and coherent understanding of rights in an anarchistic, > volunteeristic society. You need have no sympathy. Those members of this list see it as it is, a list that was supposed to be, in some small way, a "model" of an anarchistic discussion forum for the subject of cryptography, either technically (later split into coderpunks) or at a sociopolitical level. That was the intended direction of the list, it has rapidly disentigrated over recent months into a censored list where the elite post to the main list and anyone else is nearly always relegated to a seperate list for the crypto-untermenshcen. > The ones for whom I have no sympathy are those whose obvious > goal is disruption of the Cypherpunks list and who are hiding > behind a phoney interpretation of "free speech." You may make as many excuses as you like, the bottom line is you have become what you profess to hate most, a censor. If having the right to post freely on a list that was supposed to operate as a free and open anarchic forum is not a valid interpretation of free speech I cannot envisage any more elegant example. > I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the > extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be > run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive > behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they > sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves > maintain. If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and related issues. A list which proudly proclaims in its "welcome to the list" message: We do not seek to prevent other people from speaking about their experiences or their opinions. Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present class structure, then ask yourself which list you know that most closely matches this description, it`s a pretty revealing exercise. > This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did > not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse > in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. For "Reasoned discourse in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will" read "content based censorship". > If most list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we > can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the > meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show > John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > more than homesteading. It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be permenant, it is a form of online ethnic cleansing whereby the lists clique of illuminati have taken it upon themselves to remove the elements of the list they feel endanger their position of superiority and respect, the point they have missed is that they have no credibility whatsoever after this incident, as well as a number of other such occurances and therefore are only isolating themselves into their own little world. "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 27 07:29:41 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 07:29:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <854378750.95280.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk > To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:12:05 +0000 > Subject: Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Priority: normal Can anyone tell me if my previous message with the above headers (end of message quoted in below) was sent to the censored list or to cypherpunks-flames? - I subscribe to the unmoderated version of the list so do not get to see what goes where.... > I do not have the resources to run such an unmoderated list but I > hope someone on this list does and is good enough to start such a > list, cypherpunks is a shell of what it once was. > > Also, please note this message will be junked onto cypherpunks-flames > even though it contains no flames or flame bait because it dares to > criticise the censorship of the list (once again Sandy, I give you an > opportunity to prove me wrong). Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From rwright at adnetsol.com Mon Jan 27 08:21:52 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:21:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Censorship Message-ID: <199701271621.IAA17131@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> On or About 26 Jan 97 at 22:28, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > "Ross Wright" writes: > > > On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > >> > > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > > > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > >>>>>>>irrelevant at nowhere.com wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > > > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the > > > only cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". > > > > THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY > > OBJECT TO. > > Comversely, some people are willing to give up their own freedom of > speech so as to silence others whose views they don't like. Who could be that stupid? Why would they even want to give up an inch of their freedoms? >They > hope that they'll be censored less than their "enemies". A weak hope at best. Once you start censoring it becomes a "Slippery Slope". > But a forum > can't be "a little bit censored" just like a woman can't be "a > little bit pregnant". You got that right! =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From petersom at hsd.k12.or.us Mon Jan 27 08:23:05 1997 From: petersom at hsd.k12.or.us (Peterson, Mike) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:23:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Posting percentages Message-ID: Dr. Dimitri Vulus KOTM wrote: Rabid Wombat writes: >> Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue >> was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list >> "population." >The list "population" (readers) is a couple of thousand people, almost >all of whom are lurkers. All posters are an extremely small segment of >the readership. It's true on most Internet forums. Just because us "lurkers" don't post, doesn't mean that we aren't taking sides, agreeing, disagreeing, or otherwise. Small portions of the population doesn't mean that the rest of us have no comment, just not the will to make the post. From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Mon Jan 27 08:41:25 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:41:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTP security Message-ID: <199701271641.IAA27364@toad.com> I was thinking about the thread we had a week or so ago about OTPs. Say I'm going to burn a CD of what I think are cryptographically random bits, but somehow I end up with part of my stream being predictable (say every 16th bit). What does this do to the security of my CD? _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ Sam Jones on the Nine Types of User: Shaman - "Last week, when the moon was full, the clouds were thick, and formahaut was above the horizon, I typed f77, and lo, it did compile." Advantages: Gives insight into primative mythology. Disadvantages: Few scons are anthropology majors. Symptoms: Frequent questions about irrelavent objects. Real Case: One user complained that all information on one of their disks got erased (as Norton Utilities showed nothing but empty sectors, I suspect nothing had ever been on it). Reasoning that the deleted information went *somewhere*, they wouldn't shut up until the scon checked four different disks for the missing information. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 27 08:41:31 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:41:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: THE NEW YORKER on the V-Chip Message-ID: <199701271641.IAA27376@toad.com> At 12:48 AM 1/24/97 -0800, Greg Broiles wrote: ... >While I think it's always useful to consider unintended (or otherwise >unexpected) consequences, Gladwell's argument sent a shiver down my spine >with its shameless paternalism. This bit (from roughly the middle of his >piece) is what I found creepiest: > >"According to one recent study, somewhere between twenty and twenty-seven >per cent of the parents of four-to six-year-olds never restrict their >children's viewing hours, never decide what programs they can watch, never >change the channel when something objectionable comes on, and never forbid >the watching of certain programs. It has apparently never occurred to these >parents that television can be a bad influence, and it strains credulity to >think that the advent of the V-chip is going to wake them up. Yet their >families - mainly lower-income, ill-educated - are the very ones most in >need of protection from television violence. Here is a rearranging effect >with a vengeance: not only does the V-chip make television worse, it makes >television worse precisely for those already most vulnerable to its excesses." > >I understood Gladwell's point to be, in essence, that the V-chip will allow >TV producers to generate higher levels of morally impure content which he >fears will pollute the minds of poor children because their parents are too >stupid to protect them from the harmful content and too poor to buy new >televisions which will include V-chips. ... What this means is, subsidized v-chip upgrades, and v-chips turned on by default. Now to watch the really good stuff you have to subscribe to "tv-un v-chipped" Sorry, I couldn't resist the pot shot. From raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU Mon Jan 27 08:41:55 1997 From: raph at CS.Berkeley.EDU (Raph Levien) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:41:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: List of reliable remailers Message-ID: <199701271641.IAA27392@toad.com> I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list at kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = " cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{'alpha'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{'nymrod'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = " cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = " cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{'cyber'} = ' alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle ?"; $remailer{'weasel'} = ' newnym pgp'; $remailer{"death"} = " cpunk pgp hash latent post"; $remailer{"reno"} = " cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; catalyst at netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth at ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura at replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer at crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 27 Jan 97 6:48:19 PST remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- nym config at nym.alias.net ****#**#**## 1:33 99.99% balls remailer at huge.cajones.com *****++###*# 2:40 99.98% dustbin dustman at athensnet.com --+---+---+ 2:14:49 99.92% winsock winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net ------------ 4:55:21 99.87% exon remailer at remailer.nl.com ###*### #### :37 99.76% haystack haystack at holy.cow.net ###+*##***#* 29:02 99.72% weasel config at weasel.owl.de ++++++-++++ 1:17:40 99.33% squirrel mix at squirrel.owl.de +++-++++++ 1:16:21 99.16% extropia remail at miron.vip.best.com ----------- 3:58:51 99.13% lead mix at zifi.genetics.utah.edu +*+*+ +++--+ 2:05:09 98.97% middle middleman at jpunix.com -- .-*++. 8:38:28 98.42% mix mixmaster at remail.obscura.com __.-+-.- 25:34:03 97.98% cyber alias at alias.cyberpass.net +*+**+++*+ * 1:28:18 96.80% reno middleman at cyberpass.net -+--- +--+ 1:16:40 95.45% lucifer lucifer at dhp.com ++++++++ + 1:24:25 95.15% replay remailer at replay.com *** * * 16:22 69.31% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 08:43:13 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:43:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701271643.IAA27437@toad.com> Daniel Harter wrote: > ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Why do they take antibiotics? Just curious. > To treat various Venerial Diseases whose standard treatments are > antibiotics. > > Also, I haven't heard that antibiotics were bad for immune system, > > has that been proven? > What does seem to have credence is that the use of antibiotics breeds > resistant strains of bacteria, which may or may not be contagious. > A book that poses an opposing viewpoint to the current AIDS epidemic > is _The AIDS War_ by John Lauritsen (1993, Asklepios, New York, ISBN > 0-943742-08-0). It is written from a Gay man's perspective dissenting > from the current HIV-AIDS theory. Another book he wrote is _Poison by > Prescription: The AZT Story_. Also search on Peter H. Duesberg for > primary sources in various Journals. According to my AIDS database, a possible reason for the "hotly debated" theories of Duesberg is that because of the suspicion falling on the govt. and the WHO in regard to creating the HIV virus, the govt. was happy to have Duesberg and ilk deflecting a lot of that criticism. This doesn't make Duesberg wrong by implication, but there were suggestions of disinformation.... From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 27 08:43:38 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:43:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701271643.IAA27438@toad.com> > It is obvious to me that those who are waving the bloody flag of > "censorship" are doing so for either of two reasons. The ones to > whom I am the most sympathetic are those who simply do not have > a clear and coherent understanding of rights in an anarchistic, > volunteeristic society. You need have no sympathy. Those members of this list see it as it is, a list that was supposed to be, in some small way, a "model" of an anarchistic discussion forum for the subject of cryptography, either technically (later split into coderpunks) or at a sociopolitical level. That was the intended direction of the list, it has rapidly disentigrated over recent months into a censored list where the elite post to the main list and anyone else is nearly always relegated to a seperate list for the crypto-untermenshcen. > The ones for whom I have no sympathy are those whose obvious > goal is disruption of the Cypherpunks list and who are hiding > behind a phoney interpretation of "free speech." You may make as many excuses as you like, the bottom line is you have become what you profess to hate most, a censor. If having the right to post freely on a list that was supposed to operate as a free and open anarchic forum is not a valid interpretation of free speech I cannot envisage any more elegant example. > I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the > extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be > run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive > behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they > sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves > maintain. If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and related issues. A list which proudly proclaims in its "welcome to the list" message: We do not seek to prevent other people from speaking about their experiences or their opinions. Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present class structure, then ask yourself which list you know that most closely matches this description, it`s a pretty revealing exercise. > This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did > not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse > in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. For "Reasoned discourse in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will" read "content based censorship". > If most list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we > can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the > meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show > John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > more than homesteading. It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be permenant, it is a form of online ethnic cleansing whereby the lists clique of illuminati have taken it upon themselves to remove the elements of the list they feel endanger their position of superiority and respect, the point they have missed is that they have no credibility whatsoever after this incident, as well as a number of other such occurances and therefore are only isolating themselves into their own little world. "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From lwp at mail.msen.com Mon Jan 27 08:49:05 1997 From: lwp at mail.msen.com (Lou Poppler) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 08:49:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderated list is missing headers Message-ID: The arguments about imaginary quotes and libel are harder to untangle because the moderation process seems to consume the mail headers showing the messages' travels before reaching toad.com. I suggest that these headers are signal not noise, and should be propagated if at all possible. We have had problems in the past with forgeries, and should retain this basic tool for evaluating a message's source. I know I could get these from the unmoderated list -- but I prefer the moderated version so far, and think they should be here also. I know PGP signatures are a better way of authenticating a message. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by mail.msen.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA02344 for ; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:58:05 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom at localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA24082; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:41:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199701271441.GAA24082 at toad.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 04:33:05 -0800 From: Toto To: Jim Choate Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com Subject: Re: Fantasy quotes & libel Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Precedence: bulk [ message body irrelevant ] From talon57 at well.com Mon Jan 27 09:01:49 1997 From: talon57 at well.com (Brian D Williams) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:01:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701271701.JAA25515@well.com> Toto writes: > There has been great concern raised among those in the medical >profession regarding the end-effects of their wholesale >prescribing of anitbiotics for colds, aches and pains, etc., >leading to the development of new strains of virus which are >immune to the older antibiotics. This leads to development of >stronger (misused) antibiotics, which then leads to stronger >strains of virus. > There have been a number of studies which point to the fact that >the human immune system is now caught in a battle between >increasingly potent virus and antibiotics and is losing its >capacity to fightits 'natural' enemies. Antibiotics are for fighting bacterial infections. Antibiotics have no effect on viruses at all. However you are accurate in that the abuse of antibiotics for things like colds (a virus, no effect) has led us to a very dangerous situation. (antibiotic resistant bacteria) I suggest the book "The Coming Plague" who's authors name escapes me at the moment, if you, or anyone else is interested. Brian Cypherpunk Extropian " You can lead a horse to water, but you can't faucet." From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 27 09:31:47 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:31:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701271731.JAA28633@toad.com> > From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk > To: "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" > Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 19:12:05 +0000 > Subject: Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Priority: normal Can anyone tell me if my previous message with the above headers (end of message quoted in below) was sent to the censored list or to cypherpunks-flames? - I subscribe to the unmoderated version of the list so do not get to see what goes where.... > I do not have the resources to run such an unmoderated list but I > hope someone on this list does and is good enough to start such a > list, cypherpunks is a shell of what it once was. > > Also, please note this message will be junked onto cypherpunks-flames > even though it contains no flames or flame bait because it dares to > criticise the censorship of the list (once again Sandy, I give you an > opportunity to prove me wrong). Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From sandfort at crl.com Mon Jan 27 09:33:04 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:33:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <854378751.95282.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 26 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > You need have no sympathy. Those members of this list see it as it > is, a list that was supposed to be, in some small way, a "model" of > an anarchistic discussion forum for the subject of cryptography,... Nonsense. It was supposed to be a discussion of crypto and other technologies in support of privacy. The founders, Hughes, Gilmore, May and Daniel were focusing on that goal. The list structure was anarchistic (and still is to those who understand the concept of anarco-capitalism). Obviously Gilmore is not wedded to the idea of letting every fool use his bandwidth. In personal discussions as recently as yesterday, Hughes had no problem in supporting some mechanism to promote civility on the list. I don't think anything May has written would suggest he would have a problem with keeping things polite. His only argument seems to be over methodology. He thinks filtering is the answer; I don't. Reasonable minds may differ. Hugh Daniel has been instrumental in providing technical help with regard to moderation. Finally, the fact that the vast majority of list members have not seen fit to "vote with their feet" should suggest how most really feel about moderation. (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' favored solution.) > ...That was the intended direction of the list, it > has rapidly disentigrated over recent months into a censored list > where the elite post to the main list and anyone else is nearly > always relegated to a seperate list for the crypto-untermenshcen. Again, nonsense. The moderation experiment (moderation, not censorship) has been in effect for all of ONE WEEK. Where does Paul get this hysterical "recent months" stuff? > If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: > > Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was > to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and > related issues... Paul's argument is the essence of literal conservativism, "but I don't things to change!" Without change, though, there can be no progress. Moderation is a one-month experiment. There is no intellectual dishonesty in saying, "let's try something else for a while." > Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based > censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present > class structure,... "Unspoken but ever present class structure"? I wonder how Paul was able to divine this? Certainly it is unspoken, but that, of course, it because it does not exist anywhere but in Paul's fertile imagination. > It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will > have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be > permenant,... Great! I thought that hadn't been determined yet. What a relief. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From camcc at abraxis.com Mon Jan 27 09:35:51 1997 From: camcc at abraxis.com (Alec) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:35:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Privacy/info site Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970127123706.00693d88@smtp1.abraxis.com> A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 252 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Peterson Mon Jan 27 09:46:05 1997 From: Peterson (Peterson) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:46:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Posting percentages Message-ID: <199701271746.JAA28997@toad.com> Dr. Dimitri Vulus KOTM wrote: Rabid Wombat writes: >> Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue >> was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list >> "population." >The list "population" (readers) is a couple of thousand people, almost >all of whom are lurkers. All posters are an extremely small segment of >the readership. It's true on most Internet forums. Just because us "lurkers" don't post, doesn't mean that we aren't taking sides, agreeing, disagreeing, or otherwise. Small portions of the population doesn't mean that the rest of us have no comment, just not the will to make the post. From talon57 at well.com Mon Jan 27 09:46:31 1997 From: talon57 at well.com (Brian D Williams) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:46:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701271746.JAA29022@toad.com> Toto writes: > There has been great concern raised among those in the medical >profession regarding the end-effects of their wholesale >prescribing of anitbiotics for colds, aches and pains, etc., >leading to the development of new strains of virus which are >immune to the older antibiotics. This leads to development of >stronger (misused) antibiotics, which then leads to stronger >strains of virus. > There have been a number of studies which point to the fact that >the human immune system is now caught in a battle between >increasingly potent virus and antibiotics and is losing its >capacity to fightits 'natural' enemies. Antibiotics are for fighting bacterial infections. Antibiotics have no effect on viruses at all. However you are accurate in that the abuse of antibiotics for things like colds (a virus, no effect) has led us to a very dangerous situation. (antibiotic resistant bacteria) I suggest the book "The Coming Plague" who's authors name escapes me at the moment, if you, or anyone else is interested. Brian Cypherpunk Extropian " You can lead a horse to water, but you can't faucet." From lwp at mail.msen.com Mon Jan 27 09:46:43 1997 From: lwp at mail.msen.com (Lou Poppler) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:46:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderated list is missing headers Message-ID: <199701271746.JAA29041@toad.com> The arguments about imaginary quotes and libel are harder to untangle because the moderation process seems to consume the mail headers showing the messages' travels before reaching toad.com. I suggest that these headers are signal not noise, and should be propagated if at all possible. We have had problems in the past with forgeries, and should retain this basic tool for evaluating a message's source. I know I could get these from the unmoderated list -- but I prefer the moderated version so far, and think they should be here also. I know PGP signatures are a better way of authenticating a message. ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by mail.msen.com (8.8.5/8.6.12) with ESMTP id KAA02344 for ; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:58:05 -0500 (EST) Received: (from majordom at localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id GAA24082; Mon, 27 Jan 1997 06:41:04 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <199701271441.GAA24082 at toad.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 04:33:05 -0800 From: Toto To: Jim Choate Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com Subject: Re: Fantasy quotes & libel Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Precedence: bulk [ message body irrelevant ] From rwright at adnetsol.com Mon Jan 27 09:46:45 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 09:46:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Censorship Message-ID: <199701271746.JAA29042@toad.com> On or About 26 Jan 97 at 22:28, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > "Ross Wright" writes: > > > On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > >> > > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > > > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > >>>>>>>irrelevant at nowhere.com wrote: > > > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > > > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the > > > only cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". > > > > THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY > > OBJECT TO. > > Comversely, some people are willing to give up their own freedom of > speech so as to silence others whose views they don't like. Who could be that stupid? Why would they even want to give up an inch of their freedoms? >They > hope that they'll be censored less than their "enemies". A weak hope at best. Once you start censoring it becomes a "Slippery Slope". > But a forum > can't be "a little bit censored" just like a woman can't be "a > little bit pregnant". You got that right! =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From Kevin.L.Prigge-2 at tc.umn.edu Mon Jan 27 10:04:35 1997 From: Kevin.L.Prigge-2 at tc.umn.edu (Kevin L Prigge) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:04:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701271643.IAA27438@toad.com> Message-ID: <32ecee29303e002@noc.tc.umn.edu> paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the > > extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be > > run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive > > behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they > > sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves > > maintain. > > If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: > > Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was > to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and > related issues. A list which proudly proclaims in its "welcome to > the list" message: > > We do not seek to prevent other people from > speaking about their experiences or their opinions. > > Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based > censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present > class structure, then ask yourself which list you know that most > closely matches this description, it`s a pretty revealing exercise. The exercise reveals to me that only by ignoring the first paragraph of your example, the part that reads "Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and related issues." can you make a claim of content based censorship. The purpose of this list was and should be discussion of cryptography and related issues. The fact that some people choose this as a forum for personal attacks and blathering about issues that are not even vaguely related to the discussion of cryptography and related issues does not make it a proper forum for such communication. > > This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did > > not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse > > in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. > > For "Reasoned discourse in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and > good will" read "content based censorship". For "voluntary list" read "voluntary list". > > > If most list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we > > can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the > > meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show > > John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. > > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > > more than homesteading. > > It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will > have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be > permenant, it is a form of online ethnic cleansing whereby the lists > clique of illuminati have taken it upon themselves to remove the > elements of the list they feel endanger their position of superiority > and respect, the point they have missed is that they have no > credibility whatsoever after this incident, as well as a number of > other such occurances and therefore are only isolating themselves > into their own little world. The Big Lie once again. yadda yadda yadda "Censorship!" yadda yadda yadda "No Credibility" yadda yadda yadda ad nauseum. > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" -- Kevin L. Prigge | Some mornings, it's just not worth Systems Software Programmer | chewing through the leather straps. Internet Enterprise - OIT | - Emo Phillips University of Minnesota | From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Mon Jan 27 10:06:42 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:06:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Xerox is watching you In-Reply-To: <199701270555.VAA11234@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701271806.NAA03727@wauug.erols.com> Martin Minow sez: > > You'll find an article worth a visit to the dentist in the January > 1997 issue of Popular Science. It tells a story from the 1960's > cold war era. You might take this to alt.folklore.urban. Barring any factual support, it better fits there. After all Popular Science once had their famous battery carrier design, and an older friend related reading of their scheme to reduce the weight of battle tanks to get them up the Burma Road during WWII. It involved helium, and to reduce space, it was to be compressed into large cylinders bolted to the sides........ -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From peter.allan at aeat.co.uk Mon Jan 27 10:19:46 1997 From: peter.allan at aeat.co.uk (Peter M Allan) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:19:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: S/KEY (was: 2 Questions) Message-ID: <9701271820.AA17135@clare.risley.aeat.co.uk> Steven M Orrin wrote: > Hey guys, > 2 quick questions: > Are there any known hacks or weaknesses in S/Key? S/Key has a rather limited scope, in aiming to prevent replay attacks. These are where somebody snoops on your network to obtain passwords, an uses them in later login attempts. This is undoubtedly a major weakness in most current networks. S/Key addresses this replay of data obtained in passive eavesdropping, but that is all it does. Several attacks against S/Key have been discussed [1], including: race attacks: eavesdropping most of the hash, and racing the user to provide the rest of it active attacks: impersonating the server to learn future hashes or simply hijacking an established session. Strengthening S/Key really means expanding the scope to get an authenticated and encrypted 2-way connection. [John Gilmore's S/WAN may end up achieving this. I'm not familiar with it (yet?).] Ideas for improving S/Key that involve secret data stored on the server tend to get frowned on, as the original aim was to avoid that. In any case you cannot get the full encrypted 2-way connection without getting a whole lot more complicated. Recent discussions [2] have centred on ways to rekey the list of hashes remotely when the count runs down. These changes, and S/Key itself, are better than nothing but where's the ham sandwich ? [3] Beside the protocol weakness there is potential for finding collisions in the hash function (MD4 originally). A choice of hash functions can be provided. See RFC-1938. 1) See also SecureID, which is more complicated and still subject to similar attacks. 2) Not here. 3) Old joke. A ham sandwich is better than nothing, and nothing is better than a life of complete happiness, so ...... -- Peter Allan peter.allan at aeat.co.uk From spyking at thecodex.com Mon Jan 27 10:25:25 1997 From: spyking at thecodex.com (SpyKing) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:25:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701271824.NAA02534@para.mne.net> This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? From shaft at africamail.com Mon Jan 27 10:48:07 1997 From: shaft at africamail.com (John Shaft) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 10:48:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970127184948.0069dd0c@pop3.afn.org> >>If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I >>type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private >>Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? >>If so, how would that be done? There are a number of things that can happen. Basically, if you don't directly control the device/application that is doing the encryption for you, you run the risk of someone intercepting whatever you xmit. For example, if you have a dial up type shell account with your local ISP, and you depend on some UNIX based encryption program to secure your mail (running on the ISP's machine), anyone with root access can tap the tty and watch you enter your passphrase. You're also susceptable (sp?) to someone taping your phone line and looking at you with a packet analyzer. I suppose if you were doing something locally, and someone wanted to be really sneaky, they could embed something like keycopy on your machine (with a virus or something) and get coppied every time you enter a keystroke. I don't suppose it would be all that difficult to get a machine to run a tsr that got kicked off every time you accessed something like, say , PGP....Comments? Shaft! Damn Straigt. shaft at africamail.com From Kevin.L.Prigge-2 at tc.umn.edu Mon Jan 27 11:27:15 1997 From: Kevin.L.Prigge-2 at tc.umn.edu (Kevin L Prigge) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:27:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701271927.LAA02277@toad.com> paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the > > extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be > > run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive > > behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they > > sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves > > maintain. > > If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: > > Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was > to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and > related issues. A list which proudly proclaims in its "welcome to > the list" message: > > We do not seek to prevent other people from > speaking about their experiences or their opinions. > > Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based > censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present > class structure, then ask yourself which list you know that most > closely matches this description, it`s a pretty revealing exercise. The exercise reveals to me that only by ignoring the first paragraph of your example, the part that reads "Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and related issues." can you make a claim of content based censorship. The purpose of this list was and should be discussion of cryptography and related issues. The fact that some people choose this as a forum for personal attacks and blathering about issues that are not even vaguely related to the discussion of cryptography and related issues does not make it a proper forum for such communication. > > This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did > > not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse > > in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. > > For "Reasoned discourse in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and > good will" read "content based censorship". For "voluntary list" read "voluntary list". > > > If most list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we > > can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the > > meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show > > John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. > > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > > more than homesteading. > > It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will > have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be > permenant, it is a form of online ethnic cleansing whereby the lists > clique of illuminati have taken it upon themselves to remove the > elements of the list they feel endanger their position of superiority > and respect, the point they have missed is that they have no > credibility whatsoever after this incident, as well as a number of > other such occurances and therefore are only isolating themselves > into their own little world. The Big Lie once again. yadda yadda yadda "Censorship!" yadda yadda yadda "No Credibility" yadda yadda yadda ad nauseum. > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" -- Kevin L. Prigge | Some mornings, it's just not worth Systems Software Programmer | chewing through the leather straps. Internet Enterprise - OIT | - Emo Phillips University of Minnesota | From sandfort at crl.crl.com Mon Jan 27 11:28:59 1997 From: sandfort at crl.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:28:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701271928.LAA02313@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Sun, 26 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > You need have no sympathy. Those members of this list see it as it > is, a list that was supposed to be, in some small way, a "model" of > an anarchistic discussion forum for the subject of cryptography,... Nonsense. It was supposed to be a discussion of crypto and other technologies in support of privacy. The founders, Hughes, Gilmore, May and Daniel were focusing on that goal. The list structure was anarchistic (and still is to those who understand the concept of anarco-capitalism). Obviously Gilmore is not wedded to the idea of letting every fool use his bandwidth. In personal discussions as recently as yesterday, Hughes had no problem in supporting some mechanism to promote civility on the list. I don't think anything May has written would suggest he would have a problem with keeping things polite. His only argument seems to be over methodology. He thinks filtering is the answer; I don't. Reasonable minds may differ. Hugh Daniel has been instrumental in providing technical help with regard to moderation. Finally, the fact that the vast majority of list members have not seen fit to "vote with their feet" should suggest how most really feel about moderation. (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' favored solution.) > ...That was the intended direction of the list, it > has rapidly disentigrated over recent months into a censored list > where the elite post to the main list and anyone else is nearly > always relegated to a seperate list for the crypto-untermenshcen. Again, nonsense. The moderation experiment (moderation, not censorship) has been in effect for all of ONE WEEK. Where does Paul get this hysterical "recent months" stuff? > If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: > > Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was > to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and > related issues... Paul's argument is the essence of literal conservativism, "but I don't things to change!" Without change, though, there can be no progress. Moderation is a one-month experiment. There is no intellectual dishonesty in saying, "let's try something else for a while." > Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based > censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present > class structure,... "Unspoken but ever present class structure"? I wonder how Paul was able to divine this? Certainly it is unspoken, but that, of course, it because it does not exist anywhere but in Paul's fertile imagination. > It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will > have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be > permenant,... Great! I thought that hadn't been determined yet. What a relief. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From camcc at abraxis.com Mon Jan 27 11:29:45 1997 From: camcc at abraxis.com (Alec) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:29:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Privacy/info site Message-ID: <199701271929.LAA02341@toad.com> I stumbled upon this site and have not had an opportunity to visit it in toto (certainly no pun intended, Mr. Toto). Seems to have a wealth of info and links for the military/security oriented. http://hrvati.cronet.com/mprofaca/mcsusa2.html Alec From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Mon Jan 27 11:31:46 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:31:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Xerox is watching you Message-ID: <199701271931.LAA02403@toad.com> Martin Minow sez: > > You'll find an article worth a visit to the dentist in the January > 1997 issue of Popular Science. It tells a story from the 1960's > cold war era. You might take this to alt.folklore.urban. Barring any factual support, it better fits there. After all Popular Science once had their famous battery carrier design, and an older friend related reading of their scheme to reduce the weight of battle tanks to get them up the Burma Road during WWII. It involved helium, and to reduce space, it was to be compressed into large cylinders bolted to the sides........ -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Mon Jan 27 11:40:10 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Rob) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:40:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <199701272000.PAA11880@unix.asb.com> On 26 Jan 1997 18:59:32 -0500, you wrote: [..] >It doesn't seem to work with the mail program in MS IE, or MS WordMail. >I understand why some people don't like Microsoft, but excluding >support for popular Microsoft programs seems contrary to their >stated goal of promoting the use of crypto. I believe (according to their page) it's in the works to add support for other programs. It might also be that the MS CryptoAPI may impose limitations on crypto plug-ins that require annoying hacks to use conveniently. But maybe not... I'm surprised the didn't mention Pegasus Mail, which is an amazing "hot" mailer, with a sort-of built-in crypto plug-in capability... it's also free. Rob ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From spyking at thecodex.com Mon Jan 27 11:41:09 1997 From: spyking at thecodex.com (SpyKing) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701271941.LAA02719@toad.com> This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? From shaft at africamail.com Mon Jan 27 11:47:52 1997 From: shaft at africamail.com (John Shaft) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:47:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: <199701271947.LAA03025@toad.com> >>If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I >>type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private >>Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? >>If so, how would that be done? There are a number of things that can happen. Basically, if you don't directly control the device/application that is doing the encryption for you, you run the risk of someone intercepting whatever you xmit. For example, if you have a dial up type shell account with your local ISP, and you depend on some UNIX based encryption program to secure your mail (running on the ISP's machine), anyone with root access can tap the tty and watch you enter your passphrase. You're also susceptable (sp?) to someone taping your phone line and looking at you with a packet analyzer. I suppose if you were doing something locally, and someone wanted to be really sneaky, they could embed something like keycopy on your machine (with a virus or something) and get coppied every time you enter a keystroke. I don't suppose it would be all that difficult to get a machine to run a tsr that got kicked off every time you accessed something like, say , PGP....Comments? Shaft! Damn Straigt. shaft at africamail.com From peter.allan at aeat.co.uk Mon Jan 27 11:49:15 1997 From: peter.allan at aeat.co.uk (Peter M Allan) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 11:49:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: S/KEY (was: 2 Questions) Message-ID: <199701271949.LAA03073@toad.com> Steven M Orrin wrote: > Hey guys, > 2 quick questions: > Are there any known hacks or weaknesses in S/Key? S/Key has a rather limited scope, in aiming to prevent replay attacks. These are where somebody snoops on your network to obtain passwords, an uses them in later login attempts. This is undoubtedly a major weakness in most current networks. S/Key addresses this replay of data obtained in passive eavesdropping, but that is all it does. Several attacks against S/Key have been discussed [1], including: race attacks: eavesdropping most of the hash, and racing the user to provide the rest of it active attacks: impersonating the server to learn future hashes or simply hijacking an established session. Strengthening S/Key really means expanding the scope to get an authenticated and encrypted 2-way connection. [John Gilmore's S/WAN may end up achieving this. I'm not familiar with it (yet?).] Ideas for improving S/Key that involve secret data stored on the server tend to get frowned on, as the original aim was to avoid that. In any case you cannot get the full encrypted 2-way connection without getting a whole lot more complicated. Recent discussions [2] have centred on ways to rekey the list of hashes remotely when the count runs down. These changes, and S/Key itself, are better than nothing but where's the ham sandwich ? [3] Beside the protocol weakness there is potential for finding collisions in the hash function (MD4 originally). A choice of hash functions can be provided. See RFC-1938. 1) See also SecureID, which is more complicated and still subject to similar attacks. 2) Not here. 3) Old joke. A ham sandwich is better than nothing, and nothing is better than a life of complete happiness, so ...... -- Peter Allan peter.allan at aeat.co.uk From rp at rpini.com Mon Jan 27 12:00:56 1997 From: rp at rpini.com (Remo Pini) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:00:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: 4th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security Message-ID: <199701272004.VAA07649@ln.active.ch> Anyone going there? It's right next doors - at least next to mine :) Remo Pini From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Mon Jan 27 12:11:56 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Rob) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:11:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <199701272011.MAA03701@toad.com> On 26 Jan 1997 18:59:32 -0500, you wrote: [..] >It doesn't seem to work with the mail program in MS IE, or MS WordMail. >I understand why some people don't like Microsoft, but excluding >support for popular Microsoft programs seems contrary to their >stated goal of promoting the use of crypto. I believe (according to their page) it's in the works to add support for other programs. It might also be that the MS CryptoAPI may impose limitations on crypto plug-ins that require annoying hacks to use conveniently. But maybe not... I'm surprised the didn't mention Pegasus Mail, which is an amazing "hot" mailer, with a sort-of built-in crypto plug-in capability... it's also free. Rob ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 12:43:18 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:43:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <32ecee29303e002@noc.tc.umn.edu> Message-ID: <199701272039.OAA05041@manifold.algebra.com> Kevin L Prigge wrote: > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the > > > extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be > > > run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive > > > behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they > > > sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves > > > maintain. > > > > If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: > > > > Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was > > to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and > > related issues. A list which proudly proclaims in its "welcome to > > the list" message: > > > > We do not seek to prevent other people from > > speaking about their experiences or their opinions. > > > > Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based > > censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present > > class structure, then ask yourself which list you know that most > > closely matches this description, it`s a pretty revealing exercise. > > The exercise reveals to me that only by ignoring the first paragraph > of your example, the part that reads "Imagine if you will a list, > the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum > for discussion of cryptography and related issues." can you make > a claim of content based censorship. The purpose of this list was Then why discussion of machine guns should be allowed here? igor From blancw at MICROSOFT.com Mon Jan 27 12:53:00 1997 From: blancw at MICROSOFT.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 12:53:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: From: Sandy Sandfort (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' favored solution.) ............................................... What was that? .. Blanc From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 13:30:53 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 13:30:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Shave the Whales Message-ID: <199701272130.NAA17058@mailmasher.com> Dr.Disruptive Vasectomy died of AIDS last night with his homosexual lover. \|/ @ @ -oOO-(_)-OOo- Dr.Disruptive Vasectomy From markm at voicenet.com Mon Jan 27 13:36:31 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 13:36:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderated list is missing headers In-Reply-To: <199701271746.JAA29041@toad.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Lou Poppler wrote: > The arguments about imaginary quotes and libel are harder to untangle > because the moderation process seems to consume the mail headers showing > the messages' travels before reaching toad.com. I suggest that these > headers are signal not noise, and should be propagated if at all possible. > We have had problems in the past with forgeries, and should retain this > basic tool for evaluating a message's source. I agree, except I rely on this to sort the moderated and unmoderated lists into separate folders. I'm sure the bugs are still being worked out, but it would be much easier to filter if the sender header was set appropriately. Here's the procmail recipe in case anyone's interested: :0 * ^Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com { :0 * -1^1 ^Received: * 4^1 ^Received:.*from majordom at localhost.*by toad.com * ^Message-Id:.*toad.com in.cpunks :0 unedited } The number 4 should be changed depending on how many hops a message must make to reach its destination. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMu0gyyzIPc7jvyFpAQGCrAgAlIT6oSZ18sVGuMQWeszAWPE67BwMRx/1 2CLsrtpCaKfj5j+C5DsT2dpv4IhlOFOftrtCPL8KOEot5YRg3mUeUl7efwfnioeB UmM3h7Zx8W5RFZlTlhMim58G5o88jYVE3Rsov+f8nYM9hoXPDyjgoZmnG4BUn8Ca saL3ul2zO39bB4YwRmBKCeXRBzefmaowJbdC7Hl+S+uU61+Dbtbk/Fq2o5B9Gsvq wjg3QF4u+oyDCfcxdmLajL9tE6K7L2bgEkvi9kxt7AUP5e/l53epXK9cFplYF0B6 qgPd0shYmWiTSbhjQ4tw6jZkxuyxWqFX/nAHGp7Tciqp/rIkwX/tNQ== =riw1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From rp at rpini.com Mon Jan 27 13:40:01 1997 From: rp at rpini.com (Remo Pini) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 13:40:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: 4th ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security Message-ID: <199701272140.NAA06263@toad.com> Anyone going there? It's right next doors - at least next to mine :) Remo Pini From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 13:42:03 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 13:42:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701272142.NAA06336@toad.com> Kevin L Prigge wrote: > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the > > > extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be > > > run. I doubt any of them would permit the sort of disruptive > > > behavior that goes on here to go unchallenged in salons they > > > sponsor in their own homes or on Net lists that they themselves > > > maintain. > > > > If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: > > > > Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was > > to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and > > related issues. A list which proudly proclaims in its "welcome to > > the list" message: > > > > We do not seek to prevent other people from > > speaking about their experiences or their opinions. > > > > Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based > > censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present > > class structure, then ask yourself which list you know that most > > closely matches this description, it`s a pretty revealing exercise. > > The exercise reveals to me that only by ignoring the first paragraph > of your example, the part that reads "Imagine if you will a list, > the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum > for discussion of cryptography and related issues." can you make > a claim of content based censorship. The purpose of this list was Then why discussion of machine guns should be allowed here? igor From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 14:11:21 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:11:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Shave the Whales Message-ID: <199701272211.OAA07204@toad.com> Dr.Disruptive Vasectomy died of AIDS last night with his homosexual lover. \|/ @ @ -oOO-(_)-OOo- Dr.Disruptive Vasectomy From MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com Mon Jan 27 14:12:37 1997 From: MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen, Patrick) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:12:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Handbook of Applied Cryptography Message-ID: (My apologies if someone else has posted this information and I missed it.) _Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_, Menezes, Oorschot, Vanstone, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1997 With a foreword by R.L. Rivest Contents in Brief: Table of Contents v List of Tables xv List of Figures xix Foreword xxi Preface xxiii 1 Overview of Cryptography 1 2 Mathematical Background 49 3 Number-Theoretic Reverence Problems 87 4 Pulic-Key Parameters 133 5 Pseudorandom Bits and Sequences 169 6 Stream Ciphers 191 7 Block Ciphers 223 8 Public-Key Encryption 283 9 Hash Functions and Data Integrity 321 10 Identification and Entity Authentication 385 11 Digital Signatures 425 12 Key Establishment Protocols 489 13 Key Management Techniques 543 14 Efficient Implementation 591 15 Patents and Standards 635 A Bibliography of Papers from Selected Cryptographic Forums 663 References 703 Index 775 >From the back cover: << BEGIN QUOTE >> Cryptography, in particular public-key cryptography, has emerged in the las 20 years as an important discipline that is not only the subject of an enormous amount of research, but provides the foundation for information security in many applications. Standards are emerging to meet the demands for cryptographic protection in most areas of data communications. Public- key cryptographic techniques are now in widespread use in industry, especially in the financial services industry, in the public sector, and by individuals for their personal privacy, such as in electronic mail. This Handbook will serve as a valuable reference for the novice as well as for the expert who needs a wider scope of coverage within the aread of cryptography. It is a necessary and timely guide for professionals who practice the art of cryptography. The _Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_ provides a treatment that is multifunctional: * It serves as an introduction to the more practical aspects of both conventional and public-key cryptography * It is a valuable source of the latest techniques and algorithms for the serious practitioner * It provides an integrated treatment of the field, whil still presenting each major topic as a self-contained unit * It provides a mathematical treatment to accompany practical discussions * It contains enough abstractoin to be a valuable reference for theoreticians while containing enough detail to actually allow implementation of the algorithms discussed This is the definitive cryptography reference that novice as well as experienced developers, designers, researchers, engineers, computer scientists, and mathematicials alike will find indispensable. << END QUOTE >> ~ Patrick From blancw at microsoft.com Mon Jan 27 14:13:04 1997 From: blancw at microsoft.com (Blanc Weber) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:13:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701272213.OAA07242@toad.com> From: Sandy Sandfort (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' favored solution.) ............................................... What was that? .. Blanc From jimbell at pacifier.com Mon Jan 27 14:17:52 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:17:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701272217.OAA08800@mail.pacifier.com> At 01:14 AM 1/27/97 -0600, ichudov at algebra.com wrote: >I am not sure if you posted this information in response to my request >to cite a statute that would prove that libel is a crime. > >Me> Jim Choate wrote: >Me> > >Me> > >Me> > >Me> > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that >Me> > party did not write them is a crime? >Me> >Me> cite the statute > > >These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel >is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government >cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured >(libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. On the contrary, in some jurisdictions libel is indeed a crime. However, that doesn't mean that prosecutions happen anymore, but the laws are (in some places) still on the books. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From erp at digiforest.com Mon Jan 27 14:23:13 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:23:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... In-Reply-To: <199701271947.LAA03025@toad.com> Message-ID: > I suppose if you were doing something locally, and someone wanted to be > really sneaky, they could embed something like keycopy on your machine (with > a virus or something) and get coppied every time you enter a keystroke. I > don't suppose it would be all that difficult to get a machine to run a tsr > that got kicked off every time you accessed something like, say , > PGP....Comments? Ok, just something that would be a nasty little virii in its own way... If there was a virii produced that copied down a persons keystrokes every time, and then when they logged onto the InterNet aka aachieved a PPP/Slip connection, it automatically sent (without there knowing) a copy of all the keystorkes they have made so far, and then deletes them from an encrypted file, or from within a file it has been adding them too *shrug*... .. aka Automatically sends it to say an anonymous email account or some such. Ok *shrug* jsut an idea... later..... Erp *************************************************** Hey we have fun here at hell! Check us out if your lucky: http://www.fromhell.com/ From cmaria at stevens-tech.edu Mon Jan 27 14:31:20 1997 From: cmaria at stevens-tech.edu (Ciro Maria) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:31:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701272230.RAA27944@attila.stevens-tech.edu> remove  From markm at voicenet.com Mon Jan 27 14:31:27 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:31:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderated list is missing headers Message-ID: <199701272231.OAA07671@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Lou Poppler wrote: > The arguments about imaginary quotes and libel are harder to untangle > because the moderation process seems to consume the mail headers showing > the messages' travels before reaching toad.com. I suggest that these > headers are signal not noise, and should be propagated if at all possible. > We have had problems in the past with forgeries, and should retain this > basic tool for evaluating a message's source. I agree, except I rely on this to sort the moderated and unmoderated lists into separate folders. I'm sure the bugs are still being worked out, but it would be much easier to filter if the sender header was set appropriately. Here's the procmail recipe in case anyone's interested: :0 * ^Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com { :0 * -1^1 ^Received: * 4^1 ^Received:.*from majordom at localhost.*by toad.com * ^Message-Id:.*toad.com in.cpunks :0 unedited } The number 4 should be changed depending on how many hops a message must make to reach its destination. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMu0gyyzIPc7jvyFpAQGCrAgAlIT6oSZ18sVGuMQWeszAWPE67BwMRx/1 2CLsrtpCaKfj5j+C5DsT2dpv4IhlOFOftrtCPL8KOEot5YRg3mUeUl7efwfnioeB UmM3h7Zx8W5RFZlTlhMim58G5o88jYVE3Rsov+f8nYM9hoXPDyjgoZmnG4BUn8Ca saL3ul2zO39bB4YwRmBKCeXRBzefmaowJbdC7Hl+S+uU61+Dbtbk/Fq2o5B9Gsvq wjg3QF4u+oyDCfcxdmLajL9tE6K7L2bgEkvi9kxt7AUP5e/l53epXK9cFplYF0B6 qgPd0shYmWiTSbhjQ4tw6jZkxuyxWqFX/nAHGp7Tciqp/rIkwX/tNQ== =riw1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From sandfort at crl.com Mon Jan 27 14:32:13 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:32:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Blanc Weber wrote: > From: Sandy Sandfort > > (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' > favored solution.) > ............................................... > > > What was that? Eric, would like to require a deposit ($20 was the example he gave) from subscriber/posters. Non-subscribers would not be allowed to post. Subscribers who voluntarily left the list, would get their deposit back. Subscribers who flamed twice (every dog gets one bite) would be kicked off the list and their deposit would be forfeited (or perhaps turned over to the flame victim). S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From BUSINESS at VNET.NET Mon Jan 27 14:32:21 1997 From: BUSINESS at VNET.NET (CHAMBER OF COMMERCE) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:32:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Adult Chamber of Commerce is now open Message-ID: <32ED2D00@VNET.NET> IF YOU ARE A BUSINESS OWNER WITH A WEB SITE, you should know that The Adult Chamber of Commerce represents professional businesses on the Web. The Adult Chamber of Commerce is on the Web to help you! We got your E-mail address from your Business newsgroup posting. We did not put your E-mail address on a mailing list! THE BOTTOM LINE: Chamber members see increased traffic to their Web Sites. A massive portion of the Web has Doctors, Lawyers, Accountants, and all sorts of people (buyer) visiting ADULT sites. It's just the nature of the Web. Your business can capture some of this massive traffic and direct it to your Web site through Membership in The Adult Chamber of Commerce. All member companies, Adult & Non-Adult, get listed in the Chamber member links section with an icon that indicates you do business in accordance with the Better Business Practices of The Adult Chamber of Commerce. This listing literally guarantees significant additional traffic to your Web site. Membership inThe Adult Chamber of Commerce is something you should consider if you are interested in getting greater exposure on the Web. Each company is checked out before membership is approved. Since it costs a business as little as $240 annually for membership, it's not expensive for a company to tell others that they support the only professional organization for responsible ADULT businesses. A business applies for membership at the Adult Chamber Web site and visitors regularly check to see if the company [they'e planning to buy from] is a Member in Good Standing. The Adult Chamber of Commerce web site is the place to find the BEST & most responsible companies on the Web. ============================================== Visit and Bookmark http://www.adultchamber.com ============================================== IF YOU OWN A BUSINESS, applying for MEMBERSHIP to The Adult Chamber of Commerce is easy. The Web site has an online application. Memberships are pocessed daily and increasing traffic to your Web site is as easy as becoming a member! The chamber has other services besides increasing traffic to your Web site. We design, re-design and host Web sites professionally. Visit www.adultchamber.com for the whole story and you will see why membership is a good idea for any business. If you want a brochure, leave us your name and address. You can call us to discuss membership at 516/689-2457 or 561/395-0217. THE BOTTOM LINE is that Chamber member businessessee increased traffic to their Web sites and improve sales. From cmaria at stevens-tech.edu Mon Jan 27 14:33:10 1997 From: cmaria at stevens-tech.edu (Ciro Maria) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:33:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701272230.RAA28048@attila.stevens-tech.edu> remove From Mullen Mon Jan 27 14:46:10 1997 From: Mullen (Mullen) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:46:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Handbook of Applied Cryptography Message-ID: <199701272246.OAA08096@toad.com> (My apologies if someone else has posted this information and I missed it.) _Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_, Menezes, Oorschot, Vanstone, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1997 With a foreword by R.L. Rivest Contents in Brief: Table of Contents v List of Tables xv List of Figures xix Foreword xxi Preface xxiii 1 Overview of Cryptography 1 2 Mathematical Background 49 3 Number-Theoretic Reverence Problems 87 4 Pulic-Key Parameters 133 5 Pseudorandom Bits and Sequences 169 6 Stream Ciphers 191 7 Block Ciphers 223 8 Public-Key Encryption 283 9 Hash Functions and Data Integrity 321 10 Identification and Entity Authentication 385 11 Digital Signatures 425 12 Key Establishment Protocols 489 13 Key Management Techniques 543 14 Efficient Implementation 591 15 Patents and Standards 635 A Bibliography of Papers from Selected Cryptographic Forums 663 References 703 Index 775 >From the back cover: << BEGIN QUOTE >> Cryptography, in particular public-key cryptography, has emerged in the las 20 years as an important discipline that is not only the subject of an enormous amount of research, but provides the foundation for information security in many applications. Standards are emerging to meet the demands for cryptographic protection in most areas of data communications. Public- key cryptographic techniques are now in widespread use in industry, especially in the financial services industry, in the public sector, and by individuals for their personal privacy, such as in electronic mail. This Handbook will serve as a valuable reference for the novice as well as for the expert who needs a wider scope of coverage within the aread of cryptography. It is a necessary and timely guide for professionals who practice the art of cryptography. The _Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_ provides a treatment that is multifunctional: * It serves as an introduction to the more practical aspects of both conventional and public-key cryptography * It is a valuable source of the latest techniques and algorithms for the serious practitioner * It provides an integrated treatment of the field, whil still presenting each major topic as a self-contained unit * It provides a mathematical treatment to accompany practical discussions * It contains enough abstractoin to be a valuable reference for theoreticians while containing enough detail to actually allow implementation of the algorithms discussed This is the definitive cryptography reference that novice as well as experienced developers, designers, researchers, engineers, computer scientists, and mathematicials alike will find indispensable. << END QUOTE >> ~~ Patrick From erp at digiforest.com Mon Jan 27 14:50:01 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:50:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <199701271941.LAA02719@toad.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage > son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in > college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. > Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? Well in reference to MIT.. I hope he has a 4.0 in highschool, is an allsport, has a 1600 on his SAT's, and a prefect on his ACT.. Just to even think about going there.. Let alone to include how well he'll have to do on his interviews etc.. Also you may wish to have him look again at what he wants to be before he goes to some major college such as MIT, because tuition at MIT costs approx 100,000$/4 years. Personally that is a hell of a lot, but then again *shrug*... I recommend going to a local small college, get his associates, see if that is what he still wants to do, then go on from there. I know many people that started in Computer Science and died after the first year. Now colleges that are good for Computer Sc ience.. I have heard that RIT is good.. but I'm nto sure on that.. I know pretty well positive that MIT is excellent, but when you get down to the basics MIT is more of an engineering school than a science/philosophical school which Computer Sciences falls under.. Another good school from what I've heard is UCLA.. then again you can discredit anything I've said, because I'm still a HighSchool senior myself and have been looking into Computer Criminology for the last three years, and I'm positive it is what i want so *shrug*.. Ok later... Erp **********************************************************8 See about coming from hell at: http://www.fromhell.com/ From jimbell at pacifier.com Mon Jan 27 14:52:33 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:52:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701272252.OAA08289@toad.com> At 01:14 AM 1/27/97 -0600, ichudov at algebra.com wrote: >I am not sure if you posted this information in response to my request >to cite a statute that would prove that libel is a crime. > >Me> Jim Choate wrote: >Me> > >Me> > >Me> > >Me> > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that >Me> > party did not write them is a crime? >Me> >Me> cite the statute > > >These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel >is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government >cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured >(libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. On the contrary, in some jurisdictions libel is indeed a crime. However, that doesn't mean that prosecutions happen anymore, but the laws are (in some places) still on the books. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Mon Jan 27 14:52:34 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:52:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701272252.OAA08288@toad.com> At 01:14 AM 1/27/97 -0600, ichudov at algebra.com wrote: >I am not sure if you posted this information in response to my request >to cite a statute that would prove that libel is a crime. > >Me> Jim Choate wrote: >Me> > >Me> > >Me> > >Me> > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that >Me> > party did not write them is a crime? >Me> >Me> cite the statute > > >These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel >is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government >cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured >(libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. On the contrary, in some jurisdictions libel is indeed a crime. However, that doesn't mean that prosecutions happen anymore, but the laws are (in some places) still on the books. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From sandfort at crl.crl.com Mon Jan 27 14:53:57 1997 From: sandfort at crl.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:53:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701272253.OAA08340@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Blanc Weber wrote: > From: Sandy Sandfort > > (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' > favored solution.) > ............................................... > > > What was that? Eric, would like to require a deposit ($20 was the example he gave) from subscriber/posters. Non-subscribers would not be allowed to post. Subscribers who voluntarily left the list, would get their deposit back. Subscribers who flamed twice (every dog gets one bite) would be kicked off the list and their deposit would be forfeited (or perhaps turned over to the flame victim). S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From erp at digiforest.com Mon Jan 27 14:55:17 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 14:55:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: <199701272255.OAA08389@toad.com> > I suppose if you were doing something locally, and someone wanted to be > really sneaky, they could embed something like keycopy on your machine (with > a virus or something) and get coppied every time you enter a keystroke. I > don't suppose it would be all that difficult to get a machine to run a tsr > that got kicked off every time you accessed something like, say , > PGP....Comments? Ok, just something that would be a nasty little virii in its own way... If there was a virii produced that copied down a persons keystrokes every time, and then when they logged onto the InterNet aka aachieved a PPP/Slip connection, it automatically sent (without there knowing) a copy of all the keystorkes they have made so far, and then deletes them from an encrypted file, or from within a file it has been adding them too *shrug*... .. aka Automatically sends it to say an anonymous email account or some such. Ok *shrug* jsut an idea... later..... Erp *************************************************** Hey we have fun here at hell! Check us out if your lucky: http://www.fromhell.com/ From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 15:00:15 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:00:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701272255.QAA06318@manifold.algebra.com> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' > > favored solution.) > > What was that? > > Eric, would like to require a deposit ($20 was the example he > gave) from subscriber/posters. Non-subscribers would not be > allowed to post. Subscribers who voluntarily left the list, > would get their deposit back. Subscribers who flamed twice > (every dog gets one bite) would be kicked off the list and their > deposit would be forfeited (or perhaps turned over to the flame > victim). Obviously, you will not be able to effectively collect from non-posters, since anyone would be able to resell subscriptions. Also, anyone can create a usenet newsgroups like alt.cypherpunks, or cypherpunks.general, which would be free. Lots of competing cypherpunks mailing lists would spring up. You would make some money out of it (like maybe $700 or so), but would waste so much time that it would not be worth the trouble. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 15:11:04 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:11:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701272307.RAA06428@manifold.algebra.com> moscow state university in russia is not bad also. they teach lots of theory... which is good. - Igor. From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 27 15:44:32 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:44:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTP security Message-ID: <854404295.619789.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > I was thinking about the thread we had a week or so ago about OTPs. Say > I'm going to burn a CD of what I think are cryptographically random bits, > but somehow I end up with part of my stream being predictable (say every > 16th bit). What does this do to the security of my CD? Depends on how that 16th bit is related to the other bits and whether these predictable bits give any information about the other bits on the disk. If we assume all the other bits are true random and that the 16th bits are predictable only in that they can be predicted left and right but do not depend upon the other bits not in positions 16, 32, 48, 16n etc... we can just discard them and use the rest obtaining perfect security. We can even use all the bits and all we lose is one bit every two bytes and therefore if we are calling the bytes ASCII and say adding mod 13 we only have "imperfect" security on every 2nd character where there are 2^7 eg. 128 possible characters. Suprisingly this yields perfect security as there are still a number of possible pads which lead to reasonable and plausible decryptions. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 15:56:08 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:56:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Senator Exon Message-ID: <199701272355.PAA28597@mailmasher.com> Dr.Dopefiend Viscera K'ock`OfTheMinute is a pimply dweeb sitting at a computer chortling at his own imagined cleverness. \|/ @ @ -oOO-(_)-OOo- Dr.Dopefiend Viscera K'ock`OfTheMinute From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 15:59:53 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 15:59:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701272359.PAA09886@toad.com> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' > > favored solution.) > > What was that? > > Eric, would like to require a deposit ($20 was the example he > gave) from subscriber/posters. Non-subscribers would not be > allowed to post. Subscribers who voluntarily left the list, > would get their deposit back. Subscribers who flamed twice > (every dog gets one bite) would be kicked off the list and their > deposit would be forfeited (or perhaps turned over to the flame > victim). Obviously, you will not be able to effectively collect from non-posters, since anyone would be able to resell subscriptions. Also, anyone can create a usenet newsgroups like alt.cypherpunks, or cypherpunks.general, which would be free. Lots of competing cypherpunks mailing lists would spring up. You would make some money out of it (like maybe $700 or so), but would waste so much time that it would not be worth the trouble. - Igor. From erp at digiforest.com Mon Jan 27 16:03:06 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:03:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701280003.QAA10002@toad.com> On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage > son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in > college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. > Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? Well in reference to MIT.. I hope he has a 4.0 in highschool, is an allsport, has a 1600 on his SAT's, and a prefect on his ACT.. Just to even think about going there.. Let alone to include how well he'll have to do on his interviews etc.. Also you may wish to have him look again at what he wants to be before he goes to some major college such as MIT, because tuition at MIT costs approx 100,000$/4 years. Personally that is a hell of a lot, but then again *shrug*... I recommend going to a local small college, get his associates, see if that is what he still wants to do, then go on from there. I know many people that started in Computer Science and died after the first year. Now colleges that are good for Computer Sc ience.. I have heard that RIT is good.. but I'm nto sure on that.. I know pretty well positive that MIT is excellent, but when you get down to the basics MIT is more of an engineering school than a science/philosophical school which Computer Sciences falls under.. Another good school from what I've heard is UCLA.. then again you can discredit anything I've said, because I'm still a HighSchool senior myself and have been looking into Computer Criminology for the last three years, and I'm positive it is what i want so *shrug*.. Ok later... Erp **********************************************************8 See about coming from hell at: http://www.fromhell.com/ From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Mon Jan 27 16:09:54 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:09:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <32EC6BAF.2674@gte.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > > > > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > > > > > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots > > > > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > > > > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; > > > > The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- > > > distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can > > > go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but > > > it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. > > > i don't see why she would wear a bikini if she already is tan. > > She just goes to show off right??? California is know for > > very beautiful girls ... I like the pale look :) > > There are two really major beaches in the L.A. area that I know of. > One is Bolsa Chica, several miles long, north of Huntington Beach, > which attracts most of the young'uns south of L.A., and Zuma in the > northmost points of Malibu, which gets a lot of Valley people > (fer sure). To quote the L.A. Weekly of a few years ago, in a > "Best of L.A." review, "Why do all those hot young girls go to Zuma? > Because that's where all the hot young boys are." I see. > But the real babes don't go there. They get skates and nifty little > costumes and zip up and down the boardwalks in Santa Monica and > Pacific Palisades mostly, in case some hot producer/director should > happen along. I see. From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 27 16:10:57 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:10:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <854404298.619818.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > I distinctly recall how Paul used to call for censoring me. If he's > changed his mind and really doesn't think that anyone should be censored, > it's a welcome development - even if it was brought on by the sandfart > censoring Paul. That is strange indeed as I distinctly recall saying, in as many words, I was "Happy you had stopped posting", as at that time nearly everything you posted was dreck as far as I was concerned. I also recall calling John Gilmore a Fascist censor and several other such things over the incident when you were forcibly unsubscribed from the list. I never advocated censorship, I was merely relieved you had stopped posting so much dreck to the list. Anyway, I don`t want a flame war over it so we`ll just agree to differ over this. > > > I used to respect Gilmore until this series of incidents (unsubscribing > > > me, turning list moderated). Now I only have disdain for him. > > > > I agree entirely, Gilmore was a respected man (despite the EFF being > > a corporate whore) who threw any respect and admiration others had > > for him away. > > I wonder what he thinks he got in exchange... A nice clean list where he and his bunch of "chums" can post whatever slanderous flames they want but the victims are not allowed to respond. > > > Quite a few people have expressed interest in re-creating an unmoderated > > > cypherpunks list at another site if Gilmore decided to stick to his > > > "moderation experiment". > > > > I notice and appreciate the quotes around "moderation experiment", > > this is, without doubt, a permenant measure to silence members of the > > list who dare to offer criticism of anyone an element of {x: x a > > friend or co-censor of John Gilmore} > > Yes - clearly the personality of the submitter is the most important > factor in moderator's rejections, not even the content. Indeed, content based censorship is of an order way above (if any censorship is better than any other) censorship based on subjective criterion such as personality. At least with content based censorship the censored version of the list would be readable because all the flaming and spam would have been cut, as it is all it offers is a good statistical picture of who is in favour with the list fuhrer and his pawns. > > I do not have the resources to run such an unmoderated list but I > > hope someone on this list does and is good enough to start such a > > list, cypherpunks is a shell of what it once was. > > I notice that the sandfart has been challenging his enemies to create > an alternative mailing list. I wonder what their contingency plan is. > Without a doubt, such a competing list would be mailbombed and flooded > with garbage by Gilmore and his entourage. What else? Presumably a number of mailing list chains would be set up to bounce the "flamers", that is people not members of the cypherpunks "in crowd" submissions to the new lists. > > Also, please note this message will be junked onto cypherpunks-flames > > even though it contains no flames or flame bait because it dares to > > criticise the censorship of the list (once again Sandy, I give you an > > opportunity to prove me wrong). > > The sandfart has proven me right already. As I said, I think we're > paying too much attention to him and his censorship, and he's just > a front for Gilmore anyway. Hmm, anyway, once again if anyone on this list has the resources to set up a new uncensored list I ask them to do so as soon as possible, this list is hardly worth the time it takes to read it now. Anyone who had anything worthwhile to say is so disgusted with the censorship they are either tied up in a thread like this criticising it or have chosen not to post at all. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Mon Jan 27 16:13:37 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:13:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <32EC6D24.2FD4@gte.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > > > wrong. > > > well, seems D. Thorn agrees with the song: 'california girls' > > Depends on where you go, and what time of year. So. Cal. is no doubt > a revolving door for the girl markets, especially on the beach board- > walks, or on San Vicente where a lot of joggers run. seems, Americans like their own women , which is all they have seen maybe... > > Anywhere else and it's no different from Cleveland or Pittsburgh. Well, can you say you've been 'anywhere else'? Regards, From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 16:17:38 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:17:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Lucifer Message-ID: <199701280017.QAA04432@mailmasher.com> Dimitri Vinyl K{rap} Of The Moment styles his facial hair to look more like pubic hair. v-v-v-@@-v-v-v (..) Dimitri Vinyl K{rap} Of The Moment From bigboy at gte.net Mon Jan 27 16:18:42 1997 From: bigboy at gte.net (Ernie Steefan) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:18:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [[[ Worldwide Computer Based Business ! ]]] Message-ID: If you have a PC and want to achieve real Financial Independence then you MUST take a look at our Powerful Computer Based Business. No matter who you are or where you live, Our Business is Universal. We distribute software and information all over the world through E-Mail and the Internet. Our program called PC-SUPER-MLM is the most simple and powerful MONEY MAKING software in the world!. of course, you don't have to believe me until you see the actual program. Reply to this message and i will send you a FRE copy of the PC-SUPER-MLM software via E-Mail as an attachement. Have a great day !. From thytang at computer-services.com Mon Jan 27 16:18:54 1997 From: thytang at computer-services.com (Thy Tang) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:18:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <01BC0C7F.7EABCEE0@pm5_03.computer-services.com> unsubcrise From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Mon Jan 27 16:24:33 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:24:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Censorship on Cypherpunks Message-ID: <199701280024.QAA25228@sirius.infonex.com> Dr.Dirtbag L}eninist{ Vermin K}ock{ Of The Month does NOT eat pussy. He only eats asshole if it's got a big dick up in front. Whoever calls him bisexual is a fucking liar. He likes to suck cocks in front of an audience. ,/ \, ((__,-"""-,__)) `--)~ ~(--` .-'( )`-, Dr.Dirtbag L}eninist{ Vermin K}ock{ Of The Month `~~`d\ /b`~~` | | (6___6) `---` From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 16:28:07 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:28:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IMPORTANT] New keyserver available Message-ID: <199701280027.QAA07921@mailmasher.com> Dr.Deviant Vulis K>ocksucker< Of The Minute studied yoga back- stretching exercises for five years so he could blow himself (nobody else will). _.._ _.._ ,','"_:./\/\,'_ `.`. /_:--:_ ( oo ) _:--:_\ Dr.Deviant Vulis K>ocksucker< Of The Minute /' `'`vv'`' `\ From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jan 27 16:39:55 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:39:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Handbook of Applied Cryptography Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970128003428.006b7938@pop.pipeline.com> Here's the publisher's URL for Handbook of Applied Cryptography, which amplifies Patrick's summary, and gives ordering info. http://www.crcpress.com/PRODS/8523.HTM Just reading the mouthwatering summaries and the extensive, detailed list of topics is a good primer on crypto. From nobody at replay.com Mon Jan 27 16:47:11 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Name Withheld by Request) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:47:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Reuters article: "Unstoppable Internet will defy controls" In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701280036.BAA06228@basement.replay.com> >More broadly, modern governments rely on their ability to control >information and money to maintain control over their citizens. >But does the Net mean we no longer need government in its present form? The German law professor Alexander Rossnagel has published an article titled "Globale Datennetze: Ohnmacht des Staates - Selbstschutz der Buerger" (global networks: state's impotence, citizens' self-protection) in Zeitschrift fuer Rechtspolitik 1997, p. 26 ff. He describes that decentral networks are difficult to control, and anonymizers, encryption and steganography can be used to defy surveillance. "[The state] can neither enforce matters of public interest, nor offer protection to its citizens", including protection of privacy and legally protected secrets. The state cannot effectively face law violations: "If it somewhere suppresses information, it will be 'mirrored' by many other servers world-wide. If it blocks communication lines, the message will find a way around. Sattelite transmission also renders the question of location almost irrelevant. Theresa Orlowski was denied a license for her porn channel here. Now she is broadcasting from Britain. In cyberspace, functions of social relevance, such as protection of minors, can no longer be fulfilled by the state. They are transferred to the parents exclusively." "The state can only interevene where the immaterial world of the network touches the physical world: It can arrest criminals, seize devices and data storage, when these physically are in its control. It can enforce adherance to its laws where it physically can exersize its power. But in the incorporeal world of the network, to a large extend it is powerless. All these examples indicate a new fact: The networks constitute a new incorporeal social space. Increasingly more social contacts, economic and legal exchanges are being transferred to it. In it, conditions are different from in the social relationships of the physical world. In this new world, the state has no means of coercion, no monopoly of power, and no sovereignty." "Law to be enforced requires power. The democratic constitutional state depends on sovereignty and obediency to laws. Only with these it can universally enforce democratic decisions and protect the citizens' basic rights from violations by third parties. To guarantee this is the fundamental reason for the modern state to exist. Its protective mission continues to apply. However, it has expanded with the civilisatoric development. With Hobbes, the focus was on the procetion of life and limb, with Locke the protection of freedom and property were added, and in this century, facing new threats, the protection of privacy. [... The states'] sovereignty is based on the authority to exclusively exercise physical power in [their territory]. This sovereignty has limits in the immaterial space of global networks. But when the citizen no longer receives the state's protection in the special sphere of the networks and the state can no more enforce matters of public interest there, then its basic legitimation in so far is in danger. According to Thomas Hobbes, 'the citizen's obligation to the sovereign can ... only last as long as he is capable of protecting the citizens'." But that would also endanger democracy and the constitional state. Stating that the normative strategy at large is obsolete, the author proposes new solotions: "When the democratic constitutional state can no longer reliably protect its citizens in the new social space of the networks, in compensation it must enable them to protect themselves." Information and communications technology offers various means of protection: * encryption and steganography * digital signatures * untraceable pseudonyms * certified electronic mail * ecash * software agents * connectivity management programs [whatever that is...] * cellular phones without location data * PICS * secure portable user-controlled devices that support these measures "Some of these measures - for example the encryption program PGP - can be used without any advance concession. The state only has to abstain from impeding regulations. Others - such as digital signatures - depend on an infrastructure that allows the individual to use these protective measures. The citizen of information society still depends on infrastructural prerequsites. But there is a fundamental difference in whether the individual can decide about using self-controlled protective measures himself, or the state or an other large organization offers protection that he cannot influence." "In order to protect and preserve the /old/ goals of freedom and self-determination in the /new/ social space of the networks, law must permit and support /new/ technologies." The article ends with the author's vision of a 'civil information society' as a free democratic society where basic rights are guaranteed by technology. "In this information society, the state has a limited, but fundamental role. [...] it creates a framework for the citizens to protect themselves. Thus they are enabled to freely inform themselves, solve conflicts in free self-organization, and negotiate and practice mutual security without depending on a big brother." From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 16:57:08 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:57:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STEGO] PGP 3 Message-ID: <199701280056.QAA16088@mailmasher.com> Dr.Dildo L[oser] Vegetable K[ankersore]OfTheMinute has been fired for anally raping officemates. \ o/\_ Dr.Dildo L[oser] Vegetable K[ankersore]OfTheMinute <\__,\ '\, | From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 16:57:42 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:57:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ANNOUNCE] overview.htm Message-ID: <199701280057.QAA16330@mailmasher.com> Dogfucker L[amer] Vinegar K[rud]OfTheMonth died of AIDS last night with his queer lover. /// (0 0) ____ooO_(_)_Ooo__ Dogfucker L[amer] Vinegar K[rud]OfTheMonth From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 16:58:23 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:58:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: X.500 Message-ID: <199701280058.QAA16548@mailmasher.com> Dr.Dimitri Vicious K[reep]OfTheMonth's wee-wee is so tiny that only his mommy is allowed to touch it. v-v-v-@@-v-v-v (..) Dr.Dimitri Vicious K[reep]OfTheMonth From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 16:59:00 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 16:59:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular location Message-ID: <199701280058.QAA16809@mailmasher.com> Dead Vasectomy KOTM has been fired for stealing blow jobs. (~\/~) /~'\ /`~\ _ _ `\ /'( ` ) ( `\/' ) `' `\ /' `\ /' Dead Vasectomy KOTM `\ /' `\/' ' From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Mon Jan 27 17:02:30 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:02:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTP security Message-ID: <199701280102.RAA11550@toad.com> > I was thinking about the thread we had a week or so ago about OTPs. Say > I'm going to burn a CD of what I think are cryptographically random bits, > but somehow I end up with part of my stream being predictable (say every > 16th bit). What does this do to the security of my CD? Depends on how that 16th bit is related to the other bits and whether these predictable bits give any information about the other bits on the disk. If we assume all the other bits are true random and that the 16th bits are predictable only in that they can be predicted left and right but do not depend upon the other bits not in positions 16, 32, 48, 16n etc... we can just discard them and use the rest obtaining perfect security. We can even use all the bits and all we lose is one bit every two bytes and therefore if we are calling the bytes ASCII and say adding mod 13 we only have "imperfect" security on every 2nd character where there are 2^7 eg. 128 possible characters. Suprisingly this yields perfect security as there are still a number of possible pads which lead to reasonable and plausible decryptions. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From bs-org at c2.net Mon Jan 27 17:05:02 1997 From: bs-org at c2.net (bs-org at c2.net) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:05:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Handbook of Applied Cryptography Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970128010431.25a74260@c2.net> Can anybody inform me where to get this book in Europa or can anybody buy it in USA and send it to me. I wil post the money immediately plus shipping At 17:10 1997-01-27 -0500, Mullen, Patrick wrote: >(My apologies if someone else has posted this information and I missed >it.) > >_Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_, Menezes, Oorschot, Vanstone, > CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1997 > >With a foreword by R.L. Rivest > >Contents in Brief: >Table of Contents v >List of Tables xv >List of Figures xix >Foreword xxi >Preface xxiii > >1 Overview of Cryptography 1 >2 Mathematical Background 49 >3 Number-Theoretic Reverence > Problems 87 >4 Pulic-Key Parameters 133 >5 Pseudorandom Bits and > Sequences 169 >6 Stream Ciphers 191 >7 Block Ciphers 223 >8 Public-Key Encryption 283 >9 Hash Functions and Data > Integrity 321 >10 Identification and Entity > Authentication 385 >11 Digital Signatures 425 >12 Key Establishment > Protocols 489 >13 Key Management Techniques 543 >14 Efficient Implementation 591 >15 Patents and Standards 635 >A Bibliography of Papers from > Selected Cryptographic > Forums 663 > >References 703 >Index 775 > >>From the back cover: > ><< BEGIN QUOTE >> >Cryptography, in particular public-key cryptography, has emerged in the >las 20 years as an important discipline that is not only the subject of >an >enormous amount of research, but provides the foundation for information >security in many applications. Standards are emerging to meet the >demands >for cryptographic protection in most areas of data communications. >Public- >key cryptographic techniques are now in widespread use in industry, >especially in the financial services industry, in the public sector, and >by >individuals for their personal privacy, such as in electronic mail. >This >Handbook will serve as a valuable reference for the novice as well as >for >the expert who needs a wider scope of coverage within the aread of >cryptography. It is a necessary and timely guide for professionals who >practice the art of cryptography. > >The _Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_ provides a treatment that >is multifunctional: > >* It serves as an introduction to the more practical aspects of > both conventional and public-key cryptography > >* It is a valuable source of the latest techniques and algorithms > for the serious practitioner > >* It provides an integrated treatment of the field, whil still > presenting each major topic as a self-contained unit > >* It provides a mathematical treatment to accompany > practical discussions > >* It contains enough abstractoin to be a valuable reference for > theoreticians while containing enough detail to actually allow > implementation of the algorithms discussed > >This is the definitive cryptography reference that novice as well as >experienced >developers, designers, researchers, engineers, computer scientists, and >mathematicials alike will find indispensable. ><< END QUOTE >> > >~~ Patrick > > From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Mon Jan 27 17:07:54 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (Nurdane Oksas) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:07:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) Message-ID: <199701280107.RAA11760@toad.com> On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > > > wrong. > > > well, seems D. Thorn agrees with the song: 'california girls' > > Depends on where you go, and what time of year. So. Cal. is no doubt > a revolving door for the girl markets, especially on the beach board- > walks, or on San Vicente where a lot of joggers run. seems, Americans like their own women , which is all they have seen maybe... > > Anywhere else and it's no different from Cleveland or Pittsburgh. Well, can you say you've been 'anywhere else'? Regards, From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 27 17:22:00 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:22:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: public_law_other_650.html Message-ID: <199702280121.TAA04366@einstein> [ISMAP] [INLINE] Libel and Slander Tape #650 _________________________________________________________________ On this tape I will discuss libel and slander. It is for your general information only. It is not legal advice. It will give a general outline of the law on the subject as it applies in Ontario. If you have a legal problem, you should talk to a lawyer. We all have the right to have our reputation protected against false statements made against us. This protection is given to us by the law of defamation. On this tape I'll talk about defamation in both its forms - libel and slander. Libel can be a crime, but this section of the Criminal Code is rarely used, so I'll talk about libel and slander only in their civil context - the person defamed suing the defamer; asking for money as compensation for the injury to his reputation. Generally speaking, a defamatory statement is one which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. For example, if someone calls you a cheat in your business dealings, you probably have a lawsuit against him. That is, you do if he says it to someone other than you. It's not enough that the statement be made to the person it's about. It has to be communicated to another. What's the difference between libel and slander? Broadly speaking, if the defamatory statement is made in some permanent form, such as a newspaper or a letter, then it's libel. If it's in a transitory form, such as a hand gesture or the spoken word, then it's slander. But a defamatory statement that's broadcast on radio or television will be libel, not slander, even though it's spoken and not written. In the past, there was a good reason to know the difference between libel and slander. Today, if you can prove that you have been libelled, and there is no good defence, then the law will presume you have suffered damages and will fix an amount as compensation for your loss of reputation. In other words, you do not have to prove damages for actual financial loss. For many years, in cases of slander, you had to prove actual financial loss before you would be awarded damages under the law. In part, this was because slanderous statements were not considered permanent and therefore would not have as great an impact as libellous words, gestures or portrayals. Today, under the Ontario Libel and Slander Act, the requirement to prove damages in slander cases has been removed in certain situations. Mainly, these include cases where words are chosen to call into question the reputation of a person in relation to that persons office, profession, calling, trade or business. Therefore, if you could prove that Bill told John you were a cheat and then John refused to enter into a contract with you because of the statement, you would be compensated for the loss of contract and reputation. You would have to prove it was Bill's intention to attack your business reputation, but otherwise, damages would be awarded outright. Unfortunately, the Ontario Libel and Slander Act does not remove completely the requirement to prove damage, in all slander cases. Therefore, it is important to discuss your case with a lawyer to determine how yours would be treated under the law. We said earlier that the law protects a person's reputation. But obviously this protection can have the effect of restricting other rights, such as free speech. So the law tries to balance these competing interests. In certain circumstances, even though a defamatory statement may have been made and a person may have suffered injury to reputation, other interests are considered more important. In those cases, the law provides certain defences that can protect a defamer from liability. The most common defences are: truth (known in law as "justification"); absolute privilege; qualified privilege; and fair comment. The first is the easiest. A statement might well lower your reputation, but if it is the truth then anyone is free to say it. Additionally, if you consent to the statement being made, you cannot later argue you have been defamed. The second defence - that of absolute privilege - covers statements given in evidence at a trial, or made in Parliament, to give the two prime examples. And it extends to the fair and accurate reporting of those statements - the newspaper report of a trial, for instance. Our systems of justice and parliamentary democracy demand that in those situations participants must be free to speak candidly, without having to worry about risking a lawsuit for defamation. The defence of qualified privilege covers other situations. For instance - say a former employee of yours has given your name as a reference, so you get a call from someone who wants to hire him. He asks your opinion. You say: "Well, frankly, I always suspected he was stealing from me." That's an occasion of qualified privilege . You had a moral duty to give your honest opinion and the caller had a legitimate interest in hearing it. As long as you acted in good faith and said what you honestly believed you would have a valid defence to an action for defamation. Finally, there's the defence of fair comment. We are all free to comment freely - even harshly - on matters of legitimate public interest as long as our comments are made honestly, not maliciously, and are based on true facts. For example, say a columnist writes that an MP secretly holds shares in a company which has just got a large government contract. Then he comments that the MP is deceitful and should resign his seat. Well, if in fact the MP owns no shares in the company, then the columnist may be open to a lawsuit. But if the facts are true, that is the MP does own the shares, and the columnist honestly believes bases on those facts that the MP is deceitful and should resign, then he will have the defence of fair comment. If you intend to sue for a libel in a newspaper or a broadcast you must give notice to all those you intend to sue within six weeks of learning of the publication or broadcast, and you must specify in your notice the nature of your complaint, with specific reference to the actual words of which you complained. As well, you must commence your action within three months of learning of the publication or the broadcast. Failure to conform with either of these two steps will deprive you of any right to sue. In cases not involving newspapers or broadcasts, you must commence your action against the defaming party within 2 years of the words being spoken or written. Finally, there's the matter of apology. When a libel has been published in a newspaper or other periodical, or in a radio or television broadcast, the publisher or broadcaster can limit the amount of the damages the broadcaster may end up paying by publishing or broadcasting a full apology at the earliest opportunity. Not only newspapers and broadcasters can limit their damages by offering an apology before the action begins. Any defaming party can offer an apology in the hopes of having their damages reduced. The law of defamation protects your right to your good name. If a person makes a false statement to another to your discredit you can sue for damages. But because of other competing rights in our society, such as free speech and fair comment, there are cases where even the most defamatory statement will not give rise to an award of damages. If you think you have been defamed, you should talk to a lawyer. Home Search Feedback What's New Copyright & Disclaimer About This Site From babeview at ntview.com Mon Jan 27 17:22:20 1997 From: babeview at ntview.com (babeview at ntview.com) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:22:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701272215.QAA28200@hermes.ntview.com> From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 17:26:17 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:26:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701280126.RAA12277@toad.com> moscow state university in russia is not bad also. they teach lots of theory... which is good. - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 27 17:51:00 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:51:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Blanc Weber writes: > From: Sandy Sandfort > > (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' > favored solution.) > ............................................... > > What was that? Eric Hughes struck me as being smarter than Gilmore, so I too would like to know what his "favored solution" was. Didn't I have dinner with him once? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 27 17:53:08 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 17:53:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701271426.GAA23803@toad.com> Message-ID: blanc writes: > From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. > ........................................................ > > 1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? Assassination politics is certainlyhighly crypto-relevant (being an important application of anonymity and untraceable payments). It's of interest to a number of participants in the forum. So, why not? > 2) Why do you suppose the Iraqis haven't already thought of doing this > themselves? Perhaps because they love Saddam, who really is a great guy. Stop listening to what U.S.gubmint and media tell you and use your brain. What did Saddam do to _you? > 3) The Mafia uses this method all the time - why then haven't they achieved > a more rational society among themselves? The Mafia in the U.S. doesn't work. The sicilian Mafia is very successful at assassinating any public officials that fucks with it. > 4) Weren't governments (like the U.S.) instituted to prevent this sort of > thing (even if they don't work out as expected)? i.e., there were systems > of courts and lawyers and such instituted to openly deal with "criminal" > activity so that a) people could receive assistance against low-life > degenerate killers, and b) it could be proven that the accused were indeed > deserving of punishment. When I was taking political science at Columbia, one of my most memorable insights came from reading Aeschil's tragedies. Consider this recurrent thread: why are people rude on highways, and is shooting them justified? I claim that if a driver felt that the likelihood of him getting a ticket for cutting people off was high enough, they wouldn't do it. But of course the cops are busy chasing the drug dealers :-), so the only remaining deterrent is the likelihood that someone will shoot you for cutting them off (which happens occasionally). > Humans being what they are, this hasn't worked like it's supposed to, but > the point is that there is a reason why such ideas for systems of justice > were introduced in the first place. That reason, as I eloquently read in > a book, was "So That Reason May Live". That is, so that people who choose > to live in a "society" may do so by the method of solving problems through > the application of intelligence, rather than merely knocking each other off > because a voting majority decides they don't like someone. Re-read your Hobbes - but don't believe him. The state did not come about because the people thought they'd be better off under it. The state came about as one tribe conquered and enslaved another tribe; and gradually most members of the winning tribe became slaves too. > Destructive people often ascend to positions of power not simply because > they are ruthless, but because they have 1) many sycophantic followers and > 2) many ignorant, vulnerable people unable to prevent it. You might be > able to kill off one Saddam, but potentially many others would be waiting > in the wings to take his place. The situation surrounding the existence > of someone like Saddam is part of the contributing factors which keeps him > there, not simply that one man himself. It was the same with Hitler and > with so many others - they don't just have an excess of "power" > concentrated within themselves which puts them in positions of control over > others - there will have been many people who will have helped put them > there, expecting to derive benefits from it. I don't like your Saddam example, having much admiration for the man, but again this goes back to the perceived likelihood of future assassination. If Saddam is killed in an unlikely event, he will be succeeded by someone who does not fear assassination. If all potential successors are convinced that the rubout can be repeated, they won't go for the job. Remember, the purpose of "terrorism" is not just to kill someone, but to "terrorize". > And what will be done about all those people who made this "power" > possible? You don't just kill the one man and be done with it - you have > to also "kill" the conditions which maintained him. You rub out enough key people and terrorize their potential successors into not wanting to take over their jobs, and the system collapses. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From cmaria at stevens-tech.edu Mon Jan 27 18:03:18 1997 From: cmaria at stevens-tech.edu (Ciro Maria) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:03:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <199701271941.LAA02719@toad.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage > son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in > college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. > Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? > > > Yeah Stevens Institute in Hoboken. Its pretty good I got there. Also Caltech is good, I don't really know which else. From bs-org at c2.net Mon Jan 27 18:15:07 1997 From: bs-org at c2.net (bs-org at c2.net) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:15:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Handbook of Applied Cryptography Message-ID: <199701280215.SAA13503@toad.com> Can anybody inform me where to get this book in Europa or can anybody buy it in USA and send it to me. I wil post the money immediately plus shipping At 17:10 1997-01-27 -0500, Mullen, Patrick wrote: >(My apologies if someone else has posted this information and I missed >it.) > >_Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_, Menezes, Oorschot, Vanstone, > CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1997 > >With a foreword by R.L. Rivest > >Contents in Brief: >Table of Contents v >List of Tables xv >List of Figures xix >Foreword xxi >Preface xxiii > >1 Overview of Cryptography 1 >2 Mathematical Background 49 >3 Number-Theoretic Reverence > Problems 87 >4 Pulic-Key Parameters 133 >5 Pseudorandom Bits and > Sequences 169 >6 Stream Ciphers 191 >7 Block Ciphers 223 >8 Public-Key Encryption 283 >9 Hash Functions and Data > Integrity 321 >10 Identification and Entity > Authentication 385 >11 Digital Signatures 425 >12 Key Establishment > Protocols 489 >13 Key Management Techniques 543 >14 Efficient Implementation 591 >15 Patents and Standards 635 >A Bibliography of Papers from > Selected Cryptographic > Forums 663 > >References 703 >Index 775 > >>From the back cover: > ><< BEGIN QUOTE >> >Cryptography, in particular public-key cryptography, has emerged in the >las 20 years as an important discipline that is not only the subject of >an >enormous amount of research, but provides the foundation for information >security in many applications. Standards are emerging to meet the >demands >for cryptographic protection in most areas of data communications. >Public- >key cryptographic techniques are now in widespread use in industry, >especially in the financial services industry, in the public sector, and >by >individuals for their personal privacy, such as in electronic mail. >This >Handbook will serve as a valuable reference for the novice as well as >for >the expert who needs a wider scope of coverage within the aread of >cryptography. It is a necessary and timely guide for professionals who >practice the art of cryptography. > >The _Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_ provides a treatment that >is multifunctional: > >* It serves as an introduction to the more practical aspects of > both conventional and public-key cryptography > >* It is a valuable source of the latest techniques and algorithms > for the serious practitioner > >* It provides an integrated treatment of the field, whil still > presenting each major topic as a self-contained unit > >* It provides a mathematical treatment to accompany > practical discussions > >* It contains enough abstractoin to be a valuable reference for > theoreticians while containing enough detail to actually allow > implementation of the algorithms discussed > >This is the definitive cryptography reference that novice as well as >experienced >developers, designers, researchers, engineers, computer scientists, and >mathematicials alike will find indispensable. ><< END QUOTE >> > >~~ Patrick > > From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 18:30:35 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:30:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <32ecee29303e002@noc.tc.umn.edu> Message-ID: <32ED8144.61B0@sk.sympatico.ca> Kevin L Prigge wrote: >. The purpose of this list was > and should be discussion of cryptography and related issues. Your view seems to be contradictory to that of Sandy. Sandy has stated that s/he does not censor the list according to crypto- relevancy. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 18:31:40 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:31:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32ED8048.4E50@sk.sympatico.ca> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > Apparently, Toto does not know very much about John or me or our > relationships with the "Establishment." Unfortunately, I know a little 'too much' about you and John and your relationships with the Establishment. But as long as I don't think about it at the dinner table, it doesn't affect my appetite. > I can't speak for John, but You do so all of the time. It seems, rather, that John cannot speak for himself (or is too embarrassed to do so). > I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the > extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be > run. No, Sandy, it is yourself and John who are 'telling' others how this list 'will' be run. You seem to be projecting your own motivations upon anyone who 'expresses' any unflattering opinion of the the censorship process you have instituted. > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > more than homesteading. It must be nice, Sandy, having the power and control over the list that enables you to fling insults at others and then direct them to others only at your own whim and discretion. I guess that it is every list-dictator's dream to have the power to send a big FUCK YOU to one portion of the list, and send a portrait of themself as Mother Teresa to another portion of the list. Toto From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Mon Jan 27 18:31:58 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:31:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTP security Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970127213110.00a07440@gateway.grumman.com> Paul replied: >Depends on how that 16th bit is related to the other bits and whether >these predictable bits give any information about the other bits on >the disk. Yes, I had figured that if the bits depended on eachother, then it would blow the whole system. [Yet another case of my fingers lagging behind my brain.] What I was thinking was more along the lines of something like: 1.You've got 16 hardware devices that each generate random noise. 2.One of the devices fails (or is sabotaged) and emits a predictable stream (10101...) 3.The other 15 devices are just fine, and the stream generated by one device does not effect the stream of another. 4.You do not know of the (failure/sabotage) until *after* you've generated your encyrted documents and they are out of your hands. So the revamped question is: How secure are those documents now? _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ Good evening... as a duly appointed representative of the city, county and state of New York, I order you to cease any and all supernatural activity and return forthwith to your place or origin, or to the nearest convenient parallel dimension. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 18:32:18 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:32:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderated list is missing headers In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32ED7B88.6093@sk.sympatico.ca> Lou Poppler wrote: > > The arguments about imaginary quotes and libel are harder to untangle > because the moderation process seems to consume the mail headers showing > the messages' travels before reaching toad.com. I suggest that these > headers are signal not noise, and should be propagated if at all possible. > We have had problems in the past with forgeries, and should retain this > basic tool for evaluating a message's source. The header information, on all of the lists, has been changed in order to make it more difficult for list members to keep track of what is going on behind the Electromagnetic Curtain. A simple example is the fact that, originally, a quick glance at the header was sufficient to recognize which messages were sorted to the flames list and were sent out by toad.com from this list. This has since been changed to make the process of censorship more obtuse. Your complaint about it being difficult to 'untangle' certain message threads seems to stem from the fact that you have chosen to receive only a cypher-world-view that has been censored before you receive it. The purpose behind censorship on the list is for the censoring party to be able to spoon-feed you only what they deem fit for you to read. Given the haphazard methods with which the censorship is being instituted, it is not in the best interest of the censors to make it easy for the list members to track the course of the various postings. Toto From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 18:34:23 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:34:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Bell Curve Message-ID: <199701280233.SAA12120@mailmasher.com> .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. .-. --/---\---/---\---/---\---/---\---/---\---/---\---/---\---/- `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' `-' From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 27 18:51:10 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:51:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy Message-ID: <199702280250.UAA04550@einstein> Hi, I have received several private emails inquiring into what possible crypto relevance the recent exchange over libel/slander and the law. It is clear that even in democratic countries like Canada (not know as a freedom of speech protectorate) slander/libel is covered under criminal codes. While it is true that currently these statutes are not heavily used, if at all, this will change as businesses and special interest groups move even further onto electronic networks. Consider the zealous use of the law by the CoS. Ask Julf if the ramifications are not 'real world'. Consider a trial where a person is purported to have altered a transmission by some party. It is not in the juries best interest to rule in the favor of anyone other than the person claiming the damage. Why you might ask? Simply because they are going to see themselves in that same situation and will want to know that they are protected both in spirit as well as actuality. What company will want to use an environment where their contracts and other exchanges can not only be viewed by unknown third parties but are subject to a man in the middle attack, potentialy ruining a company. Consider the ramifications in a political venue. Now some will quickly point out that they can encrypt the entire document, hardly suitable for web pages and other forms of advertisment. I predict that within the next five years these slander/libel laws will be used by some organization to prosecute defamation of their Internet presence (eg web page graffitti). Within 10 years this area will be one of the hotest areas of the new communications law. Now some have held that list operators and such will be protected, most probably not in reality. Consider, we live in a time where a person can get drunk and kill somebody with their automobile and the bar or store they bought the drink(s) from can be charged. There is a current trend in the legal industry to find the person that is easiest to prosecute in the chain of events and it has nothing to do with personal responsibility or other quaint but possibly naive views. I want to thank Toto for acting as the unknowing and unwilling dupe in my taking advantage of his emotional outburst and its results, it wasn't personal I was simply trying to create a suitable environment to make my point. It was a happenstance occurance I could not resist taking advantage of. It is clear that here we have a lawyer in Canada who is not even aware that there is a little used criminal statute in the country he practices in which could be used by citizens sufficiently motivated and having suitable quantities of cash at hand to pursue the matter. This is not a unique occurance by any means, consider the outburst from some list members, supposed legal experts, over some of the references that I forwarded (not what I would call a consistent understanding of the law by any stretch of the imagination). The reality is that the legal industry (after all the main motivation for the legal profession is money) has a serious lacking in trained individuals. This should be a warning sign to everyone in any society which has hopes of embracing communications technology. Lawyers don't make law, they survive by taking their views of the law and convincing juries of from 6 to 12 (YMMV) persons that this is the way to protect 'society' and its best interests. If they don't understand the technology (eg forwarding private email to publicly accessible lists by accident) how in the world are they going to understand what is best, let along convince anyone else? Is this the kind of self-interest you want to trust your criminal communications case, let alone your liberty, to? It has been proposed by at least one party that a district attorney or other public prosecutor would not act on such events. This is also naive. The ramifications for their political opponents to use this 'insensitive and clearly self-interested' refusal to act as a perfect example of how that prosecutor is interested in their own political career and not in the interest of the people they are charged with protecting as well as a good demonstration of their technological ignorance. It would be very difficult to get re-elected in such an environment. Now the crypto relevancy, one of the methods to help reduce if not completely abort such attempts is digital signatures. Recently a couple of co-workers for Tivoli-IBM went to the Usenix conference and while there did some key signings. However, after discussion upon their return it was clear that having had their keys signed and signing others there was no clearly useful way to apply those keys in commen communications. Last year the Austin Cypherpunks did a short term experiment with a system (kourier.ssz.com) which was involved in encrypted file systems, encrypted transfers, traffic analysis, and heterogenous key-ring management. This also made it clear that the legal ramifications, economic issues (eg who pays) as well as the technical hurdles have not been studied sufficiently to call this technology mature. All that I ask is that instead of jumping the gun and saying 'it ain't so' you simply consider the ramifications from 'their' perspective. It truly is amazing what one can learn by walking a mile in another mans shoes. For if there is one truth to be learned it is that this discussion is not about how it is, but rather how it will be and how it should be. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From hallam at ai.mit.edu Mon Jan 27 19:02:00 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:02:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701280301.TAA14685@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote in article <5ch8v4$co9 at life.ai.mit.edu>... > blanc wrote: > > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis > > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should > > not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their > > civilians > > in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. > > > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other > > governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the > > resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take > > their chances and retaliate, etc. > > I wish this were true, at least of nations which would be friendly > to someone like me (white, Western, etc.). A bully on a school > playground can always be knocked down, no matter how big or how > vicious he is. Sadly, the U.S. bully cannot be knocked down. Bad > enough you get nuclear, chemical, and/or biological stuff waved at > you - if you get into a hot war like Desert Storm, your country is > carpet-bombed with fleets of B-52's until it is thoroughly debilitated. Actually the US is being remarkably ineffective in keeping Cuba etc off the Net. If you don't believe me just try the cuban home page. We had a Web server running in Sarajevo during the siege back in '93. There is no way that the US govt. can hope to control the Internet any more than it can control the phone system. What is astonishing is that the Cuban authorities are so keen to import a technology that breaks down their propaganda. The Cold War was not won by the arms race, it was won in Eastern Europe which was never a major participant. The main instrument that won it was West German TV which broadcast pictures of supermarkets with full shelves into the homes of East Germans every night. The viewers could see that it was not mere propaganda and their relatives confirmed the fact. As a result the East German guards on the Berlin wall simply decided to leave their posts one night. The East Germans couldn't stop the TV signals either. When Dresden started to become a ghost town because people wanted to move to a town which could recieve the broadcasts the East Germans ended up installing their own relay to keep the locals happy. Phill From jya at pipeline.com Mon Jan 27 19:11:00 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:11:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Handbook of Applied Cryptography Message-ID: <199701280311.TAA14917@toad.com> Here's the publisher's URL for Handbook of Applied Cryptography, which amplifies Patrick's summary, and gives ordering info. http://www.crcpress.com/PRODS/8523.HTM Just reading the mouthwatering summaries and the extensive, detailed list of topics is a good primer on crypto. From cmaria at stevens-tech.edu Mon Jan 27 19:11:05 1997 From: cmaria at stevens-tech.edu (Ciro Maria) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:11:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701280311.TAA14925@toad.com> On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage > son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in > college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. > Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? > > > Yeah Stevens Institute in Hoboken. Its pretty good I got there. Also Caltech is good, I don't really know which else. From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jan 27 19:16:57 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:16:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. In-Reply-To: <199701270226.SAA03548@toad.com> Message-ID: At 7:39 pm -0500 1/26/97, blanc wrote: >p.s. I be femme ^^^^^^^^^^ Franconics... Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From dharter at harter.pg.md.us Mon Jan 27 19:17:01 1997 From: dharter at harter.pg.md.us (Daniel Harter) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:17:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list (fwd) Message-ID: On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Actually, it is a certifiable fact that the list subscribers can > jump to the unmoderated list whenever they want to. It is also a > certifiable fact that they (97% or so) have *not* done so. Has anyone compiled a summary of the difference of volume of posts to the lists? I'd be interested to find out. > Because of these facts, I must conclude that either: > > 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, > 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that > they've just left things as is. > > Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold > the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will > hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). I just started subscribing to the list near the time it started, so I have not noticed a difference. If the unmoderated list is not much more (~10%) I think I'd prefer the unmoderated list. Regards, Dan Harter dharter at harter.pg.md.us From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jan 27 19:23:26 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:23:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: <>(January 27, 1997) Affirmative Anonymity Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text To: DAILY DOSE From: VitaminB Date: 27 Jan 97 15:44:12 Subject: <>(January 27, 1997) Affirmative Anonymity Mime-Version: 1.0 Vitamin B: Your Daily Dose of Bionomics January 27, 1997 Affirmative Anonymity In response to the January 24th Vitamin B ("Anonymity and Reputation"), Greg Waddell, Policy Coordinator for U.S. Senator Connie Mack (R-FL) and 1996 Bionomics Conference Speaker, made the following comments, which we'd like to share. "There are aspects of the anonymity paradigm that relate to a whole host of social issues that Machine Age liberals usually seek to remedy with strong and heavy hand of government. Namely, these are issues of discrimination by race, gender, disability, etc. etc. After the Joint Economic Committee's hearing on the 21st Century Economy, held in summer of 1995, I suddenly realized (better late than never!) that communicating via computer over the Internet forces each of us to deal with others without regard to physical attributes. Neither color, race, gender, disability, religion, nationality, nor any "class" markers are apparent over the Net. The Information Age economy, if left to evolve freely, could bring us closer to our American ideals of equality for all than any law, affirmative action program, diversity training, or anything else. I think that is the most compelling aspect of what we identify as the anonymity of the Net." --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From privsoft at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 27 19:24:21 1997 From: privsoft at ix.netcom.com (Steven M Orrin) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:24:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: S/KEY (was: 2 Questions) Message-ID: <199701280323.TAA19112@dfw-ix4.ix.netcom.com> Thanks to Bill and Peter for your help. Steveo From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 27 19:25:55 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:25:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701280325.TAA15281@toad.com> Blanc Weber writes: > From: Sandy Sandfort > > (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' > favored solution.) > ............................................... > > What was that? Eric Hughes struck me as being smarter than Gilmore, so I too would like to know what his "favored solution" was. Didn't I have dinner with him once? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 19:26:34 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:26:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701280326.TAA15334@toad.com> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > Apparently, Toto does not know very much about John or me or our > relationships with the "Establishment." Unfortunately, I know a little 'too much' about you and John and your relationships with the Establishment. But as long as I don't think about it at the dinner table, it doesn't affect my appetite. > I can't speak for John, but You do so all of the time. It seems, rather, that John cannot speak for himself (or is too embarrassed to do so). > I think both of these groups are intellectually dishonest in the > extreme when it comes to telling others how this list should be > run. No, Sandy, it is yourself and John who are 'telling' others how this list 'will' be run. You seem to be projecting your own motivations upon anyone who 'expresses' any unflattering opinion of the the censorship process you have instituted. > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > more than homesteading. It must be nice, Sandy, having the power and control over the list that enables you to fling insults at others and then direct them to others only at your own whim and discretion. I guess that it is every list-dictator's dream to have the power to send a big FUCK YOU to one portion of the list, and send a portrait of themself as Mother Teresa to another portion of the list. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 19:28:31 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:28:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderated list is missing headers Message-ID: <199701280328.TAA15369@toad.com> Lou Poppler wrote: > > The arguments about imaginary quotes and libel are harder to untangle > because the moderation process seems to consume the mail headers showing > the messages' travels before reaching toad.com. I suggest that these > headers are signal not noise, and should be propagated if at all possible. > We have had problems in the past with forgeries, and should retain this > basic tool for evaluating a message's source. The header information, on all of the lists, has been changed in order to make it more difficult for list members to keep track of what is going on behind the Electromagnetic Curtain. A simple example is the fact that, originally, a quick glance at the header was sufficient to recognize which messages were sorted to the flames list and were sent out by toad.com from this list. This has since been changed to make the process of censorship more obtuse. Your complaint about it being difficult to 'untangle' certain message threads seems to stem from the fact that you have chosen to receive only a cypher-world-view that has been censored before you receive it. The purpose behind censorship on the list is for the censoring party to be able to spoon-feed you only what they deem fit for you to read. Given the haphazard methods with which the censorship is being instituted, it is not in the best interest of the censors to make it easy for the list members to track the course of the various postings. Toto From nobody at replay.com Mon Jan 27 19:31:39 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Name Withheld by Request) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:31:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Reuters article: "Unstoppable Internet will defy controls" Message-ID: <199701280331.TAA15436@toad.com> >More broadly, modern governments rely on their ability to control >information and money to maintain control over their citizens. >But does the Net mean we no longer need government in its present form? The German law professor Alexander Rossnagel has published an article titled "Globale Datennetze: Ohnmacht des Staates - Selbstschutz der Buerger" (global networks: state's impotence, citizens' self-protection) in Zeitschrift fuer Rechtspolitik 1997, p. 26 ff. He describes that decentral networks are difficult to control, and anonymizers, encryption and steganography can be used to defy surveillance. "[The state] can neither enforce matters of public interest, nor offer protection to its citizens", including protection of privacy and legally protected secrets. The state cannot effectively face law violations: "If it somewhere suppresses information, it will be 'mirrored' by many other servers world-wide. If it blocks communication lines, the message will find a way around. Sattelite transmission also renders the question of location almost irrelevant. Theresa Orlowski was denied a license for her porn channel here. Now she is broadcasting from Britain. In cyberspace, functions of social relevance, such as protection of minors, can no longer be fulfilled by the state. They are transferred to the parents exclusively." "The state can only interevene where the immaterial world of the network touches the physical world: It can arrest criminals, seize devices and data storage, when these physically are in its control. It can enforce adherance to its laws where it physically can exersize its power. But in the incorporeal world of the network, to a large extend it is powerless. All these examples indicate a new fact: The networks constitute a new incorporeal social space. Increasingly more social contacts, economic and legal exchanges are being transferred to it. In it, conditions are different from in the social relationships of the physical world. In this new world, the state has no means of coercion, no monopoly of power, and no sovereignty." "Law to be enforced requires power. The democratic constitutional state depends on sovereignty and obediency to laws. Only with these it can universally enforce democratic decisions and protect the citizens' basic rights from violations by third parties. To guarantee this is the fundamental reason for the modern state to exist. Its protective mission continues to apply. However, it has expanded with the civilisatoric development. With Hobbes, the focus was on the procetion of life and limb, with Locke the protection of freedom and property were added, and in this century, facing new threats, the protection of privacy. [... The states'] sovereignty is based on the authority to exclusively exercise physical power in [their territory]. This sovereignty has limits in the immaterial space of global networks. But when the citizen no longer receives the state's protection in the special sphere of the networks and the state can no more enforce matters of public interest there, then its basic legitimation in so far is in danger. According to Thomas Hobbes, 'the citizen's obligation to the sovereign can ... only last as long as he is capable of protecting the citizens'." But that would also endanger democracy and the constitional state. Stating that the normative strategy at large is obsolete, the author proposes new solotions: "When the democratic constitutional state can no longer reliably protect its citizens in the new social space of the networks, in compensation it must enable them to protect themselves." Information and communications technology offers various means of protection: * encryption and steganography * digital signatures * untraceable pseudonyms * certified electronic mail * ecash * software agents * connectivity management programs [whatever that is...] * cellular phones without location data * PICS * secure portable user-controlled devices that support these measures "Some of these measures - for example the encryption program PGP - can be used without any advance concession. The state only has to abstain from impeding regulations. Others - such as digital signatures - depend on an infrastructure that allows the individual to use these protective measures. The citizen of information society still depends on infrastructural prerequsites. But there is a fundamental difference in whether the individual can decide about using self-controlled protective measures himself, or the state or an other large organization offers protection that he cannot influence." "In order to protect and preserve the /old/ goals of freedom and self-determination in the /new/ social space of the networks, law must permit and support /new/ technologies." The article ends with the author's vision of a 'civil information society' as a free democratic society where basic rights are guaranteed by technology. "In this information society, the state has a limited, but fundamental role. [...] it creates a framework for the citizens to protect themselves. Thus they are enabled to freely inform themselves, solve conflicts in free self-organization, and negotiate and practice mutual security without depending on a big brother." From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Mon Jan 27 19:32:04 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:32:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701280332.TAA15446@toad.com> blanc writes: > From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. > ........................................................ > > 1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? Assassination politics is certainlyhighly crypto-relevant (being an important application of anonymity and untraceable payments). It's of interest to a number of participants in the forum. So, why not? > 2) Why do you suppose the Iraqis haven't already thought of doing this > themselves? Perhaps because they love Saddam, who really is a great guy. Stop listening to what U.S.gubmint and media tell you and use your brain. What did Saddam do to _you? > 3) The Mafia uses this method all the time - why then haven't they achieved > a more rational society among themselves? The Mafia in the U.S. doesn't work. The sicilian Mafia is very successful at assassinating any public officials that fucks with it. > 4) Weren't governments (like the U.S.) instituted to prevent this sort of > thing (even if they don't work out as expected)? i.e., there were systems > of courts and lawyers and such instituted to openly deal with "criminal" > activity so that a) people could receive assistance against low-life > degenerate killers, and b) it could be proven that the accused were indeed > deserving of punishment. When I was taking political science at Columbia, one of my most memorable insights came from reading Aeschil's tragedies. Consider this recurrent thread: why are people rude on highways, and is shooting them justified? I claim that if a driver felt that the likelihood of him getting a ticket for cutting people off was high enough, they wouldn't do it. But of course the cops are busy chasing the drug dealers :-), so the only remaining deterrent is the likelihood that someone will shoot you for cutting them off (which happens occasionally). > Humans being what they are, this hasn't worked like it's supposed to, but > the point is that there is a reason why such ideas for systems of justice > were introduced in the first place. That reason, as I eloquently read in > a book, was "So That Reason May Live". That is, so that people who choose > to live in a "society" may do so by the method of solving problems through > the application of intelligence, rather than merely knocking each other off > because a voting majority decides they don't like someone. Re-read your Hobbes - but don't believe him. The state did not come about because the people thought they'd be better off under it. The state came about as one tribe conquered and enslaved another tribe; and gradually most members of the winning tribe became slaves too. > Destructive people often ascend to positions of power not simply because > they are ruthless, but because they have 1) many sycophantic followers and > 2) many ignorant, vulnerable people unable to prevent it. You might be > able to kill off one Saddam, but potentially many others would be waiting > in the wings to take his place. The situation surrounding the existence > of someone like Saddam is part of the contributing factors which keeps him > there, not simply that one man himself. It was the same with Hitler and > with so many others - they don't just have an excess of "power" > concentrated within themselves which puts them in positions of control over > others - there will have been many people who will have helped put them > there, expecting to derive benefits from it. I don't like your Saddam example, having much admiration for the man, but again this goes back to the perceived likelihood of future assassination. If Saddam is killed in an unlikely event, he will be succeeded by someone who does not fear assassination. If all potential successors are convinced that the rubout can be repeated, they won't go for the job. Remember, the purpose of "terrorism" is not just to kill someone, but to "terrorize". > And what will be done about all those people who made this "power" > possible? You don't just kill the one man and be done with it - you have > to also "kill" the conditions which maintained him. You rub out enough key people and terrorize their potential successors into not wanting to take over their jobs, and the system collapses. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 27 19:32:09 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:32:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy Message-ID: <199701280332.TAA15454@toad.com> Hi, I have received several private emails inquiring into what possible crypto relevance the recent exchange over libel/slander and the law. It is clear that even in democratic countries like Canada (not know as a freedom of speech protectorate) slander/libel is covered under criminal codes. While it is true that currently these statutes are not heavily used, if at all, this will change as businesses and special interest groups move even further onto electronic networks. Consider the zealous use of the law by the CoS. Ask Julf if the ramifications are not 'real world'. Consider a trial where a person is purported to have altered a transmission by some party. It is not in the juries best interest to rule in the favor of anyone other than the person claiming the damage. Why you might ask? Simply because they are going to see themselves in that same situation and will want to know that they are protected both in spirit as well as actuality. What company will want to use an environment where their contracts and other exchanges can not only be viewed by unknown third parties but are subject to a man in the middle attack, potentialy ruining a company. Consider the ramifications in a political venue. Now some will quickly point out that they can encrypt the entire document, hardly suitable for web pages and other forms of advertisment. I predict that within the next five years these slander/libel laws will be used by some organization to prosecute defamation of their Internet presence (eg web page graffitti). Within 10 years this area will be one of the hotest areas of the new communications law. Now some have held that list operators and such will be protected, most probably not in reality. Consider, we live in a time where a person can get drunk and kill somebody with their automobile and the bar or store they bought the drink(s) from can be charged. There is a current trend in the legal industry to find the person that is easiest to prosecute in the chain of events and it has nothing to do with personal responsibility or other quaint but possibly naive views. I want to thank Toto for acting as the unknowing and unwilling dupe in my taking advantage of his emotional outburst and its results, it wasn't personal I was simply trying to create a suitable environment to make my point. It was a happenstance occurance I could not resist taking advantage of. It is clear that here we have a lawyer in Canada who is not even aware that there is a little used criminal statute in the country he practices in which could be used by citizens sufficiently motivated and having suitable quantities of cash at hand to pursue the matter. This is not a unique occurance by any means, consider the outburst from some list members, supposed legal experts, over some of the references that I forwarded (not what I would call a consistent understanding of the law by any stretch of the imagination). The reality is that the legal industry (after all the main motivation for the legal profession is money) has a serious lacking in trained individuals. This should be a warning sign to everyone in any society which has hopes of embracing communications technology. Lawyers don't make law, they survive by taking their views of the law and convincing juries of from 6 to 12 (YMMV) persons that this is the way to protect 'society' and its best interests. If they don't understand the technology (eg forwarding private email to publicly accessible lists by accident) how in the world are they going to understand what is best, let along convince anyone else? Is this the kind of self-interest you want to trust your criminal communications case, let alone your liberty, to? It has been proposed by at least one party that a district attorney or other public prosecutor would not act on such events. This is also naive. The ramifications for their political opponents to use this 'insensitive and clearly self-interested' refusal to act as a perfect example of how that prosecutor is interested in their own political career and not in the interest of the people they are charged with protecting as well as a good demonstration of their technological ignorance. It would be very difficult to get re-elected in such an environment. Now the crypto relevancy, one of the methods to help reduce if not completely abort such attempts is digital signatures. Recently a couple of co-workers for Tivoli-IBM went to the Usenix conference and while there did some key signings. However, after discussion upon their return it was clear that having had their keys signed and signing others there was no clearly useful way to apply those keys in commen communications. Last year the Austin Cypherpunks did a short term experiment with a system (kourier.ssz.com) which was involved in encrypted file systems, encrypted transfers, traffic analysis, and heterogenous key-ring management. This also made it clear that the legal ramifications, economic issues (eg who pays) as well as the technical hurdles have not been studied sufficiently to call this technology mature. All that I ask is that instead of jumping the gun and saying 'it ain't so' you simply consider the ramifications from 'their' perspective. It truly is amazing what one can learn by walking a mile in another mans shoes. For if there is one truth to be learned it is that this discussion is not about how it is, but rather how it will be and how it should be. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com Mon Jan 27 19:32:43 1997 From: ravage at EINSTEIN.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:32:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: public_law_other_650.html Message-ID: <199701280332.TAA15473@toad.com> [ISMAP] [INLINE] Libel and Slander Tape #650 _________________________________________________________________ On this tape I will discuss libel and slander. It is for your general information only. It is not legal advice. It will give a general outline of the law on the subject as it applies in Ontario. If you have a legal problem, you should talk to a lawyer. We all have the right to have our reputation protected against false statements made against us. This protection is given to us by the law of defamation. On this tape I'll talk about defamation in both its forms - libel and slander. Libel can be a crime, but this section of the Criminal Code is rarely used, so I'll talk about libel and slander only in their civil context - the person defamed suing the defamer; asking for money as compensation for the injury to his reputation. Generally speaking, a defamatory statement is one which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. For example, if someone calls you a cheat in your business dealings, you probably have a lawsuit against him. That is, you do if he says it to someone other than you. It's not enough that the statement be made to the person it's about. It has to be communicated to another. What's the difference between libel and slander? Broadly speaking, if the defamatory statement is made in some permanent form, such as a newspaper or a letter, then it's libel. If it's in a transitory form, such as a hand gesture or the spoken word, then it's slander. But a defamatory statement that's broadcast on radio or television will be libel, not slander, even though it's spoken and not written. In the past, there was a good reason to know the difference between libel and slander. Today, if you can prove that you have been libelled, and there is no good defence, then the law will presume you have suffered damages and will fix an amount as compensation for your loss of reputation. In other words, you do not have to prove damages for actual financial loss. For many years, in cases of slander, you had to prove actual financial loss before you would be awarded damages under the law. In part, this was because slanderous statements were not considered permanent and therefore would not have as great an impact as libellous words, gestures or portrayals. Today, under the Ontario Libel and Slander Act, the requirement to prove damages in slander cases has been removed in certain situations. Mainly, these include cases where words are chosen to call into question the reputation of a person in relation to that persons office, profession, calling, trade or business. Therefore, if you could prove that Bill told John you were a cheat and then John refused to enter into a contract with you because of the statement, you would be compensated for the loss of contract and reputation. You would have to prove it was Bill's intention to attack your business reputation, but otherwise, damages would be awarded outright. Unfortunately, the Ontario Libel and Slander Act does not remove completely the requirement to prove damage, in all slander cases. Therefore, it is important to discuss your case with a lawyer to determine how yours would be treated under the law. We said earlier that the law protects a person's reputation. But obviously this protection can have the effect of restricting other rights, such as free speech. So the law tries to balance these competing interests. In certain circumstances, even though a defamatory statement may have been made and a person may have suffered injury to reputation, other interests are considered more important. In those cases, the law provides certain defences that can protect a defamer from liability. The most common defences are: truth (known in law as "justification"); absolute privilege; qualified privilege; and fair comment. The first is the easiest. A statement might well lower your reputation, but if it is the truth then anyone is free to say it. Additionally, if you consent to the statement being made, you cannot later argue you have been defamed. The second defence - that of absolute privilege - covers statements given in evidence at a trial, or made in Parliament, to give the two prime examples. And it extends to the fair and accurate reporting of those statements - the newspaper report of a trial, for instance. Our systems of justice and parliamentary democracy demand that in those situations participants must be free to speak candidly, without having to worry about risking a lawsuit for defamation. The defence of qualified privilege covers other situations. For instance - say a former employee of yours has given your name as a reference, so you get a call from someone who wants to hire him. He asks your opinion. You say: "Well, frankly, I always suspected he was stealing from me." That's an occasion of qualified privilege . You had a moral duty to give your honest opinion and the caller had a legitimate interest in hearing it. As long as you acted in good faith and said what you honestly believed you would have a valid defence to an action for defamation. Finally, there's the defence of fair comment. We are all free to comment freely - even harshly - on matters of legitimate public interest as long as our comments are made honestly, not maliciously, and are based on true facts. For example, say a columnist writes that an MP secretly holds shares in a company which has just got a large government contract. Then he comments that the MP is deceitful and should resign his seat. Well, if in fact the MP owns no shares in the company, then the columnist may be open to a lawsuit. But if the facts are true, that is the MP does own the shares, and the columnist honestly believes bases on those facts that the MP is deceitful and should resign, then he will have the defence of fair comment. If you intend to sue for a libel in a newspaper or a broadcast you must give notice to all those you intend to sue within six weeks of learning of the publication or broadcast, and you must specify in your notice the nature of your complaint, with specific reference to the actual words of which you complained. As well, you must commence your action within three months of learning of the publication or the broadcast. Failure to conform with either of these two steps will deprive you of any right to sue. In cases not involving newspapers or broadcasts, you must commence your action against the defaming party within 2 years of the words being spoken or written. Finally, there's the matter of apology. When a libel has been published in a newspaper or other periodical, or in a radio or television broadcast, the publisher or broadcaster can limit the amount of the damages the broadcaster may end up paying by publishing or broadcasting a full apology at the earliest opportunity. Not only newspapers and broadcasters can limit their damages by offering an apology before the action begins. Any defaming party can offer an apology in the hopes of having their damages reduced. The law of defamation protects your right to your good name. If a person makes a false statement to another to your discredit you can sue for damages. But because of other competing rights in our society, such as free speech and fair comment, there are cases where even the most defamatory statement will not give rise to an award of damages. If you think you have been defamed, you should talk to a lawyer. Home Search Feedback What's New Copyright & Disclaimer About This Site From privsoft at ix.netcom.com Mon Jan 27 19:41:05 1997 From: privsoft at ix.netcom.com (Steven M Orrin) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:41:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: S/KEY (was: 2 Questions) Message-ID: <199701280341.TAA15650@toad.com> Thanks to Bill and Peter for your help. Steveo From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 19:42:48 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:42:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701280342.TAA15696@toad.com> Kevin L Prigge wrote: >. The purpose of this list was > and should be discussion of cryptography and related issues. Your view seems to be contradictory to that of Sandy. Sandy has stated that s/he does not censor the list according to crypto- relevancy. Toto From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 27 19:52:07 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:52:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701280351.TAA15925@toad.com> At 02:04 PM 1/27/97 -0800, Sandy Sandfort wrote: ... >Eric, would like to require a deposit ($20 was the example he >gave) from subscriber/posters. Non-subscribers would not be >allowed to post. Subscribers who voluntarily left the list, >would get their deposit back. Subscribers who flamed twice >(every dog gets one bite) would be kicked off the list and their >deposit would be forfeited (or perhaps turned over to the flame >victim). I know that this wasn't your idea, and am not critisizing you. This idea would be great if everyone had an equal access to funds. Persons willing to part with funds could flame people indiscriminately. Persons with more money, meaning no bills or very few in relation to capitol, would be more willing to part with funds. Suddendly, the rich control the press again, at least to the extent that they would be able to say anything. The rich would be more equal. The plan could be hacked. With several accounts, perhaps stolen, forged, etc. a person submits the $20, flames h[is/er] victim, unsubscribes, collects h[is/er] deposit, resubscribes under a new name, and repeats the cycle. Plus, as has been said before, the definition of a flame is subjective. It has been shown that children with more symettrical faces get along better with teachers. It has been shown that even uncorrupted babies know what physical beauty is. If there is any ability to pre-judge a persons character before reading the post, than the post is more likely to be judged accordingly. I hope that you will be fair in your determinations, and I assume that you will do your best. But I still worry, only because that you are human. And humans make mistakes. At least the current moderation doesn't cost any one twenty bucks. From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Mon Jan 27 19:52:35 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:52:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTP security Message-ID: <199701280352.TAA15979@toad.com> Paul replied: >Depends on how that 16th bit is related to the other bits and whether >these predictable bits give any information about the other bits on >the disk. Yes, I had figured that if the bits depended on eachother, then it would blow the whole system. [Yet another case of my fingers lagging behind my brain.] What I was thinking was more along the lines of something like: 1.You've got 16 hardware devices that each generate random noise. 2.One of the devices fails (or is sabotaged) and emits a predictable stream (10101...) 3.The other 15 devices are just fine, and the stream generated by one device does not effect the stream of another. 4.You do not know of the (failure/sabotage) until *after* you've generated your encyrted documents and they are out of your hands. So the revamped question is: How secure are those documents now? _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ Good evening... as a duly appointed representative of the city, county and state of New York, I order you to cease any and all supernatural activity and return forthwith to your place or origin, or to the nearest convenient parallel dimension. From dharter at harter.pg.md.us Mon Jan 27 19:52:37 1997 From: dharter at harter.pg.md.us (Daniel Harter) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:52:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list (fwd) Message-ID: <199701280352.TAA15983@toad.com> On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Actually, it is a certifiable fact that the list subscribers can > jump to the unmoderated list whenever they want to. It is also a > certifiable fact that they (97% or so) have *not* done so. Has anyone compiled a summary of the difference of volume of posts to the lists? I'd be interested to find out. > Because of these facts, I must conclude that either: > > 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, > 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that > they've just left things as is. > > Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold > the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will > hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). I just started subscribing to the list near the time it started, so I have not noticed a difference. If the unmoderated list is not much more (~10%) I think I'd prefer the unmoderated list. Regards, Dan Harter dharter at harter.pg.md.us From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jan 27 19:54:34 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:54:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: <>(January 27, 1997) Affirmative Anonymity Message-ID: <199701280354.TAA16021@toad.com> --- begin forwarded text To: DAILY DOSE From: VitaminB Date: 27 Jan 97 15:44:12 Subject: <>(January 27, 1997) Affirmative Anonymity Mime-Version: 1.0 Vitamin B: Your Daily Dose of Bionomics January 27, 1997 Affirmative Anonymity In response to the January 24th Vitamin B ("Anonymity and Reputation"), Greg Waddell, Policy Coordinator for U.S. Senator Connie Mack (R-FL) and 1996 Bionomics Conference Speaker, made the following comments, which we'd like to share. "There are aspects of the anonymity paradigm that relate to a whole host of social issues that Machine Age liberals usually seek to remedy with strong and heavy hand of government. Namely, these are issues of discrimination by race, gender, disability, etc. etc. After the Joint Economic Committee's hearing on the 21st Century Economy, held in summer of 1995, I suddenly realized (better late than never!) that communicating via computer over the Internet forces each of us to deal with others without regard to physical attributes. Neither color, race, gender, disability, religion, nationality, nor any "class" markers are apparent over the Net. The Information Age economy, if left to evolve freely, could bring us closer to our American ideals of equality for all than any law, affirmative action program, diversity training, or anything else. I think that is the most compelling aspect of what we identify as the anonymity of the Net." --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From hallam at ai.mit.edu Mon Jan 27 19:55:21 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:55:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701280355.TAA16061@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote in article <5ch8v4$co9 at life.ai.mit.edu>... > blanc wrote: > > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis > > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should > > not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their > > civilians > > in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. > > > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other > > governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the > > resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take > > their chances and retaliate, etc. > > I wish this were true, at least of nations which would be friendly > to someone like me (white, Western, etc.). A bully on a school > playground can always be knocked down, no matter how big or how > vicious he is. Sadly, the U.S. bully cannot be knocked down. Bad > enough you get nuclear, chemical, and/or biological stuff waved at > you - if you get into a hot war like Desert Storm, your country is > carpet-bombed with fleets of B-52's until it is thoroughly debilitated. Actually the US is being remarkably ineffective in keeping Cuba etc off the Net. If you don't believe me just try the cuban home page. We had a Web server running in Sarajevo during the siege back in '93. There is no way that the US govt. can hope to control the Internet any more than it can control the phone system. What is astonishing is that the Cuban authorities are so keen to import a technology that breaks down their propaganda. The Cold War was not won by the arms race, it was won in Eastern Europe which was never a major participant. The main instrument that won it was West German TV which broadcast pictures of supermarkets with full shelves into the homes of East Germans every night. The viewers could see that it was not mere propaganda and their relatives confirmed the fact. As a result the East German guards on the Berlin wall simply decided to leave their posts one night. The East Germans couldn't stop the TV signals either. When Dresden started to become a ghost town because people wanted to move to a town which could recieve the broadcasts the East Germans ended up installing their own relay to keep the locals happy. Phill From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com Mon Jan 27 19:55:53 1997 From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl') Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 19:55:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Infinite Improbability Drive? Message-ID: <199701280416.XAA02142@unix.asb.com> Am I reading this correctly, or will the 'infinite improbability drive' be invented real soon now? (An odd coincidence after the Tesla thread too...) --Rob > Edupage, 26 January 1997. Edupage, a summary of news about information > technology, is provided three times a week as a service by Educom, > a Washington, D.C.-based consortium of leading colleges and universities > seeking to transform education through the use of information technology. [..] > COMPUTER IN A COFFEE CUP > While a conventional computer stores its bits of information by assuming one > of two possible states (a 1 or a 0), a quantum computer theoretically could > store much more information by using all the potential states of anatom. > Scientists are now proposing a new way to harness the power of quantum > computing, using nuclear magnetic resonance devices to control the movement > of millions of atoms within an evenly heated volume of material. By > coordinating the nuclear spin of the particles, physicists could make them > act collectively as qubits (quantum bits). A liquid with the rightthermal > properties (such as coffee, which is known for its unusually evenheating > characteristics) could hold up to 10 qubits, but scientists are still > looking for ways to create a liquid computer that could hold up to 40 qubits > -- perhaps out of "a really expensive cup of structured coffee," says a > University of California, Santa Barbara researcher. (Science News 18 Jan 97 > p37) From nobody at huge.cajones.com Mon Jan 27 20:10:27 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:10:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [CRYPTO] Airport Security Message-ID: <199701280410.UAA06882@mailmasher.com> Dumpy Vilus wears satin lingerie embroidered with pink swastikas, prancing around for his homosexual, AIDS infected lovers. _ / ' | /><\ Dumpy Vilus //[ `' ]\\ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 20:20:08 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:20:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy In-Reply-To: <199702280250.UAA04550@einstein> Message-ID: <32ED9B2E.6A35@sk.sympatico.ca> Jim Choate wrote: A whole shitload of rambling material which is irrelevant for any purpose except, perhaps, to disguise semi-literacy with long-winded soliloquys. Jim, You seem to be getting better drugs than I am. Got any numbers I could call in order to re-up? I have to admit that your grasp of technology is superior to my own, since you are capable of posting to the list from a parallel universe where it is already Thursday, Feb. 27, 1997. Interestingly enough, one of the UCE/Spammers that is mailbombing various lists also lives in a parallel universe where it is already Thursday, Feb. 27, 1997. Small univerese, isn't it, Jim. Toto From bigboy at gte.net Mon Jan 27 20:23:48 1997 From: bigboy at gte.net (Ernie Steefan) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:23:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: [[[ Worldwide Computer Based Business ! ]]] Message-ID: If you have a PC and want to achieve real Financial Independence then you MUST take a look at our Powerful Computer Based Business. No matter who you are or where you live, Our Business is Universal. We distribute software and information all over the world through E-Mail and the Internet. Our program called PC-SUPER-MLM is the most simple and powerful MONEY MAKING software in the world!. of course, you don't have to believe me until you see the actual program. Reply to this message and i will send you a FREE copy of the PC-SUPER-MLM software via E-Mail as an attachement. Have a great day !. From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jan 27 20:39:04 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:39:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <199701280439.UAA17377@toad.com> At 7:39 pm -0500 1/26/97, blanc wrote: >p.s. I be femme ^^^^^^^^^^ Franconics... Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Mon Jan 27 20:40:07 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:40:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701280440.UAA17424@toad.com> At 02:04 PM 1/27/97 -0800, Sandy Sandfort wrote: ... >Eric, would like to require a deposit ($20 was the example he >gave) from subscriber/posters. Non-subscribers would not be >allowed to post. Subscribers who voluntarily left the list, >would get their deposit back. Subscribers who flamed twice >(every dog gets one bite) would be kicked off the list and their >deposit would be forfeited (or perhaps turned over to the flame >victim). I know that this wasn't your idea, and am not critisizing you. This idea would be great if everyone had an equal access to funds. Persons willing to part with funds could flame people indiscriminately. Persons with more money, meaning no bills or very few in relation to capitol, would be more willing to part with funds. Suddendly, the rich control the press again, at least to the extent that they would be able to say anything. The rich would be more equal. The plan could be hacked. With several accounts, perhaps stolen, forged, etc. a person submits the $20, flames h[is/er] victim, unsubscribes, collects h[is/er] deposit, resubscribes under a new name, and repeats the cycle. Plus, as has been said before, the definition of a flame is subjective. It has been shown that children with more symettrical faces get along better with teachers. It has been shown that even uncorrupted babies know what physical beauty is. If there is any ability to pre-judge a persons character before reading the post, than the post is more likely to be judged accordingly. I hope that you will be fair in your determinations, and I assume that you will do your best. But I still worry, only because that you are human. And humans make mistakes. At least the current moderation doesn't cost any one twenty bucks. From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com Mon Jan 27 20:40:46 1997 From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl') Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:40:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Infinite Improbability Drive? Message-ID: <199701280440.UAA17453@toad.com> Am I reading this correctly, or will the 'infinite improbability drive' be invented real soon now? (An odd coincidence after the Tesla thread too...) --Rob > Edupage, 26 January 1997. Edupage, a summary of news about information > technology, is provided three times a week as a service by Educom, > a Washington, D.C.-based consortium of leading colleges and universities > seeking to transform education through the use of information technology. [..] > COMPUTER IN A COFFEE CUP > While a conventional computer stores its bits of information by assuming one > of two possible states (a 1 or a 0), a quantum computer theoretically could > store much more information by using all the potential states of anatom. > Scientists are now proposing a new way to harness the power of quantum > computing, using nuclear magnetic resonance devices to control the movement > of millions of atoms within an evenly heated volume of material. By > coordinating the nuclear spin of the particles, physicists could make them > act collectively as qubits (quantum bits). A liquid with the rightthermal > properties (such as coffee, which is known for its unusually evenheating > characteristics) could hold up to 10 qubits, but scientists are still > looking for ways to create a liquid computer that could hold up to 40 qubits > -- perhaps out of "a really expensive cup of structured coffee," says a > University of California, Santa Barbara researcher. (Science News 18 Jan 97 > p37) From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jan 27 21:01:40 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 21:01:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Panamsat Offers Internet By Satellite Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Sender: investor at LunaCity.com To: "Space Investors Mailing List" From: Michael_Wallis at sec.sel.sony.com Reply-To: "Space Investors Mailing List" Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:00:33 -0800 Organization: LunaCity BBS - (Clan Zen Relay Network) Mountain View, CA Subject: Panamsat Offers Internet By Satellite X-Mailserver: Waffle File Server (WFS), Release 3.2.ag X-Article: 267 >From Space News Daily News Note -- 1/27/97 Panamsat Corp. of Greenwich, Conn. is now offering high-speed Internet access by satellite. The new service, called Spotbytes, is available worldwide to Internet service providers. It provides a quick connection to the Internet by avoiding terrestrial lines and linking companies directly to backbone providers -- companies with a main line to the Internet. Michael ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Wallis, Computer Consultant Work: mwallis at sec.sel.sony.com http: //www.wallis.com/ Home: mwallis at wallis.com --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From rah at shipwright.com Mon Jan 27 21:11:08 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 21:11:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Panamsat Offers Internet By Satellite Message-ID: <199701280511.VAA18530@toad.com> --- begin forwarded text Sender: investor at LunaCity.com To: "Space Investors Mailing List" From: Michael_Wallis at sec.sel.sony.com Reply-To: "Space Investors Mailing List" Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:00:33 -0800 Organization: LunaCity BBS - (Clan Zen Relay Network) Mountain View, CA Subject: Panamsat Offers Internet By Satellite X-Mailserver: Waffle File Server (WFS), Release 3.2.ag X-Article: 267 >From Space News Daily News Note -- 1/27/97 Panamsat Corp. of Greenwich, Conn. is now offering high-speed Internet access by satellite. The new service, called Spotbytes, is available worldwide to Internet service providers. It provides a quick connection to the Internet by avoiding terrestrial lines and linking companies directly to backbone providers -- companies with a main line to the Internet. Michael ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Wallis, Computer Consultant Work: mwallis at sec.sel.sony.com http: //www.wallis.com/ Home: mwallis at wallis.com --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 22:23:12 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:23:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Bell Weather Curve In-Reply-To: <199701280233.SAA12120@mailmasher.com> Message-ID: <32ED9537.673E@sk.sympatico.ca> A structurally biased analysis of the ill-diguised flames approved for posting to the censored list yield the following graphical representation of dual-faced snide-itity: .-. / u \ | n | | c | | e | | n | .-. .-. | s | .-. .-. ----/---\---/---\--| o |--/---\---/---\-------------------- / `-' `/ r \' `-' \ ( e ) | d | | | From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Mon Jan 27 22:47:21 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:47:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970127223906.02e57ebc@mail.teleport.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 07:39 PM 1/27/97 GMT, Rob wrote: >I'm surprised the didn't mention Pegasus Mail, which is an amazing "hot" >mailer, with a sort-of built-in crypto plug-in capability... it's also free. I would like to see PGPMail support Pegusus Mail for the reason that I have used the crypto plug-in for Pegusus and found it inadiquate for general usage. Pegusus's current crypto hooks do not deal well with remailers and multiple keys. PGPMail does not deal with remailers as well as I would like, but it is far easier to use than the Pegusus solution. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMu2e++QCP3v30CeZAQG33wf9GL2yZodjFYsSPTsfO+zgmi+UtzGWKCJe OBcdIRxw+eRIS+wzVE39QYiWNsNHx9hijRtyXnVkdPNUWOoAZMTtJ5ndbFl+TtCQ PNicvtitryrPc4VrD+VOr/uZ98Yyf1YEQXxs8+CAocJ4uujerC2bsSaG2xtqtBKZ 8fS64D0P9MklNuGWS4/RYsJsnNtdJP7I7L7G+WFd8L1PAzvlrgq3ClJ+zuBBGrQf A/tz9YTIck0anRBifOKCUlRAtpTe0tElCvJKv7QPxLgHAJxM+rg1GHj35SY6QlKs b3cUpjxWolL5c4WvZcyOYRf9CPp2Gr5D2XMgIrydmgQYQStP/8Orhw== =79pa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From jimbell at pacifier.com Mon Jan 27 22:48:00 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:48:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701280647.WAA10602@mail.pacifier.com> At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >any recognition of this fact. >........................................................ > >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of using encryption. If we were satisfied to protect ourselves from, say, 99.999% of the ordinary population of this country who might want to read our messages, we'd all be satisfied with DES and we'd be happy with GAK. But the fact is, most of us recognize that the REAL reason for good encryption is to keep our messages away from a tyrannical government with far more assets than individuals or small organizations. >2) Why do you suppose the Iraqis haven't already thought of doing this >themselves? You need to be a little more specific about who you are referring to when you say "the Iraquis." Presumably, you aren't referring to the "Iraqui on the street"? Perhaps you're talking about the politicians and government officials there, right? Well, if that's the case then the answer should be obvious. AP is, fundamentally, a system that will take down all governments everywhere after it starts up anywhere. The leadership of Iraq may be the leaders of a third-rate, third-world country, but as comedian Mel Brooks said in the movie, "History of the World, Part I," "It's good to be the king!" And it is. These official-types have far more in common with the leadership of the other countries than they do with their own citizens. If anything, they're probably actually even MORE rewarded by their position than the leadership of westernized countries. After all, Clinton makes about $250K per year and it's pretty risky for him to receive direct bribes. Kick him out and he only loses a cushy job with lots of prestige. Saddam Hussein and his family, on the other hand, probably was able to rake in hundreds of millions of dollars a year in baksheesh. What makes you think that the leadership of Iraq would want to craft a weapon (AP) which is guaranteed to drop them to the level of their citizenry, or maybe even get themselves killed? As for why the ordinary Iraquis didn't think of it... Or the ordinary people of any or every country, as well. Why didn't THEY think of it? Maybe this is just another case of "not invented here" syndrome: You're pissed off that you didn't think of it, and I did. Sorry, can't help that. >3) The Mafia uses this method all the time - why then haven't they achieved >a more rational society among themselves? That's just it! The Mafia DOESN'T use AP or anything like it. (Admittedly I can't really claim personal knowledge of the operation of the Mafia, you understand...!) In fact, apparently, they function diametrically opposed to the AP system. A complete AP-like system is structured (via encryption, etc) to totally avoid anybody having to trust anyone else. Each participant is kept honest mathematically. Nobody can inform on anyone else, because nobody knows anyone else's identity. In fact, a fully-implemented AP-type system not merely hides the identities of the participants from each other, but it also hides the existence of crimes committed by any of the other participants (if any) from each other. A donor to the AP system, for instance, can't know for sure that his donation money was paid to a person who killed a target. At most, he knows that the money was paid to somebody who, he's satisfied, had enough confidence that the death would occur on a particular date in the future to, in effect, bet money on the outcome. And AP allows anyone to participate in the system, regardless of whether he's trusted by the others. On the contrary, the Mafia, or at least what I've managed to pick up from decades of melodramatic movies and newspaper and magazine articles, depends intimately on people trusting each other. That's why it's so devastating to them when one of their own (Joseph Valachi, for instance) turns on them and rats. To be sure, that trust is backed up by threat of death for turncoats, which is why such defections are rare, but they do indeed occur. Also, AP (quite unlike the Mafia) encourages literally anyone to do jobs for it. The Mafia, quite the contrary, must trust people, so I assume they won't farm out their work to just anyone. (I should point out that your clear misinterpretation of AP, claiming that it is the way the Mafia does things, is just another example of such confusion among critics of AP. I attribute this to such a burning desire to discredit AP that you'll use practically any argument, however specious, to "prove" it to be incorrect or unworkable. You're not alone.) >4) Weren't governments (like the U.S.) instituted to prevent this sort of >thing (even if they don't work out as expected)? i.e., there were systems >of courts and lawyers and such instituted to openly deal with "criminal" >activity so that a) people could receive assistance against low-life >degenerate killers, and b) it could be proven that the accused were indeed >deserving of punishment. Remember "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"? The problem with all existing political systems (and particularly those fallen ones from the past) is that they put power in the hands of people who subsequently abuse it, destroying the checks and balances that were put in place. >Humans being what they are, this hasn't worked like it's supposed to, but >the point is that there is a reason why such ideas for systems of justice >were introduced in the first place. That reason, as I eloquently read in >a book, was "So That Reason May Live". That is, so that people who choose >to live in a "society" may do so by the method of solving problems through >the application of intelligence, rather than merely knocking each other off >because a voting majority decides they don't like someone. You misunderstand AP, yet again. AP doesn't really take votes, it merely totals donations. It is an essential element of the AP system that even a tiny minority should be able to kill individuals who are seen as threats, as long as this capability is universal. True, the smaller the minority the more uneconomical such an action would be for them, but it would be well within the ability of 1% of the population to avoid a another Holocaust by getting rid of those pushing for it. In the current political system, in the US for instance, 51% of the population is able to screw the remaining 49%, just as long as they can maintain the majority. Or, perhaps even more accurately and ominously, a tiny fraction of the population (the current leadership class) is able to screw the 49%, as long as they have the un-thinking backing of the remaining and relatively uninvolved 51%. AP disables this system. AP turns government into the moral equivalent of a pick-up football game: Nobody is being forced to play, and everybody and anybody can simply "get up and leave" whenever he wants to. The moment the "rules of the game" to make an individual's continued participation unsatisfying, he can leave. >Destructive people often ascend to positions of power not simply because >they are ruthless, but because they have 1) many sycophantic followers and >2) many ignorant, vulnerable people unable to prevent it. You might be >able to kill off one Saddam, but potentially many others would be waiting >in the wings to take his place. I don't think so. Let's suppose you could purchase the death of Saddam for $5 million. The next guy gets killed for another $5 million, and then the next, etc. Who would want to be the next leader? While $5 million dollars is certainly not pocket change for an individual, it is well within the capacity of the entire world to fund without any difficulty. Anybody considering taking over Saddam's job, aware of such an easy system to kill him, would have no motivation to piss off the world. Sooner or later, Saddam's place would have to be taken by a person who makes it absolutely clear to the rest of the world that he's no Saddam. In fact, he'll point out that he would be foolish to take the job if he had ulterior motives. Unless you believe that it's physically impossible for Iraq to have an honest government (at which point you're displaying what I believe was called jingoism?) you'll acknowledge that their system would be fixed rapidly. That's why AP will be so economical: The absolute certainty that enough money could be raised to get rid of anyone who poses a threat will make it simply unnecessary to do so, the vast majority of the time. It's called "deterrence," and is one of the reasons that 99.99% of the population doesn't rob banks, commit mass murder, or do any other anti-social things. Dictatorships will be impossible under AP because dictators simply won't be able to survive. By being ready at all times to pay to have a dictator killed, society will never have any dictators. Strange but true. >The situation surrounding the existence >of someone like Saddam is part of the contributing factors which keeps him >there, not simply that one man himself. Saddam is still in power because as long as the collective leadership of the countries of the world fear to set an example that will cost them their jobs and possibly their lives, they will gladly choose the $60 BILLION dollar "solution" to the Iraq problem, as opposed to my solution, AP, which would not only fix Iraq but every other country on the face of the globe. That's why the leadership will never choose it. The fact is, George Bush and his cronies kept Saddam in power by intentional acts, although he would never admit it. It was the same with Hitler and >with so many others - they don't just have an excess of "power" >concentrated within themselves which puts them in positions of control over >others - there will have been many people who will have helped put them >there, expecting to derive benefits from it. > >And what will be done about all those people who made this "power" >possible? You don't just kill the one man and be done with it - you have >to also "kill" the conditions which maintained him. >Blanc I assert AP does this quite well. AP makes it quite impossible to maintain a government which pisses off even a small fraction of the population. Anyone who feels abused in the citizen/government relationship will be able to opt out when he wants. "Abused", by my definition, is getting less benefit out of the arrangement than that person wants in relation to the assets he put in. "Governments" may still exist after AP, but in name only. They will not have the ability to force taxation, and they will primarily be a way to coordinate volunteer action, and will be dramatically shrunk from today's behemoths. Such a government can't be corrupted: To whatever extent that corruption makes that government a less-attractive as a project to an honest citizen, he will leave it and it will shrink, making it even less able to support that corruption. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 23:05:00 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:05:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <32ecee29303e002@noc.tc.umn.edu> Message-ID: <32EDA4EB.604D@gte.net> Kevin L Prigge wrote: > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 23:06:58 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:06:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701280647.WAA10602@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <199701280703.BAA15931@manifold.algebra.com> jim bell wrote: > > At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: > >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') > >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > >any recognition of this fact. > >........................................................ > > > >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? > > Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list > concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using > encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of > using encryption. Actually AP is one of the more interesting topics here. I think that there is a clear need for an AP bot. Do you feel like writing it? - Igor. From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Mon Jan 27 23:10:39 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:10:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <199701280710.XAA22100@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 07:39 PM 1/27/97 GMT, Rob wrote: >I'm surprised the didn't mention Pegasus Mail, which is an amazing "hot" >mailer, with a sort-of built-in crypto plug-in capability... it's also free. I would like to see PGPMail support Pegusus Mail for the reason that I have used the crypto plug-in for Pegusus and found it inadiquate for general usage. Pegusus's current crypto hooks do not deal well with remailers and multiple keys. PGPMail does not deal with remailers as well as I would like, but it is far easier to use than the Pegusus solution. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMu2e++QCP3v30CeZAQG33wf9GL2yZodjFYsSPTsfO+zgmi+UtzGWKCJe OBcdIRxw+eRIS+wzVE39QYiWNsNHx9hijRtyXnVkdPNUWOoAZMTtJ5ndbFl+TtCQ PNicvtitryrPc4VrD+VOr/uZ98Yyf1YEQXxs8+CAocJ4uujerC2bsSaG2xtqtBKZ 8fS64D0P9MklNuGWS4/RYsJsnNtdJP7I7L7G+WFd8L1PAzvlrgq3ClJ+zuBBGrQf A/tz9YTIck0anRBifOKCUlRAtpTe0tElCvJKv7QPxLgHAJxM+rg1GHj35SY6QlKs b3cUpjxWolL5c4WvZcyOYRf9CPp2Gr5D2XMgIrydmgQYQStP/8Orhw== =79pa -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From jimbell at pacifier.com Mon Jan 27 23:10:54 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:10:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701280710.XAA22120@toad.com> At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >any recognition of this fact. >........................................................ > >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of using encryption. If we were satisfied to protect ourselves from, say, 99.999% of the ordinary population of this country who might want to read our messages, we'd all be satisfied with DES and we'd be happy with GAK. But the fact is, most of us recognize that the REAL reason for good encryption is to keep our messages away from a tyrannical government with far more assets than individuals or small organizations. >2) Why do you suppose the Iraqis haven't already thought of doing this >themselves? You need to be a little more specific about who you are referring to when you say "the Iraquis." Presumably, you aren't referring to the "Iraqui on the street"? Perhaps you're talking about the politicians and government officials there, right? Well, if that's the case then the answer should be obvious. AP is, fundamentally, a system that will take down all governments everywhere after it starts up anywhere. The leadership of Iraq may be the leaders of a third-rate, third-world country, but as comedian Mel Brooks said in the movie, "History of the World, Part I," "It's good to be the king!" And it is. These official-types have far more in common with the leadership of the other countries than they do with their own citizens. If anything, they're probably actually even MORE rewarded by their position than the leadership of westernized countries. After all, Clinton makes about $250K per year and it's pretty risky for him to receive direct bribes. Kick him out and he only loses a cushy job with lots of prestige. Saddam Hussein and his family, on the other hand, probably was able to rake in hundreds of millions of dollars a year in baksheesh. What makes you think that the leadership of Iraq would want to craft a weapon (AP) which is guaranteed to drop them to the level of their citizenry, or maybe even get themselves killed? As for why the ordinary Iraquis didn't think of it... Or the ordinary people of any or every country, as well. Why didn't THEY think of it? Maybe this is just another case of "not invented here" syndrome: You're pissed off that you didn't think of it, and I did. Sorry, can't help that. >3) The Mafia uses this method all the time - why then haven't they achieved >a more rational society among themselves? That's just it! The Mafia DOESN'T use AP or anything like it. (Admittedly I can't really claim personal knowledge of the operation of the Mafia, you understand...!) In fact, apparently, they function diametrically opposed to the AP system. A complete AP-like system is structured (via encryption, etc) to totally avoid anybody having to trust anyone else. Each participant is kept honest mathematically. Nobody can inform on anyone else, because nobody knows anyone else's identity. In fact, a fully-implemented AP-type system not merely hides the identities of the participants from each other, but it also hides the existence of crimes committed by any of the other participants (if any) from each other. A donor to the AP system, for instance, can't know for sure that his donation money was paid to a person who killed a target. At most, he knows that the money was paid to somebody who, he's satisfied, had enough confidence that the death would occur on a particular date in the future to, in effect, bet money on the outcome. And AP allows anyone to participate in the system, regardless of whether he's trusted by the others. On the contrary, the Mafia, or at least what I've managed to pick up from decades of melodramatic movies and newspaper and magazine articles, depends intimately on people trusting each other. That's why it's so devastating to them when one of their own (Joseph Valachi, for instance) turns on them and rats. To be sure, that trust is backed up by threat of death for turncoats, which is why such defections are rare, but they do indeed occur. Also, AP (quite unlike the Mafia) encourages literally anyone to do jobs for it. The Mafia, quite the contrary, must trust people, so I assume they won't farm out their work to just anyone. (I should point out that your clear misinterpretation of AP, claiming that it is the way the Mafia does things, is just another example of such confusion among critics of AP. I attribute this to such a burning desire to discredit AP that you'll use practically any argument, however specious, to "prove" it to be incorrect or unworkable. You're not alone.) >4) Weren't governments (like the U.S.) instituted to prevent this sort of >thing (even if they don't work out as expected)? i.e., there were systems >of courts and lawyers and such instituted to openly deal with "criminal" >activity so that a) people could receive assistance against low-life >degenerate killers, and b) it could be proven that the accused were indeed >deserving of punishment. Remember "power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely"? The problem with all existing political systems (and particularly those fallen ones from the past) is that they put power in the hands of people who subsequently abuse it, destroying the checks and balances that were put in place. >Humans being what they are, this hasn't worked like it's supposed to, but >the point is that there is a reason why such ideas for systems of justice >were introduced in the first place. That reason, as I eloquently read in >a book, was "So That Reason May Live". That is, so that people who choose >to live in a "society" may do so by the method of solving problems through >the application of intelligence, rather than merely knocking each other off >because a voting majority decides they don't like someone. You misunderstand AP, yet again. AP doesn't really take votes, it merely totals donations. It is an essential element of the AP system that even a tiny minority should be able to kill individuals who are seen as threats, as long as this capability is universal. True, the smaller the minority the more uneconomical such an action would be for them, but it would be well within the ability of 1% of the population to avoid a another Holocaust by getting rid of those pushing for it. In the current political system, in the US for instance, 51% of the population is able to screw the remaining 49%, just as long as they can maintain the majority. Or, perhaps even more accurately and ominously, a tiny fraction of the population (the current leadership class) is able to screw the 49%, as long as they have the un-thinking backing of the remaining and relatively uninvolved 51%. AP disables this system. AP turns government into the moral equivalent of a pick-up football game: Nobody is being forced to play, and everybody and anybody can simply "get up and leave" whenever he wants to. The moment the "rules of the game" to make an individual's continued participation unsatisfying, he can leave. >Destructive people often ascend to positions of power not simply because >they are ruthless, but because they have 1) many sycophantic followers and >2) many ignorant, vulnerable people unable to prevent it. You might be >able to kill off one Saddam, but potentially many others would be waiting >in the wings to take his place. I don't think so. Let's suppose you could purchase the death of Saddam for $5 million. The next guy gets killed for another $5 million, and then the next, etc. Who would want to be the next leader? While $5 million dollars is certainly not pocket change for an individual, it is well within the capacity of the entire world to fund without any difficulty. Anybody considering taking over Saddam's job, aware of such an easy system to kill him, would have no motivation to piss off the world. Sooner or later, Saddam's place would have to be taken by a person who makes it absolutely clear to the rest of the world that he's no Saddam. In fact, he'll point out that he would be foolish to take the job if he had ulterior motives. Unless you believe that it's physically impossible for Iraq to have an honest government (at which point you're displaying what I believe was called jingoism?) you'll acknowledge that their system would be fixed rapidly. That's why AP will be so economical: The absolute certainty that enough money could be raised to get rid of anyone who poses a threat will make it simply unnecessary to do so, the vast majority of the time. It's called "deterrence," and is one of the reasons that 99.99% of the population doesn't rob banks, commit mass murder, or do any other anti-social things. Dictatorships will be impossible under AP because dictators simply won't be able to survive. By being ready at all times to pay to have a dictator killed, society will never have any dictators. Strange but true. >The situation surrounding the existence >of someone like Saddam is part of the contributing factors which keeps him >there, not simply that one man himself. Saddam is still in power because as long as the collective leadership of the countries of the world fear to set an example that will cost them their jobs and possibly their lives, they will gladly choose the $60 BILLION dollar "solution" to the Iraq problem, as opposed to my solution, AP, which would not only fix Iraq but every other country on the face of the globe. That's why the leadership will never choose it. The fact is, George Bush and his cronies kept Saddam in power by intentional acts, although he would never admit it. It was the same with Hitler and >with so many others - they don't just have an excess of "power" >concentrated within themselves which puts them in positions of control over >others - there will have been many people who will have helped put them >there, expecting to derive benefits from it. > >And what will be done about all those people who made this "power" >possible? You don't just kill the one man and be done with it - you have >to also "kill" the conditions which maintained him. >Blanc I assert AP does this quite well. AP makes it quite impossible to maintain a government which pisses off even a small fraction of the population. Anyone who feels abused in the citizen/government relationship will be able to opt out when he wants. "Abused", by my definition, is getting less benefit out of the arrangement than that person wants in relation to the assets he put in. "Governments" may still exist after AP, but in name only. They will not have the ability to force taxation, and they will primarily be a way to coordinate volunteer action, and will be dramatically shrunk from today's behemoths. Such a government can't be corrupted: To whatever extent that corruption makes that government a less-attractive as a project to an honest citizen, he will leave it and it will shrink, making it even less able to support that corruption. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 23:12:20 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:12:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701280712.XAA22156@toad.com> Kevin L Prigge wrote: > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 23:22:50 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:22:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <32EDA4EB.604D@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701280717.BAA16135@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Kevin L Prigge wrote: > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > > > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" > > The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to > be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can > not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else > from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - > if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most > people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? > Don't you like power, Dale? - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Mon Jan 27 23:25:40 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:25:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701280725.XAA22607@toad.com> jim bell wrote: > > At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: > >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') > >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > >any recognition of this fact. > >........................................................ > > > >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? > > Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list > concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using > encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of > using encryption. Actually AP is one of the more interesting topics here. I think that there is a clear need for an AP bot. Do you feel like writing it? - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 23:25:49 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:25:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EDA9B3.6FA0@gte.net> Nurdane Oksas wrote: > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > seems, Americans like their own women , which is all they > have seen maybe... > > Anywhere else and it's no different from Cleveland or Pittsburgh. > Well, can you say you've been 'anywhere else'? Lived all over So. Cal. for 12 years, 4 years in SE Tenn., close to Atlanta. Atlanta has some nice babes, warm weather. I fell totally in love with a girl from Chattanooga, who was probably the best college radio D.J. who ever lived. Lived in Charleston for a short while. Much smaller than Atlanta. Very cozy. Spent a lot of time in Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Detroit. The best babes there are usually the Chrissy Hynde (Akron) types. Spent 2-1/2 years in Southern Germany. Very, very nice. Loved Berchtesgaden (sp?). Interestingly enough, I have a fondness for English girls. Must be the ancestry thing. I'd really like to talk to some Welsh girls - my mum's grandparents came to the U.S. from there. What about you? From dthorn at gte.net Mon Jan 27 23:48:43 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:48:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701280301.TAA14685@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EDAF27.727B@gte.net> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote in article > > blanc wrote: > > > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis This [below] is one of the most remarkable posts I've ever seen.... > > > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba > > > should not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders > > > their civilians in retaliation for something their governments > > > supposedly did. > > > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > > > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from > > > other governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they > > > have the resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form > > > alliances, take their chances and retaliate, etc. > > I wish this were true, at least of nations which would be friendly > > to someone like me (white, Western, etc.). A bully on a school > > playground can always be knocked down, no matter how big or how > > vicious he is. Sadly, the U.S. bully cannot be knocked down. Bad > > enough you get nuclear, chemical, and/or biological stuff waved at > > you - if you get into a hot war like Desert Storm, your country is > > carpet-bombed with fleets of B-52's until it is thoroughly debilitated. > Actually the US is being remarkably ineffective in keeping > Cuba etc off the Net. If you don't believe me just try > the cuban home page. We had a Web server running in Sarajevo > during the siege back in '93. There is no way that the US govt. > can hope to control the Internet any more than it can control the > phone system. What is astonishing is that the Cuban authorities are > so keen to import a technology that breaks down their propaganda. This *is* amazing. The cuban govt. is *eager* (keen) to subvert their own propaganda. > The Cold War was not won by the arms race, it was won in > Eastern Europe which was never a major participant. The main > instrument that won it was West German TV which broadcast > pictures of supermarkets with full shelves into the homes > of East Germans every night. The viewers could see that it > was not mere propaganda and their relatives confirmed the > fact. As a result the East German guards on the Berlin wall > simply decided to leave their posts one night. That's it? The system collapsed because the guards left their posts? And no mutiny charges? Incredible. > The East Germans couldn't stop the TV signals either. When > Dresden started to become a ghost town because people wanted > to move to a town which could recieve the broadcasts the > East Germans ended up installing their own relay to keep > the locals happy. People left their own home towns just so they could watch TV? I know a lot of Americans who'd like to leave their towns to get away from TV, permanently. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 23:49:37 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:49:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Toto's database In-Reply-To: <3.0.32.19970126025513.006ba14c@ricochet.net> Message-ID: <32EDB7D6.5F52@sk.sympatico.ca> Greg Broiles wrote: > An interesting assertion. Is your database available for others to draw > their own conclusions from? As a matter of fact, it is. It consists of the cypherpunks unedited and flames list. > I'd appreciate seeing at least a first-level abstraction of the data Given the well-developed and ratiionally strong questions you asked in your post, I am afraid that you would find my abstractions of data rather rudimentary, at best. I keep a separate directory of CypherSpam, for my own purposes, and I merely popped the moderation-related criticisms into another directory and made some direct comparisons. I used my computer-brain to draw my conclusions from, which I suppose might raise the issue of personal bias and/or competent technology. (I regard my brain as a Pentium, but there are others who aver that it can more closely be compared to the digital circuitry on their office coffee-machine) > Of course, correlation alone doesn't tell us much. If it really exists, it > suggests that the two phenomena observed are related in some way, but it > doesn't tell us the nature or the cause of the relationship. That is why the world has need of spin-doctors, conspiracy theorists and data-analysts. > Another explanation would be that a moderation opponent is sending the > spams as a way to punish the proponents of moderation. This is an illogical conclusion, since the proponents of moderation receive the censored list, and therefore do not receive the UCE/Spams. On the other hand, the UCE/Spams are passed along to the other lists, despite the fact that not a single member of the list has indicated any desire to receive them. The fact that John and Sandy have shown absolutely no concern for 'protecting' the list members from UCE/Spam until their forced censoring of 'undesirable' list members indicates that the 'punishment' you mention applies only to those who oppose the censorship of list members. > I think this is especially true given the relatively inexact nature of the > "spam" weapon Unfortunately, the 'spam weapon' is an extremely exact science in the hands of those familiar with remailer systems and bots. Also, some of the spams appear to originate from toad.com itself, as opposed to coming from outside sources. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Mon Jan 27 23:51:19 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 23:51:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Moderated list is missing headers In-Reply-To: <199701280528.AAA03139@para.mne.net> Message-ID: <32EDCC24.1F51@sk.sympatico.ca> SpyKing wrote: > I mean no disrespect by this but this list is funny. The CypherPunks list is, and always has been, a 'hoot'. I have followed it since its inception, in various guises. It is the only list I still keep tabs on when I'm hiding under a rock to escape persecution, prosecution, and/or prostitution. I once read over a year's worth of postings in one stetch, after having surfaced following an unfortunate incident behind the Iron Curtain. That was when I fully realized that the course of the universe could be reliably predicted by following the CypherPunks list. (Picking the winner in the Kentucky Derby being one notable exception.) > I've never seen so much > bickering about moderation. I know you were a subscriber to the surveillance > list that's why I mention this. When I moderate I ONLY cut out the spam... > we haven't even had one flame yet... You have one of the best moderated lists that I have seen. Some of the posts are a definite 'stretch' as far as being on-topic is concerned, but we live in a world where people make different kinds of connections inside their brains, and I have always believed that keeping too tight a rein on the human animal will lead to crushing the spirit within. Several years ago, when the CypherPunks were on the cover of 'Wired', I inserted a short post suggesting that their philosophies regarding anarchism, privacy and free speech would be put to the test when recognition, money and power entered the cypher-picture. I only became active on the list, under my present persona, about a month before 'moderation/censorship', as a result of receiving word that changes were in the wind that would make my prediction prophetic. It has been said that one can reliably predict the future course of civilization by following the progress of men of genius and the insane. To this, I would add the CypherPunks list, which seems to fully encompass both arenas. > I suppose if we had someone like the > guy who flames Tim May all the time it would be necessary... The Tim May flames were a simple matter of office politics. He could not be counted on to 'go quietly into the night' in regard for the plans for the New List Order. Anyone who chooses to spend the least amount of time analyzing the UCE/Spam content of the CypherPunks list can easily ascertain that there was a concerted blitzkrieg of postings aimed at creating an atmosphere wherein the BrownShirts could move in to address the 'problems' being created for the list. It was a classic 'takeover' of the list by those involved. It used the "Tim May" and "Make $$Money$$ Fast" UCE/Spams to implement a moderation/censorship system which could be used to bring the jackboot down on those whose postings do not fit in with the future socio/politico directions envisioned by those directing the takeover of the list. The forced unsubscribing of Dr. Dimitri was merely an opening salvo, to test the waters. He was the Saddam Hussein of Cypher Storm. Tim May presented a different problem. As a veteran, respected member of the CypherPunks list (respected, for the most part, even by those who violently disagreed with him), he needed to be eliminated through a combination of public humiliation and withdrawal of support by the elitist members of the list. The current moderation/censorship, and the process by which it was instituted, is a disgrace to the memory of a list which was, at one time a bastion of free speech. The CypherPunks list of the past is now dead. It has already been decided that, in the future, it will be controlled and directed, through censorship, to further its prostitution to the new financial frontiers of cryptology. > P.S. Those Tim May flames are hilarious although I probably wouldn't think > so if I were him... Hang on to them, they are now 'collectors items', probably worth a lot of money. If Tim May had a better sense of humor, he might have parlayed the posts into a guest spot on 'Letterman'. Toto From harka at nycmetro.com Tue Jan 28 00:08:07 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 00:08:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, does anybody know any contact points/Web pages, where I might get some information on e-mail filtering via trigger-words? I am interested in how this technology specifically works and a collection of trigger-words would be nice too :) Thanks in advance... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMuhpbjltEBIEF0MBAQGiOwf+N61i3Vj1XjmhKLm+qispHDxsu4Wde8nb BtMkVOAt9MGlihKftUAvp7l8aUcr5+D5jFh4/1VllO+QeZ4Yni9kM40xBLry1LYD yiLqpeNMfz2Zf6XMqGaNc8lblx9qyNHyJBHf5p8OfJWN47LcIn8CYkhDSq6b3Sch rHNBg8RjuCKQGD3XlCkwZLrYCUiCPFmSkKeuYpSaPkXgqgf7Zku68RrmqhRzbF1m UneIgxMXqWFetIBHe8PIcQpLrN0X+lRMCnCFVY9x7Rsy4QJc3f8lZ7YKo2xDiGXb Ly+wiA6sexlwwf+BdLDRu3fshI4eCpe7KbfWmzf3z0pdpvdRfUiJuw== =KEb+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com Tue Jan 28 00:10:46 1997 From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com (Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 00:10:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html Message-ID: <199701280826.DAA00864@linux.nycmetro.com> Reuters New Media [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: UK Bill To Fight Millennium Computer Bug Moves On Next Story: Intel to Europe: Get Online Or Fall Behind _________________________________________________________________ Monday January 27 9:50 AM EST UAE Launches Service To Censor Internet DUBAI - The United Arab Emirates's monopoly Internet provider launched a service Saturday to censor sites in cyberspace that breached local moral values and traditions. Officials from state telecommunications company Etisalat said the new Proxy Service would be compulsory for the UAE's 9,669 subscribers, who will have to configure their web browsers that navigate the net by February 2. "The service was launched today as part of our efforts to improve the Internet service to our subscribers after lengthy study and research," said one official at Etisalat. "We were working on it before some official statements were made on the need to control access to some sites on the service," he told Reuters. The move follows repeated calls to regulate access to the Internet in the conservative Gulf region, where most women are veiled, magazine pictures revealing cleavage or bare legs are blacked out and questioning the existence of god can be punishable by death. Some are worried about the spread of pornography as well as religious and political material through the worldwide network of interlinked computers. Last year, Dubai Police chief Major General Dhahi Khalfan Tamim created a rare public row in the UAE saying the information ministry and the police, rather that Etisalat, should be authorized to issue Internet licenses as it was their job to monitor data coming into the UAE and maintain security. Telecommunications experts say the Proxy Service will not be "fully water-tight," but would help block access to known and unwanted sites -- a list of which could be constantly updated. The proxy server will be pre-fed with Internet addresses where access is blocked off, industry sources said. But the server will be unable to block access if addresses of prohibited sites are changed, as frequently happens. Etisalat says it will disconnect any customer who abused its Internet services and violated "order and clear laws." "Singapore has succeeded to a great extent in its drive to control harm done by the Internet," said another Etisalat official. "Why cannot we?" Singapore government measures to regulate political and religious content on the Internet and keep it free of pornography became effective in July last year. They require all Internet service operators and local content providers to be registered with the Singapore Broadcasting Authority. Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved _________________________________________________________________ ________________________ ___________ Help _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: UK Bill To Fight Millennium Computer Bug Moves On Next Story: Intel to Europe: Get Online Or Fall Behind _________________________________________________________________ [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Reuters Limited Questions or Comments From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 00:13:59 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 00:13:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701280717.BAA16135@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32EDB51D.31DF@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > Kevin L Prigge wrote: > > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > > > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" > > The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to > > be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can > > not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else > > from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - > > if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most > > people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? > Don't you like power, Dale? I have a great deal of respect for power. When I was 6, I unwound a coat hanger and put both ends into an electrical outlet. All I remember from that is something like a sledgehammer hitting me, and I went backwards rather quickly. And I never did it again. But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would suffice to be immediately terminated. The best place to begin, in the USA at least, would be the public freeways. There you have the most acts of aggression in a short space, and the best pickings for liquidation. Give me the power, and I'll show you all those nifty techno-ways of eliminating people that have been kept from the public by our benevolent government ("sources and methods"). BTW, I don't give a damn about someone "cutting me off", since I'm not aggressive enough (outside of my liquidation duties) to be bothered by that in most cases. I'm primarily concerned with vehicles who get too close behind, who pass with no safety margin, etc. I call these people anal-compulsive (as opposed to anal-retentive). You've seen the videos on PBS, the various animal species whose male members perform occasional "mounting" of others to intimidate. There are a large percentage of humans who try to do the same thing, demonstrating that they (IMO) have no further need of their lives. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 28 00:32:00 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 00:32:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... In-Reply-To: <199701271426.GAA23780@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970127091008.0063c918@popd.ix.netcom.com> >>If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I >>type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private >>Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? >>If so, how would that be done? You're much safer if you're using an operating system instead of a kluge like Windows... On the other hand, operating systems make it easier to run applications like telnet servers that allow someone else to connect to your system while you're on line. Some different ways you could be at risk include - someone sends you a keystroke-sniffer program and tricks your machine into running it - so it grabs your passphrase from PI or PGP and sends it in later - someone sends you a keystroke-sniffer program and tricks _you_ into running it, whether they use email, web, etc. - someone logs into your system, guesses that the root password is "trustno1", and modifies your copy of PGP to save keystrokes. (On MSDOS, of course, you don't _need_ a root password.) - someone sets up a web page with an evil ActiveX script that convinces your Internet Explorer to download a new copy of PGP. - someone sends you email with an attachment named ..\..\..\windows\pgp.exe and your mail system is dumb enough to accept the pathname. - somebody sends you email with an MS-Word/Excel/PPT attachment that, instead of having a dumb Concept macro virus, has a macro that does something useful like replace your copy of PGP, and you don't have any innoculation on your MS-Word. - any of the above, where the "pgp" program is replaced with one that's almost identical but uses non-random numbers instead of good randoms, and maybe also leaks out your secret key or passphrase. - any of the above, where your email program is modified to add Cc: janet at kremvax.su on outgoing smtp. > Still paranoid? Good! # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Jan 28 01:37:04 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 01:37:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970128012643.006ea2c8@mail.io.com> At 08:50 PM 2/27/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >I predict that within the next five years these >slander/libel laws will be used by some organization to prosecute defamation >of their Internet presence (eg web page graffitti). Within 10 years this >area will be one of the hotest areas of the new communications law. Civil actions against people doing "graffiti" are only interesting where the defendant has assets worth suing for. This economic dimension substantially limits the number of suits which will be brought. Corporate plaintiffs, if they chose to bring suit, would in many cases prefer to sue in federal court. (Federal juries tend to be more conservative and hence pro-corporate; they're also more likely to be friendly to an out-of-town corporation suing a local individual). To sue in federal court, the plaintiff needs to find a federal question or diversity jurisdiction. Other causes of action (like copyright infringement, trademark dilution, or false designation of origin) would provide a federal question and hence federal jurisdiction. Criminal prosecutions for defamation (in the case of "graffiti") are still unlikely - a much more straightforward charge would be unauthorized access to a computer or some flavor of fraud, depending on the facts. Confusion aids defendants, so I predict prosecutors will avoid defamation law (and its tar pits of actual malice and the defense of truth) when they are able to do so and still have a reasonable chance of conviction. >If they don't >understand the technology (eg forwarding private email to publicly >accessible lists by accident) how in the world are they going to understand >what is best, let along convince anyone else? There's a world of difference between understanding technology and screwing up once in awhile. Perhaps you've never screwed anything up (although your summary of US defamation law ought to count), but the rest of us do, from time to time. Were I involved in computer-related litigation, I'd choose an attorney who could talk to a jury over an attorney who was good with computers, hands down. Not even a question. And I'd pick an attorney who owned up to making mistakes sometimes over someone who imagined him or herself somehow superior to people who fuck up now and then. >It has been proposed by at least one party that a district attorney or other >public prosecutor would not act on such events. This is also naive. I was that "party", and I guess that in trying to be civil I was actually unclear. If you were a politically important person or organization, and if Toto's message had caused you real damage, and if Toto were reasonably available to prosecute, a prosecutor might get interested. But you're not important, Toto would be difficult to extradite, and you weren't harmed. So you picked a crappy example to make your point(s) with. Change the facts, and you'll get a different answer. Duh. >The >ramifications for their political opponents to use this 'insensitive and >clearly self-interested' refusal to act as a perfect example of how that >prosecutor is interested in their own political career and not in the >interest of the people they are charged with protecting as well as a good >demonstration of their technological ignorance. It would be very difficult >to get re-elected in such an environment. Yeah, I'll bet that your local prosecutor's failure to prosecute Toto is going to cost them dearly in the next election. You picked a hypothetical which did a poor job of illustrating the points you're making in this later message. Do you want to talk about whether or not Toto is criminally liable for making fun of you while making a point about ownership of networks and its relationship to freedom of speech, or do you want to talk about the more general case of liability for misattribution? If it's the latter, yes, there are some issues there, but I still think that defamation law is a poor way to address them. You seem to be having an "I've got a hammer, everything looks like a nail" problem. And all of this seems a bit contrived if the real crypto-relevant point is "use digital signatures to avoid misattribution". >All that I ask is that instead of jumping the gun and saying 'it ain't so' >you simply consider the ramifications from 'their' perspective. It truly is >amazing what one can learn by walking a mile in another mans shoes. For if >there is one truth to be learned it is that this discussion is not about how >it is, but rather how it will be and how it should be. Despite your closing, I haven't seen you write anything about "how it should be", beyond the idea that people should learn more about digital signatures. You've forwarded lots of information from other people's web pages about defamation liability in different jurisdictions, but no discussion about why the rules we've got now are good ones (or bad ones). Other commentators have suggested that defamation law is obsolete (Tim May) or should be reconsidered in light of a victim's ability (via the net) to reply to a defamer (Mike Godwin). Do you have a proposal along these lines? Your message suggests to me that you're very pro-plaintiff with respect to defamation (at least when you're the plaintiff), but you haven't explained why other people should adopt your perspective. You did suggest that juries are also likely to think it's in their best interests to find for plaintiffs (because they might find themselves in similar circumstances someday); but it's unclear to me why that reasoning wouldn't make them equally likely to side with defendants (because they might be wrongfully accused of doing something bad), or why your logic wouldn't apply to every case, not just defamation cases. And, for what it's worth, juries aren't supposed to consider "what is in our best interest" either as individuals nor as a community, nor is that a legitimate topic for argument to the jury with respect to questions about liability or guilt. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From jlkmiec at concentric.net Tue Jan 28 04:09:07 1997 From: jlkmiec at concentric.net (jlkmiec at concentric.net) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 04:09:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: (((( Cool new marketing technique discovered, cheap & very effec Message-ID: <199701280958.EAA27503@newman.concentric.net> The following should be of interest to you, if not please disregard you are NOT on a list and will not receive future mailings. AMAZING DIRECT MARKETING TECHNIQUE DISCOVERED We have after spending years researching developed a way for a company to sell ANY product more effectively. It is not bulk E-mail, it is much more effective. It is ideal for anyone in MLM who needs to contact only interested MLM partys or any other company for that matter. All you need to do is say how many people you want us to contact and we will give you a rate and implement the system. You get qualified leads that are easy to close. You can sample this for as little as $20 which will put your product directly in touch with 5000 people. All you need to do is E-mail us a little about your target audience and we will take care of the rest. From the information we relay to you, you should have a list of very qualified cantidates for your product. Special 50,000 contacts only $100!!!!!! Copyright 1997 Innovative Concepts From jlkmiec at concentric.net Tue Jan 28 04:11:28 1997 From: jlkmiec at concentric.net (jlkmiec at concentric.net) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 04:11:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: (( New marketing technique discovered, cheap & very effective))) Message-ID: <199701281010.FAA29927@newman.concentric.net> The following should be of general interest to you. If it is not please excuse the intrusion. You are NOT on a list and will NOT be contacted again. AMAZING DIRECT MARKETING TECHNIQUE DISCOVERED We have after spending years researching developed a way for a company to sell ANY product more effectively. It is not bulk E-mail, it is much more effective. It is ideal for anyone in MLM who needs to contact only interested MLM partys or any other company for that matter. All you need to do is say how many people you want us to contact and we will give you a rate and implement the system. You get qualified leads that are easy to close. You can sample this for as little as $20 which will put your product directly in touch with 5000 people. All you need to do is E-mail us a little about your target audience and we will take care of the rest. From the information we relay to you, you should have a list of very qualified cantidates for your product. Special 50,000 contacts only $100 (Save $100)!! Copyright 1997 Innovative Concepts From Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at BXL.DG13.cec.be Tue Jan 28 04:32:34 1997 From: Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at BXL.DG13.cec.be (Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at BXL.DG13.cec.be) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 04:32:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to subscribe Message-ID: I have learned from the discussions in this list that there are other lists related to this one. Can anybody send me information on what is available and when this confusion created by having different lists will stop. cypherpunks : unmoderated and uncensored cypherpunks : unmoderated and censored cypherpunks : moderated and uncensored cypherpunks : moderated and censored cypherpunks : US eyes only -- export restrictions cypherpunks : Europe cypherpunks : private mail Theodor W. Schlickmann From aga at dhp.com Tue Jan 28 04:34:44 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 04:34:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? In-Reply-To: <199701272217.OAA08800@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: > At 01:14 AM 1/27/97 -0600, ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > >I am not sure if you posted this information in response to my request > >to cite a statute that would prove that libel is a crime. > > > >Me> Jim Choate wrote: > >Me> > > >Me> > > >Me> > > >Me> > Are you aware that attributing statements in print to a party when that > >Me> > party did not write them is a crime? > >Me> > >Me> cite the statute > > > > > >These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel > >is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government > >cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured > >(libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. > > On the contrary, in some jurisdictions libel is indeed a crime. However, > that doesn't mean that prosecutions happen anymore, but the laws are (in > some places) still on the books. > > > > > Jim Bell > jimbell at pacifier.com > Jim, either you are full of shit or that Law is VERY unconstitutional. The first amendment prohibits any Criminal Laws from being made against libel. Being able to defame somebody is clearly within Freedom of speech. The only thing that is illegal in this Country is any speech proposing the killing of any President, and we can live with that. Nothing else is ever prohibited by the Criminal Law. Your only remedy for defamation of any kind is a civil Lawsuit. -DrG,Esq. esq at pgh.org by/aga.bot/telnet From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 05:14:04 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:14:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to subscribe In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EE1818.2CB5@sk.sympatico.ca> Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at BXL.DG13.cec.be wrote: > > I have learned from the discussions in this list that there are other lists related to > this one. Can anybody send me information on what is available and when this confusion > created by having different lists will stop. > cypherpunks : unmoderated and uncensored - This is a list for handsome, witty, intelligent people who believe in the actual practice of free speech in regard to cryptography and its socio/politico implications. > cypherpunks : unmoderated and censored - This list is the same as the one above, only it includes the postings 'accidently' routed to /dev/null. (You need a /dev/null 'reader' to access it. I recommend one from the makers of the Infinite Hard Drive) > cypherpunks : moderated and uncensored - This list consists of only Sandy's postings. > cypherpunks : moderated and censored - This list consists of formerly free CypherPunks who were forcibly relocated into its confines. The members of this list are grotesquely deformed, slow-witted creatures, although some appear to be idiot savants and are able to work very well with numbers. Nonetheless, they have little chance of escaping the Dark Storm which is descending upon them. Legend has it that its server was once a handsome princebot who kissed the wrong ass, and turned into a toad.com. > cypherpunks : US eyes only -- export restrictions - This is a list composed entirely of foreign spies. > cypherpunks : Europe - This is a list that will soon be beseiged by Attila T. Hun. > cypherpunks : private mail - This is a list accessible only to the two people exchanging the private mail and the DOD (barring use of PGP). The confusion created by having different lists will stop when the 'other boot' drops. Toto From aga at dhp.com Tue Jan 28 05:18:45 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:18:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701280717.BAA16135@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > Kevin L Prigge wrote: > > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > > > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > > > > > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" > > > > The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to > > be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can > > not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else > > from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - > > if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most > > people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? > > > > Don't you like power, Dale? > > - Igor. > Power corrupts, in some instances. From aga at dhp.com Tue Jan 28 05:21:05 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:21:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <32EDB51D.31DF@gte.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Kevin L Prigge wrote: > > > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > > > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > > > > > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" > > > > The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to > > > be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can > > > not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else > > > from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - > > > if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most > > > people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? > > > Don't you like power, Dale? > > I have a great deal of respect for power. When I was 6, I unwound a > coat hanger and put both ends into an electrical outlet. All I > remember from that is something like a sledgehammer hitting me, and > I went backwards rather quickly. And I never did it again. > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > suffice to be immediately terminated. The best place to begin, in > the USA at least, would be the public freeways. There you have the > most acts of aggression in a short space, and the best pickings for > liquidation. Give me the power, and I'll show you all those nifty > techno-ways of eliminating people that have been kept from the public > by our benevolent government ("sources and methods"). > > BTW, I don't give a damn about someone "cutting me off", since I'm > not aggressive enough (outside of my liquidation duties) to be bothered > by that in most cases. I'm primarily concerned with vehicles who get > too close behind, who pass with no safety margin, etc. I call these > people anal-compulsive (as opposed to anal-retentive). You've seen > the videos on PBS, the various animal species whose male members > perform occasional "mounting" of others to intimidate. There are a > large percentage of humans who try to do the same thing, demonstrating > that they (IMO) have no further need of their lives. > Boy, it is a fucking Bitch living in that L.A. traffic, huh? From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 28 05:33:27 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 05:33:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: A moment with Dale (Rejection policy, etc.) Message-ID: <199701281333.FAA15951@mailmasher.com> Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 From: Dale Thorn CC: cypherpunks at toad.com Subject: Re: Rejection policy, etc. Dale Thorn obviously wrote: >I have a great deal of respect for power. When I was 6, I unwound a >coat hanger and put both ends into an electrical outlet. All I >remember from that is something like a sledgehammer hitting me, and >I went backwards rather quickly. And I never did it again. Why do I do this? Typical Dale. A moment with Dale. Stories from the past. However, there may be some grain of truth in this. Such socket poking might well explain Dale's (shall I say) specialness. He went backwards quickly and has, relentlessly, never reversed direction. Too bad he didn't keep on doing it again and again. Ho hum. More Dale. XO From MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com Tue Jan 28 06:07:30 1997 From: MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen, Patrick) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 06:07:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [noise] RE: Shave the Whales Message-ID: Is there a way we can keep the caricatures w/out getting the rest of the message w/ these postings? I like the ASCII art, but... BTW, I don't know if the joke was in the original posting (I notice the RE: header), but -- Mammals have hair. Whales are mammals. Shave the whales! ~ Patrick >---------- >From: Huge Cajones Remailer[SMTP:nobody at huge.cajones.com] >Sent: Monday, January 27, 1997 4:30 PM >To: cypherpunks at toad.com >Subject: Re: Shave the Whales > >Dr.Disruptive Vasectomy died of AIDS last night with his >homosexual lover. > > \|/ > @ @ > -oOO-(_)-OOo- Dr.Disruptive Vasectomy > > > > From eb at comsec.com Tue Jan 28 12:42:57 1997 From: eb at comsec.com (Eric Blossom) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 12:42:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) In-Reply-To: <199701201612.IAA12435@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701281938.LAA10043@comsec.com> >> It is not clear you need signatures in the secure phone case. Eric >> Blossom's 3DES uses straight DH for key exchange with verbal verification >> that both ends are using the same key. > >How does Eric's box display the negotiated key to the user? (I don't >recall the pair I saw having displays). Latest versions have an LCD display that reports the type of crypto being used (3DES), as well as 24 bits worth of SHA-1 of the public exponentials exchanged. Alice sends g^x mod p, Bob sends g^y mod p. Let m = min(g^x mod p, g^y mod p) and n = max(g^x mod p, g^y mod p). compute v = SHA (concat (OCTET_REP (m), OCTET_REP (n))). Display the high 24 bits of v. >Also I thought it would be kind of cute if there were some way for >phones to exchange their signature keys `face to face' as well. Currently, absent some kind of widely deployed public key infrastructure, there are no signature keys used. This also means that the units do *not* contain any long term secrets, just the session key which is destroyed at the end of the call. Eric From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 28 13:01:58 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:01:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701282026.MAA23636@cygnus.com> At 08:00 PM 1/27/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >blanc writes: ... >> 2) Why do you suppose the Iraqis haven't already thought of doing this >> themselves? > >Perhaps because they love Saddam, who really is a great guy. Stop listening >to what U.S.gubmint and media tell you and use your brain. What did >Saddam do to _you? Those of us in the US have the luxery of secret ballots, Iraq is not. What was reported to me (by the media) was that those who decided to vote against Hussein, in a time when food was scarce, decided to vote against eating. It was not made illegal to vote him out, merely a catch 22, unless enough people agreed openly, the vocal minority would suffer. What we should have been doing as the troops pulled out and a no fly zone was being established was dropping bombs full of bread on the populus. Then they could have voted any which way they chose. ... >> Destructive people often ascend to positions of power not simply because >> they are ruthless, but because they have 1) many sycophantic followers and >> 2) many ignorant, vulnerable people unable to prevent it. You might be >> able to kill off one Saddam, but potentially many others would be waiting >> in the wings to take his place. The situation surrounding the existence >> of someone like Saddam is part of the contributing factors which keeps him >> there, not simply that one man himself. It was the same with Hitler and >> with so many others - they don't just have an excess of "power" >> concentrated within themselves which puts them in positions of control over >> others - there will have been many people who will have helped put them >> there, expecting to derive benefits from it. > >I don't like your Saddam example, having much admiration for the man, but >again this goes back to the perceived likelihood of future assassination. >If Saddam is killed in an unlikely event, he will be succeeded by someone >who does not fear assassination. If all potential successors are convinced >that the rubout can be repeated, they won't go for the job. Remember, the >purpose of "terrorism" is not just to kill someone, but to "terrorize". > >> And what will be done about all those people who made this "power" >> possible? You don't just kill the one man and be done with it - you have >> to also "kill" the conditions which maintained him. > >You rub out enough key people and terrorize their potential successors >into not wanting to take over their jobs, and the system collapses. ... I don't remember where I heard this, and in all likelyhood, I heard it here. This is certainly not a direct quote, ant would the origional poster please speak up. There came a time, in some ancient civilization when the king committed suicide by eating poisoned food. In the remaining week, most of the household, apparently in honor of the deceased king, jumped on kitchen knives and butcher knives, killing themselves. The brother of the king would not come out of hiding because some unknown person was terrorizing him with a meat cleaver. After a year, it was apparent that no one in the line of succession still survived, all killing themselves with kitchen utensils. It was rumored that the post was cursed. It was then that the royal galley slave bravely stepped foreward to rule the kingdom until one of the origional line should return. The decendants of the galley slave have ruled to this day. Like I said, I don't know where this came from, but I would like to see it again, if it came from here. From erp at digiforest.com Tue Jan 28 13:02:04 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:02:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On 28 Jan 1997, Derek Atkins wrote: > Erp writes: > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > > > This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be > admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and > 1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. You > can think of being admitted with even lower scores, if you stand out > in some way. MIT admissions looks for well-rounded students. You're > much better off being a writer/artist/musician than being on the > science or math teams. > Hmm.... Then a have a lieing blah blah blah of a counselor >) hehe I applied for MIT, and even had an interview.. Then dropped my application after getting chewed out by my counselor, and having had her refuse to fill out anything on my second part of the application that said specifically "COUNSELOR ONLY" went to the principal and he refused.. Filled it out myself, and since it didn't have the counselors signature ... I dropped it aka they dropped me but its easier to say it hteo ther way around. And yes I understand the well-rounded thing.. But then again you hav eto consider that the average student at MIT has applied at least two times. I know that one for a fact from some program or something I read that MIT puts out. > > what he wants to be before he goes to some major college such as MIT, > > because tuition at MIT costs approx 100,000$/4 years. Personally that is > > a hell of a lot, but then again *shrug*... I recommend going to a local > > It may be alot, but then again MIT is one of the best schools in the > world (I'm not going to be egotistical enough to say it *is* the best, > even tho Consumer Reports rated it such for the last N years). True, it is one of the best, can't argue against that.. But there are others that are better in certain areas.. from my knowledge MIT expresses more in its engineering departments than anything else though.. Although I do know a very philosophical physics professor there so *shrug*.. maybe I'll apply again some day.. And yes all the rest of my requirements wher ehigh.. I am a swimteam captain, first trombone in my school, for marching jazz pep and symphonic bands.. I'm also the lead french horn.. Then I have the little side things such as Chess team captain.. and have tha precious 3.6 GPA the only proglem with it is I ahve one teacher that gave me a D in my freshman year, so I can't get into honor society .. go figure... But hey such is life.. I'm planning on reapplying after I get into college and raise myself back to a 4 point so who knows what will happen.. > > This is untrue. The computer science department at MIT is really > good. As are the sciences, and even business! The MIT Sloan School > (Management and Economics) was rated #1 last year. The EECS > department (EE and CS are together) is top notch, too. Really good yes.. Not necessarily the best though.. Check everywhere.. each aspect of every college may have one thing that he is specifically interested in that would be better than going to MIT or some other such place3... > > Ciro Maria writes: > > > Yeah Stevens Institute in Hoboken. Its pretty good I got there. Also > > Caltech is good, I don't really know which else. > > When I looked at Caltech, their Engineering (and computer science) > really lacked. They were excellent for the Sciences (Math, Physics, > Chemistry, etc.) but their engineering school wasn't as good as others > I was looking at (both EE and CS). Things may have changed in the > last 8 years, however. *nod* I do agree with that... THey are pretty much the same now.. > > > Spyking, my advise to you: Look around at many schools. Go visit > them. Talk to the students there. Talk to the professors. Talk to > graduates. The more information you and your son have, the better > decisions you and he can make. > > Personally, I loved MIT -- it was the right place for me. It isn't > the right place for everyone. Make sure it is the right place for > your son before he applies. For what it's worth, I wanted to go to > MIT my sophomore year in high school, too ;) I havet o ask, did you make it in on your first apply to it? and please forgive the mistypes in this.. I'm really lagged for some reason.. And well, It takes forever to go back when it is lagged this bd, so I ahven't can back and changed things automatically like I usually do... > Thanks, Erp From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 28 13:02:39 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:02:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <854471618.912223.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will > > have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be > > permenant, it is a form of online ethnic cleansing whereby the lists > > clique of illuminati have taken it upon themselves to remove the > > elements of the list they feel endanger their position of superiority > > and respect, the point they have missed is that they have no > > credibility whatsoever after this incident, as well as a number of > > other such occurances and therefore are only isolating themselves > > into their own little world. > > The Big Lie once again. yadda yadda yadda "Censorship!" yadda yadda > yadda "No Credibility" yadda yadda yadda ad nauseum. Blah Blah "Free speech advocates", Blah Blah "Foaming at the mouth anarchists".... > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" "Fascists will reply to posts with weak arguments" Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 28 13:04:04 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:04:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <854471616.912211.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > ...That was the intended direction of the list, it > > has rapidly disentigrated over recent months into a censored list > > where the elite post to the main list and anyone else is nearly > > always relegated to a seperate list for the crypto-untermenshcen. > > Again, nonsense. The moderation experiment (moderation, not > censorship) has been in effect for all of ONE WEEK. Where does > Paul get this hysterical "recent months" stuff? The list has been disentigrating for some time since the disgusting incident when Dimitri was forcibly unsubscribed from the list. There have also been a number of postings from members of the list claiming to understand anarchism who support censorship to "protect new members of the list". > > If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: > > > > Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was > > to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and > > related issues... > > Paul's argument is the essence of literal conservativism, "but > I don't things to change!" Without change, though, there can be > no progress. Moderation is a one-month experiment. There is no > intellectual dishonesty in saying, "let's try something else for > a while." So, there would be no intellectual dishonesty in a country claiming to be a free and open society "trying out" fascism for a month or two? - After all it`s a private country just as this is a private list.... > > Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based > > censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present > > class structure,... > > "Unspoken but ever present class structure"? I wonder how Paul > was able to divine this? Certainly it is unspoken, but that, of > course, it because it does not exist anywhere but in Paul's > fertile imagination. There is a clear trend easily observable on the list whereby certain members postings are censored when their content is of a standard that, if the moderation were objective and based on content alone, would warrant their being sent to the censored list. If anyone here archives all of the list postings or is willing to retrieve them from the archive we can run some statistical tests and comparisons in a few weeks once the sample is large enough, however, the list oberfuhrer and leutenant von Sandfort will claim the statistical correlation between poster reputation among the upper class of list members and the number of their posts let onto the moderated list is caused by persistent flamers so this will not convince them.. > > It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will > > have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be > > permenant,... > > Great! I thought that hadn't been determined yet. What a > relief. I think you`ll find your poor attempt at making light of the situation does little to hide the fact that this censorship has finally confirmed that this is a private list and is no longer meant to be a free, anarchic discussion forum. I can tell you one other thing for sure, even if the moderation "experiment" were to end in a month as a last ditch attempt by John Gilmore and Sandy Sandfort to recover some of their lost credibility it would be a vain and entirely unsuccesful attempt. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From nowhere at erewhon.org Tue Jan 28 13:04:56 1997 From: nowhere at erewhon.org (Somebody) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:04:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access Message-ID: <32EE44E4.2B22@erewhon.org> This morning at the RSA keynote, David Aaron, the US Crypto ambassador quoted the "Sovreign Right of Lawful Access" as something that goverments were determined to preserve. From tremle at connect-wales.co.uk Tue Jan 28 13:05:11 1997 From: tremle at connect-wales.co.uk (Neil Rogers) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:05:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: .hlp creation Message-ID: <199701281924.TAA06759@storm.connect-wales.co.uk> Howdi all, how are you, Can someone please help me, Can someone create a Windows 3.1 .hlp file fro me, when opened has a link to FILE MANAGER - U:\W31\winfile.exe Please, I have tried but can't do one, I would be really gratefull if someone could help! Thanks in advance, Neil .............. From MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com Tue Jan 28 13:05:20 1997 From: MullenP at ndhm06.ndhm.gtegsc.com (Mullen, Patrick) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:05:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Where's reference? (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: >>---------- >>From: Phil Karn[SMTP:karn at qualcomm.com] >>>If past cryptographic software is any indication, the DES Cracker >>>will be available from an overseas ftp site within hours of release in >>>the US. >> >>And lacking that, the author can always print it out on paper and >>physically mail it out of the country; this is specifically allowed by >>the new Commerce rules as I understand them. And who's to say that the >>overseas FTP copies weren't scanned from such a paper copy? :-) >> >>Phil > Where can I get a reference to this? I thought you weren't supposed to transmit cryptographic code out of the U.S. under any means, including print... >(???) > >~ Patrick > From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 28 13:05:24 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:05:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <854471619.912219.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > The exercise reveals to me that only by ignoring the first paragraph > > of your example, the part that reads "Imagine if you will a list, > > the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum > > for discussion of cryptography and related issues." can you make > > a claim of content based censorship. The purpose of this list was Maybe this was misleading, that was indeed a purpose of the list but it was also supposed to be a free and anarchic list where people were not prevented from posting whatever they want. Even if it were the case that we accepted content based censorship that is no defence of the obvious class system that is in place whereby certain posters are automatically sent straight to the moderated list and others are censored regardless of the content of their posts. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 28 13:06:28 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:06:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701282106.NAA01621@toad.com> > > ...That was the intended direction of the list, it > > has rapidly disentigrated over recent months into a censored list > > where the elite post to the main list and anyone else is nearly > > always relegated to a seperate list for the crypto-untermenshcen. > > Again, nonsense. The moderation experiment (moderation, not > censorship) has been in effect for all of ONE WEEK. Where does > Paul get this hysterical "recent months" stuff? The list has been disentigrating for some time since the disgusting incident when Dimitri was forcibly unsubscribed from the list. There have also been a number of postings from members of the list claiming to understand anarchism who support censorship to "protect new members of the list". > > If you want to talk about intellectual dishonesty try the following: > > > > Imagine if you will a list, the original purpose of which was > > to act as a free and open forum for discussion of cryptography and > > related issues... > > Paul's argument is the essence of literal conservativism, "but > I don't things to change!" Without change, though, there can be > no progress. Moderation is a one-month experiment. There is no > intellectual dishonesty in saying, "let's try something else for > a while." So, there would be no intellectual dishonesty in a country claiming to be a free and open society "trying out" fascism for a month or two? - After all it`s a private country just as this is a private list.... > > Now imagine that list falling into a state of content based > > censorship and censorship based on an unspoken but ever present > > class structure,... > > "Unspoken but ever present class structure"? I wonder how Paul > was able to divine this? Certainly it is unspoken, but that, of > course, it because it does not exist anywhere but in Paul's > fertile imagination. There is a clear trend easily observable on the list whereby certain members postings are censored when their content is of a standard that, if the moderation were objective and based on content alone, would warrant their being sent to the censored list. If anyone here archives all of the list postings or is willing to retrieve them from the archive we can run some statistical tests and comparisons in a few weeks once the sample is large enough, however, the list oberfuhrer and leutenant von Sandfort will claim the statistical correlation between poster reputation among the upper class of list members and the number of their posts let onto the moderated list is caused by persistent flamers so this will not convince them.. > > It is a foregone conclusion that the upper class of list members will > > have no dispute over the censorship and therefore the change will be > > permenant,... > > Great! I thought that hadn't been determined yet. What a > relief. I think you`ll find your poor attempt at making light of the situation does little to hide the fact that this censorship has finally confirmed that this is a private list and is no longer meant to be a free, anarchic discussion forum. I can tell you one other thing for sure, even if the moderation "experiment" were to end in a month as a last ditch attempt by John Gilmore and Sandy Sandfort to recover some of their lost credibility it would be a vain and entirely unsuccesful attempt. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From sandfort at crl.com Tue Jan 28 13:07:04 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:07:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <854471616.912211.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 27 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > The list has been disentigrating for some time since the disgusting > incident when Dimitri was forcibly unsubscribed from the list. I'm curious about the gratuitous use of the word "forcibly" by Paul. Does this mean Gilmore took a fire axe to the computer or something? Dimitri was unsubscribed. It was done more or less against his will. ("More or less" because he in effect said to John, "bet you can't stop me.") What does "forcibly" add to this discussion besides melodrama? No force was required. John had the right and ability to pull the plug on Dimitri. "No animals were harmed in the making of this film." "Force," my ass. > have also been a number of postings from members of the list claiming > to understand anarchism who support censorship to "protect new > members of the list". There are various definitions of "censorship" and various flavors of anarchism. I'm a market anarchist, Paul is not. Paul claims to believe that any form of moderation is censorship. I think that enforcing standards of decorum on a private, voluntary list are not censorship. Reasonable minds may differ. I acknowledge that Paul's interpretations are not without some justification. (I just think they are incorrect in the instant case.) Paul, on the other hand, seems to be a True Believer. He brooks no view other than his own. (Curiously hypocritical under the circumstrances.) > So, there would be no intellectual dishonesty in a country claiming > to be a free and open society "trying out" fascism for a month or > two? - After all it`s a private country just as this is a private > list.... Paul's sophistry is showing. Nation-states are entities that exercise a monopoly on the use of force (real force, Paul) within (and often without) their boundries. Mail lists are far more like private homes, businesses or clubs. When you are a guest there, you are subject to their rules of behavior. > There is a clear trend easily observable on the list whereby certain > members postings are censored when their content is of a standard > that, if the moderation were objective and based on content alone, > would warrant their being sent to the censored list. Several substantive examples, please. True, nothing Bill Stewart has posted has been sent to CP-Flames. One guess why. Numerous posts by Dimitri have been posted to CP-Moderated, but many more have not made the cut. There are much more obvious reasons for this than Paul's biased analysis. > I can tell you one other thing for sure, even if the moderation > "experiment" were to end in a month as a last ditch attempt by John > Gilmore and Sandy Sandfort to recover some of their lost credibility > it would be a vain and entirely unsuccesful attempt. YMMV. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 13:07:24 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:07:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <01BC0D1B.1237DBE0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> >That's it? The system collapsed because the guards left their posts? >And no mutiny charges? Incredible. I was there. The collapse of East Germany was quite spectacular. There was at most three months of warning. First there was a series of sit ins at foreign embassies, then a migration of large numbers of people in their twenties within the eastern block. I missed the actual collapse of the wall itself having to go to England. I was told of the sequence of events by friends in Berlin. By this time the protestors were confident enough to stage open demonstrations. The authorities had tolerated small scale demonstrations for some time provided they did not appear to be part of a larger movement. The sudden increase in numbers from tens to tens of thousands left the authorities unsure of what to do. They could not be sure of the reliability of the police should they attempt to violently suppress the demonstrations. To imprison the ringleaders was equally dangerous. The communists were aware that the South Africans had continued to be troubled by Mandela and Biko long after they were imprisoned or murdered. At some point a group of protesters approached the wall, probably hoping to goad the police into making an arrest. The guards made no response and the numbers increased to the point where firing of warning shots was impossible without causing a massacre. West German protesters joined from the other side of the wall. The border guards did try to use a water cannon but to little effect since the range was insufficient. At some point someone appeared with a sledge hammer and a pickaxe. Some people say that this was at the start of the protest, others that someone fetched them. I have heard people who believe that they were brought from either side of the wall. They started attacking the wall and soon had removed one of the panels. Next day the border guards quite literally abandoned their posts. The Brandenburg gate was opened for the first time in fifty years and the party apparatus all but collapsed. The only military activity during this period was GDR forces preparing against possible invasion by Soviet forces. Not that this was a logistical possibility since it was unlikely they would get across Poland unopposed. Read Norman Davies book "Europe a history" if you want to find out the background for the velvet revolution. It is one of the most amazing events in political history. It is a pity that people have forgotten so quickly about the real causes. It was not military power that prevailed but the protest movement. Unfortunately US commentators tend to see everything in terms of US cultural norms, many of which were explicitly rejected by the protestors. The East Germans wanted West German affluence, they wanted to be part of Western Europe. They were certainly not responding to US military spending as right wing theorists claim, nor was the economy collapsing because of the arms race, it was collapsing because of the costs of a totalitarian state and the incompatibility of that state with modern industrial organization. Phill From warlord at MIT.EDU Tue Jan 28 13:07:38 1997 From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:07:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <199701280003.QAA10002@toad.com> Message-ID: Erp writes: > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > > > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage > > son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in > > college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. > > Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? > > Well in reference to MIT.. I hope he has a 4.0 in highschool, is an > allsport, has a 1600 on his SAT's, and a prefect on his ACT.. Just to > even think about going there.. Let alone to include how well he'll have > to do on his interviews etc.. Also you may wish to have him look again at This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and 1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. You can think of being admitted with even lower scores, if you stand out in some way. MIT admissions looks for well-rounded students. You're much better off being a writer/artist/musician than being on the science or math teams. > what he wants to be before he goes to some major college such as MIT, > because tuition at MIT costs approx 100,000$/4 years. Personally that is > a hell of a lot, but then again *shrug*... I recommend going to a local It may be alot, but then again MIT is one of the best schools in the world (I'm not going to be egotistical enough to say it *is* the best, even tho Consumer Reports rated it such for the last N years). > small college, get his associates, see if that is what he still wants to > do, then go on from there. I know many people that started in Computer > Science and died after the first year. > Now colleges that are good for Computer Sc ience.. I have heard that RIT > is good.. but I'm nto sure on that.. I know pretty well positive that > MIT is excellent, but when you get down to the basics MIT is more of an > engineering school than a science/philosophical school which Computer This is untrue. The computer science department at MIT is really good. As are the sciences, and even business! The MIT Sloan School (Management and Economics) was rated #1 last year. The EECS department (EE and CS are together) is top notch, too. Ciro Maria writes: > Yeah Stevens Institute in Hoboken. Its pretty good I got there. Also > Caltech is good, I don't really know which else. When I looked at Caltech, their Engineering (and computer science) really lacked. They were excellent for the Sciences (Math, Physics, Chemistry, etc.) but their engineering school wasn't as good as others I was looking at (both EE and CS). Things may have changed in the last 8 years, however. Spyking, my advise to you: Look around at many schools. Go visit them. Talk to the students there. Talk to the professors. Talk to graduates. The more information you and your son have, the better decisions you and he can make. Personally, I loved MIT -- it was the right place for me. It isn't the right place for everyone. Make sure it is the right place for your son before he applies. For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high school, too ;) Good Luck, -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) Home page: http://www.mit.edu:8001/people/warlord/home_page.html warlord at MIT.EDU PP-ASEL N1NWH PGP key available From aga at dhp.com Tue Jan 28 13:08:53 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:08:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <32EE18D5.62DA@gte.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > aga wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > > suffice to be immediately terminated. No trial, huh? The best place to begin, in > > > the USA at least, would be the public freeways. There you have the > > > most acts of aggression in a short space, and the best pickings for > > > liquidation. Give me the power, and I'll show you all those nifty > > > techno-ways of eliminating people that have been kept from the public > > > by our benevolent government ("sources and methods"). > > > > > > BTW, I don't give a damn about someone "cutting me off", since I'm > > > not aggressive enough (outside of my liquidation duties) to be bothered > > > by that in most cases. I'm primarily concerned with vehicles who get > > > too close behind, who pass with no safety margin, etc. I call these > > > people anal-compulsive (as opposed to anal-retentive). You've seen > > > the videos on PBS, the various animal species whose male members > > > perform occasional "mounting" of others to intimidate. There are a > > > large percentage of humans who try to do the same thing, demonstrating > > > that they (IMO) have no further need of their lives. > > > Boy, it is a fucking Bitch living in that L.A. traffic, huh? > > I heard years ago that approximately 10% of the people on the street > are certifiably mentally unstable. Multiply that by two at least for > Los Angeles (suburban L.A., actually, Hollywood for example is much > safer than Altadena or Westlake Village). > Just carry a gun all of the time when you go over there. > Quincy M.D. (the old TV show) did an excellent piece once on how a > person can more-or-less legally commit murder with a car, by passing > a deliberate act off as an "accident". It's one area of our law > enforcement where the law (or rules) as stated by the state and as > enforced by the state cops don't even agree. > Maybe it is best to travel only on the net any more. The highways are deathtraps. From jya at pipeline.com Tue Jan 28 13:09:42 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:09:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Handbook of Applied Cryptography Message-ID: <199701282109.NAA01903@toad.com> Here's the publisher's URL for Handbook of Applied Cryptography, which amplifies Patrick's summary, and gives ordering info. http://www.crcpress.com/PRODS/8523.HTM Just reading the mouthwatering summaries and the extensive, detailed list of topics is a good primer on crypto. From karn at qualcomm.com Tue Jan 28 13:09:42 1997 From: karn at qualcomm.com (Phil Karn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:09:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Message-ID: <199701282109.NAA01904@toad.com> >If past cryptographic software is any indication, the DES Cracker >will be available from an overseas ftp site within hours of release in >the US. And lacking that, the author can always print it out on paper and physically mail it out of the country; this is specifically allowed by the new Commerce rules as I understand them. And who's to say that the overseas FTP copies weren't scanned from such a paper copy? :-) Phil From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 13:10:01 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:10:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701281651.KAA05582@einstein> Forwarded message: > From: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 21:36:13 -0500 > > I don't agree with your view of states. The inhabitants of a > geographical area are not mere chattels of the governing power. Exactly! By jove you got it! By demanding your liberty but demanding that 'we' go to Singapore or anywhere else and treat them as chattels we have clearly instituted a double-standard. Most parties in this discussion still haven't made that distinction. All we have done is replace their current tyrant with a new one, mainly us. > The right to rule rests on certain criteria which I believe neither > country meets. The harassment of opposition politicians in > obviously trumped up charges disqualifies any country from > calling itself a democracy. Exactly. And by applying pressure on Singapore we only help them keep that tyrany in place. The quickest way I know to make a social institution band together is self-preservation from an outside threat, real or perceived. > I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into > the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool > for confirming the present social order which is manifestly > corrupt. ALL social orders are corrupt. The 3 laws of thermodynamics apply to everything including social institutions. 1. You can't get ahead 2. You can't break even 3. You can't quit the game Heinz Pagels (RIP) Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 13:10:06 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:10:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy (fwd) Message-ID: <199701281642.KAA05566@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 01:28:19 -0800 > From: Greg Broiles > Subject: Re: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy > > Civil actions against people doing "graffiti" are only interesting where > the defendant has assets worth suing for. This economic dimension > substantially limits the number of suits which will be brought. Thank you for agreeing with my thesis that the legal industry is one driven by monetary gain and not justice. It is the one major problem with law today, it ignores those who are not 'worth it'. Justice is supposed to be blind and until that happens there can be no true liberty. Law should be involved in rights and wrongs and not 'how much money do I need to buy that villa in Spain'. There is also the aspect of 'reputation' of the organization which was defamed. This will become even more critical to good business over the Internet in the future than it is now. Now the only really important 'reputation' that one has to worry about is their credit report. Since it is very unlikely that such records will be made public in the future they won't be available so some other 'reputation' verification process will be required for parties interested in doing business with other parties they have no information on other than an email address or a webpage. This problem became very clear during the Austin Cypherpunks remailer project last year. The goal was to create a economicaly viable keyserver. The problem rapidly became one of trust and reputation and there was and still is no clear cut methodology for dealing with these concepts, let alone actualy trying to quantify them. Another aspect of this that keeps coming up is one of 'big' corporations with 'lots' of money, this monotonicity in legal thought is the reason I refer to the 'legal industry' and not 'legal profession'. Currently the main force driving law is how much money is available. Expansions of liberty simply can't happen in this environment because there is no mechanism to protect 'little' organizations or persons without 'lots' of cash. This problem is one that is not being addressed by anyone, most especialy lawyers who will loose income which they aren't apt to do voluntarily. > Criminal prosecutions for defamation (in the case of "graffiti") are still > unlikely - a much more straightforward charge would be unauthorized access > to a computer or some flavor of fraud, depending on the facts. This would be hard to do in the situation such as a mailing list because the parties would have 'authorized access' and it does not include the issue of inside parties nor 'web bbs's' where parties can enter comments and other statements in a 'authorized' manner. There are mechanisms to use computers for abuse of other parties besides hacking. > Confusion > aids defendants, so I predict prosecutors will avoid defamation law (and > its tar pits of actual malice and the defense of truth) when they are able > to do so and still have a reasonable chance of conviction. > > >If they don't > >understand the technology (eg forwarding private email to publicly > >accessible lists by accident) how in the world are they going to understand > >what is best, let along convince anyone else? > > There's a world of difference between understanding technology and screwing > up once in awhile. Absolutely. However, if there is not a fundamental understanding of the technology and its ramifications I certainly wouldn't want somebody making a case on my behalf because they would make assumptions which were not based in fact. In Toto's case the point I was refering to was not his sending private practice related material to a publicly accessible list (pretty reprehensible for my attorney accident or not) but rather his unsolicited admission that he didn't have any idea how it works. THAT would worry me if my liberty, possessions, or life were on the line. > I was that "party", and I guess that in trying to be civil I was actually > unclear. If you were a politically important person or organization, and if > Toto's message had caused you real damage, and if Toto were reasonably > available to prosecute, a prosecutor might get interested. But you're not > important, Toto would be difficult to extradite, and you weren't harmed. So > you picked a crappy example to make your point(s) with. Change the facts, > and you'll get a different answer. Duh. Actualy it is the PERFECT example of what is wrong with the law, it is the reason that I went to such extremes to force the situation. If the law can't protect Ma. and Pa. Kettle (their poor, being share croppers) under our 'democracy' it shure can't proctect them under a more 'liberalized' democracy which so many want and the technology will force. If the coming technocracy can't (or for monetary reasons won't) then it won't be any different that what we have now. A tyrant is a tyrant, my goal is to get rid of the cage and not to put a new layer of gilt on it. > You picked a hypothetical which did a poor job of illustrating the points > you're making in this later message. Do you want to talk about whether or > not Toto is criminally liable for making fun of you while making a point > about ownership of networks and its relationship to freedom of speech, or > do you want to talk about the more general case of liability for > misattribution? If it's the latter, yes, there are some issues there, but I > still think that defamation law is a poor way to address them. You seem to > be having an "I've got a hammer, everything looks like a nail" problem. The point is not whether Toto did or did not make fun of me, you seem to have a prediliction for personal attacks. It ain't. The point is that if joe-six-pack isn't secure in knowing that his views and expression are not protected from abuse he won't use it. We all loose in that case. > And all of this seems a bit contrived if the real crypto-relevant point is > "use digital signatures to avoid misattribution". You missed the point, keep pondering. I am shure it will come to you. > Despite your closing, I haven't seen you write anything about "how it > should be", Because I don't know how it should be, and it isn't my place or yours to make that decision. It is our responsibility to discuss this issue and to review the various solutions and what they will mean in the long run (as near as we can make the future out that is). In this example, if party A makes a statement and then B changes it and then re-distributes it as original comments by A then there is a problem irrespective of the monetary worth of A or B. Digital signatures in and of themselves won't help this from happening unless it is required to include the full text and signature of any quote in any subsequent use of that material otherwise the quote and the digital signature are out of sync and therefore worthless. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Tue Jan 28 13:10:23 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:10:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: [URGENT] Meet-in-the-middle attack Message-ID: <199701281549.IAA00745@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timmy C[retin] Maya grew a beard to look like his mother. \|||/ (o o) -ooO-(_)-Ooo- Timmy C[retin] Maya From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 13:10:46 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:10:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <01BC0D0D.272567B0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> jim bell wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility or consistency. If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be dead as a doornail in a week. Phill From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 13:10:52 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:10:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <01BC0D0D.284CF7C0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Asgaard wrote in article <5c92bo$lo9 at life.ai.mit.edu>... > On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > >The Web does not equal the Internet, straw man argument. > Actually at CERN we considered the Web to be a superset of the Internet protocols and others such as DECNET which ran on private networks such as our HEPNET. Since most of those private networks are now obsolete I would consider Web==Internet to be a reasonable equivalence. We always considered email and news to be part of the Web (news:, mailto:). The narrow view that the Web was only HTTP and HTML was a piece of Andressen propaganda. Phill From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 13:10:55 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:10:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <01BC0D0D.24B244D0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Jim Choate wrote in article <5c5891$ah at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > > this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? > > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > particular view on them. If Billy-Bob wants to shoot himself in the foot, > let him. Might be purty funny to watch. I don't agree with your view of states. The inhabitants of a geographical area are not mere chattels of the governing power. The right to rule rests on certain criteria which I believe neither country meets. The harassment of opposition politicians in obviously trumped up charges disqualifies any country from calling itself a democracy. > > The Web was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > > speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. > > Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share > data in a easily digestible format. That was not all. We had a political Web site established during the '92 election. I was in contact with Clinton's people when we had fewer than 100 Web sites. I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool for confirming the present social order which is manifestly corrupt. Phill From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 13:10:57 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:10:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <01BC0D0D.2B707EE0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Jim Choate wrote in article <5cg99p$7a at life.ai.mit.edu>... > The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of > 'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. The net is a bunch of computers, > running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and > EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility > support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody > else is along for the ride. The network is largely an intellectual creation. The hardware is relatively unimportant, it can always be replaced. > If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then once a box goes on > the net it belongs to nobody/everybody. Clearly utter nonsense. If you start from such a state and property centered ideology perhaps. I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of property you do. Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property" from the previous rulers. I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every philosopher since Locke. It is true that there is the convenience of the state as agency but the question is on whose behalf that agency is exercised. I see no reason why I should not meddle in the affairs of states I'm not a 'subject" of. > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > understand what is going on. They are allowed to connect their machinery to the Internet so long as they are prepared to accept the Internet's ethic. They are not allowed to have a free ride, to demand a valuable connection facility on their own terms. > ps I also support France's current attempt at forcing the Georgia university > web site on French soil to use French. As a citizen of Europe I disagree. I believe that the narrow and parochial attitude of the French province breaches undertakings in the Treaty of Rome and under the European declaration of human rights. France is not a sovereign state and does not have the right to pass laws that infringe on the rights granted to European citizens as a whole. Phill From biz25 at prodigy.net Tue Jan 28 13:11:08 1997 From: biz25 at prodigy.net (biz25 at prodigy.net) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:11:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: I-Link Message-ID: <199701281611.LAA87892@mail1y-int.prodigy.net> Hi, PRESS RELEASE: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: THIS IS URGENT--TWO U.S. BASED INTERNATIONAL GIANTS MERGE FOR A GROUND FLOOR OPPORTUNITY. THIS WILL BE THE MOST IMPORTANT EMAIL OF YOUR MLM LIFE. Two major publicly traded giants have joined forces to harness new telecommunications technology which promises to alter the way the world communicates. Until now, calls had to be transmitted through hard wire, fiber optics, or expensive land-based relay stations. Within months, all this will change. According to industry experts, calls in certain closely guarded test markets are already being made directly from phone to phone via satellite. Distance is no longer a factor. Without the considerable costs of hard wire installation, maintenance, and major overheads. With this new technology, rates are predicted to fall as much as 50% and more. This means that a direct dial call from Sydney Australia to London, Tokyo, or anywhere else in the world, might well be less than ten cents per minute. Calls within any country should also be reduced well below any currently being offered by any existing provider. Each user will only need a portable "little black box" which contains all the electronics to instantly convert any telephone into a two-way satellite transmitter. According to industry spokesman, the clarity of the voice link significantly exceeds present standards and the technology applies to fixed based phones as well as cellular units. Although the two major participating companies have requested anonymity until the official announcement in a few weeks time, it has been revealed that each is the industry leader in its respective field with combined annual sales exceeding Eighty Billion Dollars. This Technology will be made available throughout the world as quickly as the new company can cope with anticipated demand. Pre-Launch requests are now being accepted from interested parties that will enable them to move to the top of the list to receive information on a priority basis as soon as it becomes available. In an unexpected announcement, the company has revealed its desire to introduce this technology through network marketing. To maintain an orderly marketplace, the number of Pre-Launch distributors has been severely limited. If you are interested in being placed on the priority list to receive additional information about the new service or wish to be involved in the world wide marketing, please send the form below in any of the three manners listed. and all forms and instructions will be dropped into your email box in moments. There is NO COST or obligation in taking this first step. You make the final decision only after receiving all the relevant information. Unprecedented $$$ Opportunity 1) TWO Industry Giants is Software and Telecommunications with combined annual sales in excess of $80 Billion to team up to create a major marketing joint-venture to revolutionize the telephone industry. 2) Domestic and International Rates expected to Plunge in excess 50%---far below any currently being offered by any present company. Calls linking almost all-international locations could drop below ten cents per minute! 3) Crystal Clear Technology is achieved by two-way, direct satellite link through an inexpensive, highly portable "Little Black Box" which easily connects to both fixed and cellular phones. 4) Amazing Profit Potential. The company unexpectedly revealed it would distribute this new technology through MLM. The first 5,000 responders to this announcement could easily become instant millionaires. 5) FREE PRE-LAUNCH RESERVATIONS. The following form will assure your position on our priority list. 6) TOP SECRET DETAILS will be communicated as soon as available. 7) NO COST OR OBLIGATION NOW!!! Reserve your right to make a final decision once we release the information on the products, program, and what we ca do for you with our massive marketing power. 8) Do Not Delay!! Priority places are reserved as received. Make certain commit your contacts IMMEDIATELY to keep your own marketing organization in tact. This will totally revolutionize the way the world communicates. Virtually everyone who uses a telephone or a fax for business will be converting to this system. Submit your no-obligation Priority Reservation Form Immediately. 9) Copy and rewrite this document to reflect you as the sponsor and pass on to your email friends. -------------------------------[ Start of Form ]-------------------------- INTERNATIONAL TELEPHONE PROGRAM PRE-LAUNCH PRIORITY RESERVATION FORM Mail to: John Gilmore PO Box 990103 Naples, FL 34117 Phone 941-353-1049 or Fax to: 1-619-561-8967 or Email to: jgilmore at netnaples.com (In place of signature type "I Agree" for email entries) ***cc to: ulus12a at prodigy.com *** Please complete ALL information below. Incomplete applications cannot be processed Social Security or EIN Number_______________________ Print Full Name________________________________________________________ Business Name (if applicable)____________________________________________ Mailing Address (NO PO Box)____________________________________________ City______________________________State_________Zip Code_______________ Home Telephone Number (___)________ Work Telephone Number (____)________ Fax Number (_____)_____________ E-Mail Address_______________________ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Sponsor Information: Name____Sonya Seaman__________SS/EIN_161-64-8877____ Home Phone 610-760-8527 E-Mail Address____ ulus12a at prodigy.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I would like to be placed on the priority list to receive information on the major breakthrough in worldwide telephone services. I understand there is no cost or obligation. I reserve the right to make a final decision once I have reviewed all the relevant information. I further understand that by submitting this application, I am assured that I and my organization will be afforded its proper pre-launch positioning, and that by signing below, I agree that my position in the genealogy will not be altered or circumvented in any manner unless agreed in writing by my upline sponsor. Signature_________________________________ Date________________ I am interested in marketing in: ___________USA _________Other Countries (Specify) ________Worldwide -------------------------------[ End of Form ]-------------------------- http://www.bluesky.net.au/~aim/downline.html id#: 21 -------------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.mlmpals.com/chain/ch049.htm --------------------------------------------------------------------------  From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 28 13:13:27 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:13:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GAK] FBI at it again Message-ID: <199701281508.HAA07654@mailmasher.com> Dr.Dimitri L"iposuction" Vegetable had his foreskin ripped off last night by a vacuum cleaner. ,/ \, ((__,-"""-,__)) `--)~ ~(--` .-'( )`-, Dr.Dimitri L"iposuction" Vegetable `~~`d\ /b`~~` | | (6___6) `---` From Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at bxl.dg13.cec.be Tue Jan 28 13:13:36 1997 From: Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at bxl.dg13.cec.be (Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at bxl.dg13.cec.be) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:13:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to subscribe Message-ID: <199701282113.NAA02325@toad.com> I have learned from the discussions in this list that there are other lists related to this one. Can anybody send me information on what is available and when this confusion created by having different lists will stop. cypherpunks : unmoderated and uncensored cypherpunks : unmoderated and censored cypherpunks : moderated and uncensored cypherpunks : moderated and censored cypherpunks : US eyes only -- export restrictions cypherpunks : Europe cypherpunks : private mail Theodor W. Schlickmann From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 28 13:13:40 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:13:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dale on his podium Message-ID: <199701281501.HAA05711@mailmasher.com> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 From: Dale Thorn Reply-To: dthorn at gte.net Subject: Re: overview.htm (fwd) >Lived all over So. Cal. for 12 years, 4 years in SE Tenn., close to >Atlanta. Atlanta has some nice babes, warm weather. I fell totally >in love with a girl from Chattanooga, who was probably the best >college radio D.J. who ever lived. Lived in Charleston for a short >while. > >Much smaller than Atlanta. Very cozy. Spent a lot of time in >Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Detroit. The best babes there are usually the >Chrissy Hynde (Akron) types. Spent 2-1/2 years in Southern Germany. >Very, very nice. Loved Berchtesgaden (sp?). Interestingly enough, >I have a fondness for English girls. Must be the ancestry thing. >I'd really like to talk to some Welsh girls - my mum's grandparents >came to the U.S. from there. What about you? Who gives a rat's ass, Dale? What a waste. Babes? Types? From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 28 13:14:02 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:14:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, aga wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > Kevin L Prigge wrote: > > > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > > > > > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > > > > > > > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" > > > > > > The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to > > > be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can > > > not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else > > > from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - > > > if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most > > > people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? > > > > > > > Don't you like power, Dale? > > > > - Igor. > > > > Power corrupts, in some instances. Instances where the power is concentratted to one individual or small group of individual.... From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 28 13:14:09 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:14:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <32EDA9B3.6FA0@gte.net> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > > seems, Americans like their own women , which is all they > > have seen maybe... > > > > Anywhere else and it's no different from Cleveland or Pittsburgh. > > > Well, can you say you've been 'anywhere else'? > > Lived all over So. Cal. for 12 years, 4 years in SE Tenn., close to > Atlanta. Atlanta has some nice babes, warm weather. I fell totally > in love with a girl from Chattanooga, who was probably the best college > radio D.J. who ever lived. Lived in Charleston for a short while. > Much smaller than Atlanta. Very cozy. Spent a lot of time in > Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Detroit. The best babes there are usually the > Chrissy Hynde (Akron) types. Spent 2-1/2 years in Southern Germany. > Very, very nice. Loved Berchtesgaden (sp?). Interestingly enough, > I have a fondness for English girls. Must be the ancestry thing. > I'd really like to talk to some Welsh girls - my mum's grandparents > came to the U.S. from there. What about you? I am not into girls...sorry. From harka at nycmetro.com Tue Jan 28 13:14:19 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:14:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... Message-ID: <199701282114.NAA02411@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, does anybody know any contact points/Web pages, where I might get some information on e-mail filtering via trigger-words? I am interested in how this technology specifically works and a collection of trigger-words would be nice too :) Thanks in advance... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMuhpbjltEBIEF0MBAQGiOwf+N61i3Vj1XjmhKLm+qispHDxsu4Wde8nb BtMkVOAt9MGlihKftUAvp7l8aUcr5+D5jFh4/1VllO+QeZ4Yni9kM40xBLry1LYD yiLqpeNMfz2Zf6XMqGaNc8lblx9qyNHyJBHf5p8OfJWN47LcIn8CYkhDSq6b3Sch rHNBg8RjuCKQGD3XlCkwZLrYCUiCPFmSkKeuYpSaPkXgqgf7Zku68RrmqhRzbF1m UneIgxMXqWFetIBHe8PIcQpLrN0X+lRMCnCFVY9x7Rsy4QJc3f8lZ7YKo2xDiGXb Ly+wiA6sexlwwf+BdLDRu3fshI4eCpe7KbfWmzf3z0pdpvdRfUiJuw== =KEb+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca Tue Jan 28 13:14:29 1997 From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:14:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy Message-ID: <9700288544.AA854475143@smtplink.alis.ca> Jim Choate wrote: I have received several private emails inquiring into what possible crypto relevance the recent exchange over libel/slander and the law. It is clear that even in democratic countries like Canada (not know as a freedom of speech protectorate) slander/libel is covered under criminal codes. While it is true that currently these statutes are not heavily used, if at all, this will change as businesses and special interest groups move even further onto electronic networks. Consider the zealous use of the law by the CoS. Ask Julf if the ramifications are not 'real world'. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com Not one to ever let a mention of Canada go unchallenged - even when it is a simple fact or a compliment - I thought I should jump into the discussion. Like the CoS, many companies have threatened libel actions as a means to silence people. The McLibel Two in Britian quickly come to mind. However, also like the Cos, many companies are finding that the net effect of these libel suites are not in their favour even when they win. Some brilliant examples of subversive use of trademarks can be found at the site: http://www.adbusters.org Specific examples: http://www.adbusters.org/Corporate/Greasestick.html http://www.adbusters.org/Gallery/spoofabs.html http://www.adbusters.org/Corporate/Kalvin.html A little clever marketing could go a long way to promoting privacy issues in the public consciousness. Perhaps an NSA Friends and Family calling plan? James From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 28 13:15:48 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:15:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase Online... Message-ID: <199701282115.NAA02542@toad.com> >>If I am connected to the Internet via a SLIP/PPP connection and I >>type my passphrase while being online (for example, in Private >>Idaho, after getting my mail), could that passphrase be compromised? >>If so, how would that be done? You're much safer if you're using an operating system instead of a kluge like Windows... On the other hand, operating systems make it easier to run applications like telnet servers that allow someone else to connect to your system while you're on line. Some different ways you could be at risk include - someone sends you a keystroke-sniffer program and tricks your machine into running it - so it grabs your passphrase from PI or PGP and sends it in later - someone sends you a keystroke-sniffer program and tricks _you_ into running it, whether they use email, web, etc. - someone logs into your system, guesses that the root password is "trustno1", and modifies your copy of PGP to save keystrokes. (On MSDOS, of course, you don't _need_ a root password.) - someone sets up a web page with an evil ActiveX script that convinces your Internet Explorer to download a new copy of PGP. - someone sends you email with an attachment named ..\..\..\windows\pgp.exe and your mail system is dumb enough to accept the pathname. - somebody sends you email with an MS-Word/Excel/PPT attachment that, instead of having a dumb Concept macro virus, has a macro that does something useful like replace your copy of PGP, and you don't have any innoculation on your MS-Word. - any of the above, where the "pgp" program is replaced with one that's almost identical but uses non-random numbers instead of good randoms, and maybe also leaks out your secret key or passphrase. - any of the above, where your email program is modified to add Cc: janet at kremvax.su on outgoing smtp. > Still paranoid? Good! # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 13:15:54 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:15:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EE18D5.62DA@gte.net> aga wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > suffice to be immediately terminated. The best place to begin, in > > the USA at least, would be the public freeways. There you have the > > most acts of aggression in a short space, and the best pickings for > > liquidation. Give me the power, and I'll show you all those nifty > > techno-ways of eliminating people that have been kept from the public > > by our benevolent government ("sources and methods"). > > > > BTW, I don't give a damn about someone "cutting me off", since I'm > > not aggressive enough (outside of my liquidation duties) to be bothered > > by that in most cases. I'm primarily concerned with vehicles who get > > too close behind, who pass with no safety margin, etc. I call these > > people anal-compulsive (as opposed to anal-retentive). You've seen > > the videos on PBS, the various animal species whose male members > > perform occasional "mounting" of others to intimidate. There are a > > large percentage of humans who try to do the same thing, demonstrating > > that they (IMO) have no further need of their lives. > Boy, it is a fucking Bitch living in that L.A. traffic, huh? I heard years ago that approximately 10% of the people on the street are certifiably mentally unstable. Multiply that by two at least for Los Angeles (suburban L.A., actually, Hollywood for example is much safer than Altadena or Westlake Village). Quincy M.D. (the old TV show) did an excellent piece once on how a person can more-or-less legally commit murder with a car, by passing a deliberate act off as an "accident". It's one area of our law enforcement where the law (or rules) as stated by the state and as enforced by the state cops don't even agree. From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 13:15:57 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:15:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701282115.NAA02560@toad.com> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > Kevin L Prigge wrote: > > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > > > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" > > The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to > > be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can > > not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else > > from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - > > if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most > > people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? > Don't you like power, Dale? I have a great deal of respect for power. When I was 6, I unwound a coat hanger and put both ends into an electrical outlet. All I remember from that is something like a sledgehammer hitting me, and I went backwards rather quickly. And I never did it again. But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would suffice to be immediately terminated. The best place to begin, in the USA at least, would be the public freeways. There you have the most acts of aggression in a short space, and the best pickings for liquidation. Give me the power, and I'll show you all those nifty techno-ways of eliminating people that have been kept from the public by our benevolent government ("sources and methods"). BTW, I don't give a damn about someone "cutting me off", since I'm not aggressive enough (outside of my liquidation duties) to be bothered by that in most cases. I'm primarily concerned with vehicles who get too close behind, who pass with no safety margin, etc. I call these people anal-compulsive (as opposed to anal-retentive). You've seen the videos on PBS, the various animal species whose male members perform occasional "mounting" of others to intimidate. There are a large percentage of humans who try to do the same thing, demonstrating that they (IMO) have no further need of their lives. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 13:16:01 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:16:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Toto's database Message-ID: <199701282116.NAA02574@toad.com> Greg Broiles wrote: > An interesting assertion. Is your database available for others to draw > their own conclusions from? As a matter of fact, it is. It consists of the cypherpunks unedited and flames list. > I'd appreciate seeing at least a first-level abstraction of the data Given the well-developed and ratiionally strong questions you asked in your post, I am afraid that you would find my abstractions of data rather rudimentary, at best. I keep a separate directory of CypherSpam, for my own purposes, and I merely popped the moderation-related criticisms into another directory and made some direct comparisons. I used my computer-brain to draw my conclusions from, which I suppose might raise the issue of personal bias and/or competent technology. (I regard my brain as a Pentium, but there are others who aver that it can more closely be compared to the digital circuitry on their office coffee-machine) > Of course, correlation alone doesn't tell us much. If it really exists, it > suggests that the two phenomena observed are related in some way, but it > doesn't tell us the nature or the cause of the relationship. That is why the world has need of spin-doctors, conspiracy theorists and data-analysts. > Another explanation would be that a moderation opponent is sending the > spams as a way to punish the proponents of moderation. This is an illogical conclusion, since the proponents of moderation receive the censored list, and therefore do not receive the UCE/Spams. On the other hand, the UCE/Spams are passed along to the other lists, despite the fact that not a single member of the list has indicated any desire to receive them. The fact that John and Sandy have shown absolutely no concern for 'protecting' the list members from UCE/Spam until their forced censoring of 'undesirable' list members indicates that the 'punishment' you mention applies only to those who oppose the censorship of list members. > I think this is especially true given the relatively inexact nature of the > "spam" weapon Unfortunately, the 'spam weapon' is an extremely exact science in the hands of those familiar with remailer systems and bots. Also, some of the spams appear to originate from toad.com itself, as opposed to coming from outside sources. Toto From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 28 13:16:13 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:16:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701282116.NAA02586@toad.com> At 10:47 PM 1/27/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: ... >You misunderstand AP, yet again. AP doesn't really take votes, it merely >totals donations. It is an essential element of the AP system that even a >tiny minority should be able to kill individuals who are seen as threats, as >long as this capability is universal. True, the smaller the minority the >more uneconomical such an action would be for them, but it would be well >within the ability of 1% of the population to avoid a another Holocaust by >getting rid of those pushing for it. > >In the current political system, in the US for instance, 51% of the >population is able to screw the remaining 49%, just as long as they can >maintain the majority. Or, perhaps even more accurately and ominously, a >tiny fraction of the population (the current leadership class) is able to >screw the 49%, as long as they have the un-thinking backing of the remaining >and relatively uninvolved 51%. > >AP disables this system. AP turns government into the moral equivalent of a >pick-up football game: Nobody is being forced to play, and everybody and >anybody can simply "get up and leave" whenever he wants to. The moment the >"rules of the game" to make an individual's continued participation >unsatisfying, he can leave. > ... In our society, which, if I remember correctly, 10% of the population control 90% of the wealth, AP would only lead to 10% of the population being able to screw the remaining 90%. At least as it is, it takes a simple majority. As for the murder of the rich, here is a scenerio. A collection of poor pool their capitol to have a tyrant killed. The tyrant assembles a counter-wager saying that anyone able to prove thier ability to kill him without harming him, and who can show they got through will get 110% of the poor's bid. The household is told that a standing bounty has been placed with a collection of individuals, on the head of the trigger man involved in the tyrants murder. The poor can not hope to match the tyrants bid as they only have 10% of the wealth, the household knows that thier participation in an attempt on the tyrant will get them killed. Even if the attempt was successful. The people from the outside who would benefit from the bounty benefit more by taking the tyrants offer and then trying again, i.e. tiger teams. From Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com Tue Jan 28 13:16:20 1997 From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com (Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:16:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html Message-ID: <199701282116.NAA02609@toad.com> Reuters New Media [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: UK Bill To Fight Millennium Computer Bug Moves On Next Story: Intel to Europe: Get Online Or Fall Behind _________________________________________________________________ Monday January 27 9:50 AM EST UAE Launches Service To Censor Internet DUBAI - The United Arab Emirates's monopoly Internet provider launched a service Saturday to censor sites in cyberspace that breached local moral values and traditions. Officials from state telecommunications company Etisalat said the new Proxy Service would be compulsory for the UAE's 9,669 subscribers, who will have to configure their web browsers that navigate the net by February 2. "The service was launched today as part of our efforts to improve the Internet service to our subscribers after lengthy study and research," said one official at Etisalat. "We were working on it before some official statements were made on the need to control access to some sites on the service," he told Reuters. The move follows repeated calls to regulate access to the Internet in the conservative Gulf region, where most women are veiled, magazine pictures revealing cleavage or bare legs are blacked out and questioning the existence of god can be punishable by death. Some are worried about the spread of pornography as well as religious and political material through the worldwide network of interlinked computers. Last year, Dubai Police chief Major General Dhahi Khalfan Tamim created a rare public row in the UAE saying the information ministry and the police, rather that Etisalat, should be authorized to issue Internet licenses as it was their job to monitor data coming into the UAE and maintain security. Telecommunications experts say the Proxy Service will not be "fully water-tight," but would help block access to known and unwanted sites -- a list of which could be constantly updated. The proxy server will be pre-fed with Internet addresses where access is blocked off, industry sources said. But the server will be unable to block access if addresses of prohibited sites are changed, as frequently happens. Etisalat says it will disconnect any customer who abused its Internet services and violated "order and clear laws." "Singapore has succeeded to a great extent in its drive to control harm done by the Internet," said another Etisalat official. "Why cannot we?" Singapore government measures to regulate political and religious content on the Internet and keep it free of pornography became effective in July last year. They require all Internet service operators and local content providers to be registered with the Singapore Broadcasting Authority. Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved _________________________________________________________________ ________________________ ___________ Help _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: UK Bill To Fight Millennium Computer Bug Moves On Next Story: Intel to Europe: Get Online Or Fall Behind _________________________________________________________________ [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Reuters Limited Questions or Comments From gbroiles at netbox.com Tue Jan 28 13:16:22 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:16:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy Message-ID: <199701282116.NAA02614@toad.com> At 08:50 PM 2/27/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >I predict that within the next five years these >slander/libel laws will be used by some organization to prosecute defamation >of their Internet presence (eg web page graffitti). Within 10 years this >area will be one of the hotest areas of the new communications law. Civil actions against people doing "graffiti" are only interesting where the defendant has assets worth suing for. This economic dimension substantially limits the number of suits which will be brought. Corporate plaintiffs, if they chose to bring suit, would in many cases prefer to sue in federal court. (Federal juries tend to be more conservative and hence pro-corporate; they're also more likely to be friendly to an out-of-town corporation suing a local individual). To sue in federal court, the plaintiff needs to find a federal question or diversity jurisdiction. Other causes of action (like copyright infringement, trademark dilution, or false designation of origin) would provide a federal question and hence federal jurisdiction. Criminal prosecutions for defamation (in the case of "graffiti") are still unlikely - a much more straightforward charge would be unauthorized access to a computer or some flavor of fraud, depending on the facts. Confusion aids defendants, so I predict prosecutors will avoid defamation law (and its tar pits of actual malice and the defense of truth) when they are able to do so and still have a reasonable chance of conviction. >If they don't >understand the technology (eg forwarding private email to publicly >accessible lists by accident) how in the world are they going to understand >what is best, let along convince anyone else? There's a world of difference between understanding technology and screwing up once in awhile. Perhaps you've never screwed anything up (although your summary of US defamation law ought to count), but the rest of us do, from time to time. Were I involved in computer-related litigation, I'd choose an attorney who could talk to a jury over an attorney who was good with computers, hands down. Not even a question. And I'd pick an attorney who owned up to making mistakes sometimes over someone who imagined him or herself somehow superior to people who fuck up now and then. >It has been proposed by at least one party that a district attorney or other >public prosecutor would not act on such events. This is also naive. I was that "party", and I guess that in trying to be civil I was actually unclear. If you were a politically important person or organization, and if Toto's message had caused you real damage, and if Toto were reasonably available to prosecute, a prosecutor might get interested. But you're not important, Toto would be difficult to extradite, and you weren't harmed. So you picked a crappy example to make your point(s) with. Change the facts, and you'll get a different answer. Duh. >The >ramifications for their political opponents to use this 'insensitive and >clearly self-interested' refusal to act as a perfect example of how that >prosecutor is interested in their own political career and not in the >interest of the people they are charged with protecting as well as a good >demonstration of their technological ignorance. It would be very difficult >to get re-elected in such an environment. Yeah, I'll bet that your local prosecutor's failure to prosecute Toto is going to cost them dearly in the next election. You picked a hypothetical which did a poor job of illustrating the points you're making in this later message. Do you want to talk about whether or not Toto is criminally liable for making fun of you while making a point about ownership of networks and its relationship to freedom of speech, or do you want to talk about the more general case of liability for misattribution? If it's the latter, yes, there are some issues there, but I still think that defamation law is a poor way to address them. You seem to be having an "I've got a hammer, everything looks like a nail" problem. And all of this seems a bit contrived if the real crypto-relevant point is "use digital signatures to avoid misattribution". >All that I ask is that instead of jumping the gun and saying 'it ain't so' >you simply consider the ramifications from 'their' perspective. It truly is >amazing what one can learn by walking a mile in another mans shoes. For if >there is one truth to be learned it is that this discussion is not about how >it is, but rather how it will be and how it should be. Despite your closing, I haven't seen you write anything about "how it should be", beyond the idea that people should learn more about digital signatures. You've forwarded lots of information from other people's web pages about defamation liability in different jurisdictions, but no discussion about why the rules we've got now are good ones (or bad ones). Other commentators have suggested that defamation law is obsolete (Tim May) or should be reconsidered in light of a victim's ability (via the net) to reply to a defamer (Mike Godwin). Do you have a proposal along these lines? Your message suggests to me that you're very pro-plaintiff with respect to defamation (at least when you're the plaintiff), but you haven't explained why other people should adopt your perspective. You did suggest that juries are also likely to think it's in their best interests to find for plaintiffs (because they might find themselves in similar circumstances someday); but it's unclear to me why that reasoning wouldn't make them equally likely to side with defendants (because they might be wrongfully accused of doing something bad), or why your logic wouldn't apply to every case, not just defamation cases. And, for what it's worth, juries aren't supposed to consider "what is in our best interest" either as individuals nor as a community, nor is that a legitimate topic for argument to the jury with respect to questions about liability or guilt. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 13:17:03 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:17:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701282117.NAA02665@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Kevin L Prigge wrote: > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > > > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" > > The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to > be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can > not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else > from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - > if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most > people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? > Don't you like power, Dale? - Igor. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 28 13:17:17 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:17:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trolling with Dale (a bite) Message-ID: <199701281448.GAA02231@mailmasher.com> Date: Sat, 25 Jan 1997 From: Dale Thorn Subject: Re: overview.htm (fwd) Dale Thorn hopelessly wrote: >Let's be realistic about how AIDS is acquired. Yes, Dale, let's >AIDS, OTOH, is likely to be a development from years of 1) Contact >with germs, chemicals, food additives, antibiotics other medical >treatments, sexual contact, etc. and 2) Immune-suppressing activities >such as lack of sleep and exercise, anxiety and stress, and so on. Sounds reasonable to me, especially contact with germs (Who says "germs?"), and sexual contact. Take it on the road, Dale. >It seems to me that "proof" of someone acquiring AIDS from one stab >with a contaminated needle is a very nebulous thing. As far as nurses >go, the contact I've had with many of them tells me they are also >(on average) drug users extraordinaire. Yes, nebulous! Extraordinaire (on average), certainly. At the risk of being offed by the moderator, I do believe that Dale is masturbating when he writes nonsense such as this. Perhaps "masterbating" as opposed to j.o. will pass muster. Dale makes an excellent case for having a moderated list right here. What do his nutball beyond-the-fringe remarks have to do with crypto, privacy, security? Cripes, in the old days even an _accurate_ off-list remark would open a blast furnace of condemnation, a la Jim B. If the list won't moderate itself to "guide" the Dale's, it DESERVES to be moderated. He's gotta be trolling to keep it hard. (Dangerous ground here!) Read "erect" for "keep it hard." I suggest even (even!) "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" would disavow this pseudo-scientific nonsense regardless of his stated feelings toward homosexuals which I do not share but, nevertheless, believe may be aired. Step up, Doc. P.S. Does tripe such as Dale's latest make the mod list? From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 13:17:53 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:17:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701282117.NAA02726@toad.com> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote in article > > blanc wrote: > > > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis This [below] is one of the most remarkable posts I've ever seen.... > > > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba > > > should not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders > > > their civilians in retaliation for something their governments > > > supposedly did. > > > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > > > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from > > > other governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they > > > have the resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form > > > alliances, take their chances and retaliate, etc. > > I wish this were true, at least of nations which would be friendly > > to someone like me (white, Western, etc.). A bully on a school > > playground can always be knocked down, no matter how big or how > > vicious he is. Sadly, the U.S. bully cannot be knocked down. Bad > > enough you get nuclear, chemical, and/or biological stuff waved at > > you - if you get into a hot war like Desert Storm, your country is > > carpet-bombed with fleets of B-52's until it is thoroughly debilitated. > Actually the US is being remarkably ineffective in keeping > Cuba etc off the Net. If you don't believe me just try > the cuban home page. We had a Web server running in Sarajevo > during the siege back in '93. There is no way that the US govt. > can hope to control the Internet any more than it can control the > phone system. What is astonishing is that the Cuban authorities are > so keen to import a technology that breaks down their propaganda. This *is* amazing. The cuban govt. is *eager* (keen) to subvert their own propaganda. > The Cold War was not won by the arms race, it was won in > Eastern Europe which was never a major participant. The main > instrument that won it was West German TV which broadcast > pictures of supermarkets with full shelves into the homes > of East Germans every night. The viewers could see that it > was not mere propaganda and their relatives confirmed the > fact. As a result the East German guards on the Berlin wall > simply decided to leave their posts one night. That's it? The system collapsed because the guards left their posts? And no mutiny charges? Incredible. > The East Germans couldn't stop the TV signals either. When > Dresden started to become a ghost town because people wanted > to move to a town which could recieve the broadcasts the > East Germans ended up installing their own relay to keep > the locals happy. People left their own home towns just so they could watch TV? I know a lot of Americans who'd like to leave their towns to get away from TV, permanently. From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 13:22:49 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:22:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <01BC0D37.DDC6B1C0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Erp wrote in article <5cjlg0$2ij at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > > > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage > > son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in > > college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. > > Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? > > Well in reference to MIT.. I hope he has a 4.0 in highschool, is an > allsport, has a 1600 on his SAT's, and a prefect on his ACT.. Just to > even think about going there.. Let alone to include how well he'll have > to do on his interviews etc.. Also you may wish to have him look again at > what he wants to be before he goes to some major college such as MIT, > because tuition at MIT costs approx 100,000$/4 years. Actually MIT does not take notice of SATs, GSATs and other IQ nonsense. Basically the tests are meaningless at the upper end of the scale which is where most MIT students would score and a low score does not in itself demonstate stupidity. If he can get in then its difficult to imagine a better school for crypto in the US. There is a finacial support program and admission is "needs blind" so that grants are matched according to need. > I know pretty well positive that > MIT is excellent, but when you get down to the basics MIT is more of an > engineering school than a science/philosophical school which Computer > Sciences falls under.. Another good school from what I've heard is UCLA.. > then again you can discredit anything I've said, because I'm still a > HighSchool senior myself and have been looking into Computer Criminology > for the last three years, and I'm positive it is what i want so *shrug*.. Actually there is a reasonable school for philosophy just up the road but its not so good for computer science (it did produce Bill Gates.) The AI lab does have a number of people who lean quite heavilly to the philosophy side. Phill From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 28 13:44:59 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:44:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > > > The list has been disentigrating for some time since the disgusting > > incident when Dimitri was forcibly unsubscribed from the list. > > I'm curious about the gratuitous use of the word "forcibly" by > Paul. Does this mean Gilmore took a fire axe to the computer or > something? Dimitri was unsubscribed. It was done more or less > against his will. ("More or less" because he in effect said to > John, "bet you can't stop me.") What does "forcibly" add to this > discussion besides melodrama? No force was required. John had > the right and ability to pull the plug on Dimitri. "No animals > were harmed in the making of this film." "Force," my ass. > You are disgusting cindy. > > have also been a number of postings from members of the list claiming > > to understand anarchism who support censorship to "protect new > > members of the list". > > There are various definitions of "censorship" and various flavors > of anarchism. I'm a market anarchist, Paul is not. Paul claims > to believe that any form of moderation is censorship. I think > that enforcing standards of decorum on a private, voluntary list > are not censorship. Reasonable minds may differ. I acknowledge Yes REASONABLE minds do differ from yours... > that Paul's interpretations are not without some justification. > (I just think they are incorrect in the instant case.) Paul, on > the other hand, seems to be a True Believer. He brooks no view > other than his own. (Curiously hypocritical under the > circumstrances.) > > > So, there would be no intellectual dishonesty in a country claiming > > to be a free and open society "trying out" fascism for a month or > > two? - After all it`s a private country just as this is a private > > list.... > > Paul's sophistry is showing. Nation-states are entities that > exercise a monopoly on the use of force (real force, Paul) > within (and often without) their boundries. Mail lists are far > more like private homes, businesses or clubs. When you are a > guest there, you are subject to their rules of behavior. If it is so private, why does deja news have it when 'mail.cypherpunks' is searched??? > > There is a clear trend easily observable on the list whereby certain > > members postings are censored when their content is of a standard > > that, if the moderation were objective and based on content alone, > > would warrant their being sent to the censored list. > > Several substantive examples, please. True, nothing Bill Stewart > has posted has been sent to CP-Flames. One guess why. Numerous > posts by Dimitri have been posted to CP-Moderated, but many more > have not made the cut. There are much more obvious reasons for > this than Paul's biased analysis. > > > I can tell you one other thing for sure, even if the moderation > > "experiment" were to end in a month as a last ditch attempt by John > > Gilmore and Sandy Sandfort to recover some of their lost credibility > > it would be a vain and entirely unsuccesful attempt. > > YMMV. > > > S a n d y > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > From nowhere at erewhon.org Tue Jan 28 13:56:02 1997 From: nowhere at erewhon.org (Somebody) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:56:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access Message-ID: <199701282156.NAA03998@toad.com> This morning at the RSA keynote, David Aaron, the US Crypto ambassador quoted the "Sovreign Right of Lawful Access" as something that goverments were determined to preserve. From tremle at connect-wales.co.uk Tue Jan 28 13:56:06 1997 From: tremle at connect-wales.co.uk (Neil Rogers) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:56:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: .hlp creation Message-ID: <199701282156.NAA04005@toad.com> Howdi all, how are you, Can someone please help me, Can someone create a Windows 3.1 .hlp file fro me, when opened has a link to FILE MANAGER - U:\W31\winfile.exe Please, I have tried but can't do one, I would be really gratefull if someone could help! Thanks in advance, Neil .............. From eb at comsec.com Tue Jan 28 13:56:39 1997 From: eb at comsec.com (Eric Blossom) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:56:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: GSM crypto upgrade? (was Re: Newt's phone calls) Message-ID: <199701282156.NAA04042@toad.com> >> It is not clear you need signatures in the secure phone case. Eric >> Blossom's 3DES uses straight DH for key exchange with verbal verification >> that both ends are using the same key. > >How does Eric's box display the negotiated key to the user? (I don't >recall the pair I saw having displays). Latest versions have an LCD display that reports the type of crypto being used (3DES), as well as 24 bits worth of SHA-1 of the public exponentials exchanged. Alice sends g^x mod p, Bob sends g^y mod p. Let m = min(g^x mod p, g^y mod p) and n = max(g^x mod p, g^y mod p). compute v = SHA (concat (OCTET_REP (m), OCTET_REP (n))). Display the high 24 bits of v. >Also I thought it would be kind of cute if there were some way for >phones to exchange their signature keys `face to face' as well. Currently, absent some kind of widely deployed public key infrastructure, there are no signature keys used. This also means that the units do *not* contain any long term secrets, just the session key which is destroyed at the end of the call. Eric From Mullen Tue Jan 28 13:56:42 1997 From: Mullen (Mullen) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:56:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Where's reference? (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: <199701282156.NAA04048@toad.com> >>---------- >>From: Phil Karn[SMTP:karn at qualcomm.com] >>>If past cryptographic software is any indication, the DES Cracker >>>will be available from an overseas ftp site within hours of release in >>>the US. >> >>And lacking that, the author can always print it out on paper and >>physically mail it out of the country; this is specifically allowed by >>the new Commerce rules as I understand them. And who's to say that the >>overseas FTP copies weren't scanned from such a paper copy? :-) >> >>Phil > Where can I get a reference to this? I thought you weren't supposed to transmit cryptographic code out of the U.S. under any means, including print... >(???) > >~ Patrick > From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Tue Jan 28 13:57:10 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:57:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701282157.NAA04082@toad.com> > > The exercise reveals to me that only by ignoring the first paragraph > > of your example, the part that reads "Imagine if you will a list, > > the original purpose of which was to act as a free and open forum > > for discussion of cryptography and related issues." can you make > > a claim of content based censorship. The purpose of this list was Maybe this was misleading, that was indeed a purpose of the list but it was also supposed to be a free and anarchic list where people were not prevented from posting whatever they want. Even if it were the case that we accepted content based censorship that is no defence of the obvious class system that is in place whereby certain posters are automatically sent straight to the moderated list and others are censored regardless of the content of their posts. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From erp at digiforest.com Tue Jan 28 13:57:24 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:57:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701282157.NAA04105@toad.com> On 28 Jan 1997, Derek Atkins wrote: > Erp writes: > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > > > This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be > admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and > 1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. You > can think of being admitted with even lower scores, if you stand out > in some way. MIT admissions looks for well-rounded students. You're > much better off being a writer/artist/musician than being on the > science or math teams. > Hmm.... Then a have a lieing blah blah blah of a counselor >) hehe I applied for MIT, and even had an interview.. Then dropped my application after getting chewed out by my counselor, and having had her refuse to fill out anything on my second part of the application that said specifically "COUNSELOR ONLY" went to the principal and he refused.. Filled it out myself, and since it didn't have the counselors signature ... I dropped it aka they dropped me but its easier to say it hteo ther way around. And yes I understand the well-rounded thing.. But then again you hav eto consider that the average student at MIT has applied at least two times. I know that one for a fact from some program or something I read that MIT puts out. > > what he wants to be before he goes to some major college such as MIT, > > because tuition at MIT costs approx 100,000$/4 years. Personally that is > > a hell of a lot, but then again *shrug*... I recommend going to a local > > It may be alot, but then again MIT is one of the best schools in the > world (I'm not going to be egotistical enough to say it *is* the best, > even tho Consumer Reports rated it such for the last N years). True, it is one of the best, can't argue against that.. But there are others that are better in certain areas.. from my knowledge MIT expresses more in its engineering departments than anything else though.. Although I do know a very philosophical physics professor there so *shrug*.. maybe I'll apply again some day.. And yes all the rest of my requirements wher ehigh.. I am a swimteam captain, first trombone in my school, for marching jazz pep and symphonic bands.. I'm also the lead french horn.. Then I have the little side things such as Chess team captain.. and have tha precious 3.6 GPA the only proglem with it is I ahve one teacher that gave me a D in my freshman year, so I can't get into honor society .. go figure... But hey such is life.. I'm planning on reapplying after I get into college and raise myself back to a 4 point so who knows what will happen.. > > This is untrue. The computer science department at MIT is really > good. As are the sciences, and even business! The MIT Sloan School > (Management and Economics) was rated #1 last year. The EECS > department (EE and CS are together) is top notch, too. Really good yes.. Not necessarily the best though.. Check everywhere.. each aspect of every college may have one thing that he is specifically interested in that would be better than going to MIT or some other such place3... > > Ciro Maria writes: > > > Yeah Stevens Institute in Hoboken. Its pretty good I got there. Also > > Caltech is good, I don't really know which else. > > When I looked at Caltech, their Engineering (and computer science) > really lacked. They were excellent for the Sciences (Math, Physics, > Chemistry, etc.) but their engineering school wasn't as good as others > I was looking at (both EE and CS). Things may have changed in the > last 8 years, however. *nod* I do agree with that... THey are pretty much the same now.. > > > Spyking, my advise to you: Look around at many schools. Go visit > them. Talk to the students there. Talk to the professors. Talk to > graduates. The more information you and your son have, the better > decisions you and he can make. > > Personally, I loved MIT -- it was the right place for me. It isn't > the right place for everyone. Make sure it is the right place for > your son before he applies. For what it's worth, I wanted to go to > MIT my sophomore year in high school, too ;) I havet o ask, did you make it in on your first apply to it? and please forgive the mistypes in this.. I'm really lagged for some reason.. And well, It takes forever to go back when it is lagged this bd, so I ahven't can back and changed things automatically like I usually do... > Thanks, Erp From sandfort at crl.crl.com Tue Jan 28 13:57:27 1997 From: sandfort at crl.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:57:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701282157.NAA04110@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 27 Jan 1997 paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: > The list has been disentigrating for some time since the disgusting > incident when Dimitri was forcibly unsubscribed from the list. I'm curious about the gratuitous use of the word "forcibly" by Paul. Does this mean Gilmore took a fire axe to the computer or something? Dimitri was unsubscribed. It was done more or less against his will. ("More or less" because he in effect said to John, "bet you can't stop me.") What does "forcibly" add to this discussion besides melodrama? No force was required. John had the right and ability to pull the plug on Dimitri. "No animals were harmed in the making of this film." "Force," my ass. > have also been a number of postings from members of the list claiming > to understand anarchism who support censorship to "protect new > members of the list". There are various definitions of "censorship" and various flavors of anarchism. I'm a market anarchist, Paul is not. Paul claims to believe that any form of moderation is censorship. I think that enforcing standards of decorum on a private, voluntary list are not censorship. Reasonable minds may differ. I acknowledge that Paul's interpretations are not without some justification. (I just think they are incorrect in the instant case.) Paul, on the other hand, seems to be a True Believer. He brooks no view other than his own. (Curiously hypocritical under the circumstrances.) > So, there would be no intellectual dishonesty in a country claiming > to be a free and open society "trying out" fascism for a month or > two? - After all it`s a private country just as this is a private > list.... Paul's sophistry is showing. Nation-states are entities that exercise a monopoly on the use of force (real force, Paul) within (and often without) their boundries. Mail lists are far more like private homes, businesses or clubs. When you are a guest there, you are subject to their rules of behavior. > There is a clear trend easily observable on the list whereby certain > members postings are censored when their content is of a standard > that, if the moderation were objective and based on content alone, > would warrant their being sent to the censored list. Several substantive examples, please. True, nothing Bill Stewart has posted has been sent to CP-Flames. One guess why. Numerous posts by Dimitri have been posted to CP-Moderated, but many more have not made the cut. There are much more obvious reasons for this than Paul's biased analysis. > I can tell you one other thing for sure, even if the moderation > "experiment" were to end in a month as a last ditch attempt by John > Gilmore and Sandy Sandfort to recover some of their lost credibility > it would be a vain and entirely unsuccesful attempt. YMMV. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 28 13:59:05 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 13:59:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701282159.NAA04160@toad.com> At 08:00 PM 1/27/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >blanc writes: ... >> 2) Why do you suppose the Iraqis haven't already thought of doing this >> themselves? > >Perhaps because they love Saddam, who really is a great guy. Stop listening >to what U.S.gubmint and media tell you and use your brain. What did >Saddam do to _you? Those of us in the US have the luxery of secret ballots, Iraq is not. What was reported to me (by the media) was that those who decided to vote against Hussein, in a time when food was scarce, decided to vote against eating. It was not made illegal to vote him out, merely a catch 22, unless enough people agreed openly, the vocal minority would suffer. What we should have been doing as the troops pulled out and a no fly zone was being established was dropping bombs full of bread on the populus. Then they could have voted any which way they chose. ... >> Destructive people often ascend to positions of power not simply because >> they are ruthless, but because they have 1) many sycophantic followers and >> 2) many ignorant, vulnerable people unable to prevent it. You might be >> able to kill off one Saddam, but potentially many others would be waiting >> in the wings to take his place. The situation surrounding the existence >> of someone like Saddam is part of the contributing factors which keeps him >> there, not simply that one man himself. It was the same with Hitler and >> with so many others - they don't just have an excess of "power" >> concentrated within themselves which puts them in positions of control over >> others - there will have been many people who will have helped put them >> there, expecting to derive benefits from it. > >I don't like your Saddam example, having much admiration for the man, but >again this goes back to the perceived likelihood of future assassination. >If Saddam is killed in an unlikely event, he will be succeeded by someone >who does not fear assassination. If all potential successors are convinced >that the rubout can be repeated, they won't go for the job. Remember, the >purpose of "terrorism" is not just to kill someone, but to "terrorize". > >> And what will be done about all those people who made this "power" >> possible? You don't just kill the one man and be done with it - you have >> to also "kill" the conditions which maintained him. > >You rub out enough key people and terrorize their potential successors >into not wanting to take over their jobs, and the system collapses. ... I don't remember where I heard this, and in all likelyhood, I heard it here. This is certainly not a direct quote, ant would the origional poster please speak up. There came a time, in some ancient civilization when the king committed suicide by eating poisoned food. In the remaining week, most of the household, apparently in honor of the deceased king, jumped on kitchen knives and butcher knives, killing themselves. The brother of the king would not come out of hiding because some unknown person was terrorizing him with a meat cleaver. After a year, it was apparent that no one in the line of succession still survived, all killing themselves with kitchen utensils. It was rumored that the post was cursed. It was then that the royal galley slave bravely stepped foreward to rule the kingdom until one of the origional line should return. The decendants of the galley slave have ruled to this day. Like I said, I don't know where this came from, but I would like to see it again, if it came from here. From dave at kachina.jetcafe.org Tue Jan 28 14:00:16 1997 From: dave at kachina.jetcafe.org (Dave Hayes) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:00:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701282159.NAA11748@kachina.jetcafe.org> Dale Thorn writes: > I heard years ago that approximately 10% of the people on the street > are certifiably mentally unstable. This depends on your standads of "unstable". I'll bet genetic diversity is now much more of a factor then when those standards were written. > Multiply that by two at least for > Los Angeles (suburban L.A., actually, Hollywood for example is much > safer than Altadena or Westlake Village). I beg to differ. Which parts of Altadena and Hollywood are you referring to? ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave at jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet Call on God, but row away from the rocks. From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 14:11:26 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:11:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701282211.OAA04598@toad.com> jim bell wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility or consistency. If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be dead as a doornail in a week. Phill From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 14:11:41 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:11:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701282211.OAA04637@toad.com> Asgaard wrote in article <5c92bo$lo9 at life.ai.mit.edu>... > On Wed, 22 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > >The Web does not equal the Internet, straw man argument. > Actually at CERN we considered the Web to be a superset of the Internet protocols and others such as DECNET which ran on private networks such as our HEPNET. Since most of those private networks are now obsolete I would consider Web==Internet to be a reasonable equivalence. We always considered email and news to be part of the Web (news:, mailto:). The narrow view that the Web was only HTTP and HTML was a piece of Andressen propaganda. Phill From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 28 14:11:57 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:11:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701282211.OAA04676@toad.com> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, aga wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > Kevin L Prigge wrote: > > > > paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk said: > > > > > > > > "cypherpunks will make the networks safe for censorship" > > > > > > > "Idiots will make the networks require censorship" > > > > > > The line above this one says it all, doesn't it? If I judge you to > > > be "an idiot", then, if I also have the power to shut you up, I can > > > not only shut off your "noise" from me, but also prevent anyone else > > > from hearing you as well. That's the real beauty of censorship - > > > if I have the power, I can make you a non-person by preventing most > > > people from hearing you at all. Oh, lovely, isn't it? > > > > > > > Don't you like power, Dale? > > > > - Igor. > > > > Power corrupts, in some instances. Instances where the power is concentratted to one individual or small group of individual.... From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 14:12:02 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:12:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701282212.OAA04677@toad.com> Forwarded message: > From: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 21:36:13 -0500 > > I don't agree with your view of states. The inhabitants of a > geographical area are not mere chattels of the governing power. Exactly! By jove you got it! By demanding your liberty but demanding that 'we' go to Singapore or anywhere else and treat them as chattels we have clearly instituted a double-standard. Most parties in this discussion still haven't made that distinction. All we have done is replace their current tyrant with a new one, mainly us. > The right to rule rests on certain criteria which I believe neither > country meets. The harassment of opposition politicians in > obviously trumped up charges disqualifies any country from > calling itself a democracy. Exactly. And by applying pressure on Singapore we only help them keep that tyrany in place. The quickest way I know to make a social institution band together is self-preservation from an outside threat, real or perceived. > I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into > the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool > for confirming the present social order which is manifestly > corrupt. ALL social orders are corrupt. The 3 laws of thermodynamics apply to everything including social institutions. 1. You can't get ahead 2. You can't break even 3. You can't quit the game Heinz Pagels (RIP) Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 14:12:09 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:12:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701282212.OAA04686@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote in article <5c5891$ah at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > Singapore and China are blocking certain net groups. I think > > this is a bad thing, question is how can we stop it? > > 'We' shouldn't, it is their own country and it is up to their populace to > stop it. Do you really want Singapore or China having a say in how we run > our web? I certainly don't, and won't support any move to force any > particular view on them. If Billy-Bob wants to shoot himself in the foot, > let him. Might be purty funny to watch. I don't agree with your view of states. The inhabitants of a geographical area are not mere chattels of the governing power. The right to rule rests on certain criteria which I believe neither country meets. The harassment of opposition politicians in obviously trumped up charges disqualifies any country from calling itself a democracy. > > The Web was conceived as offering despots and dictators a choice > > between remaining in the dark ages and allowing freedom of > > speech. Blocking and filtering schemes threaten this ideal. > > Bull, the web was conceived so physicist and other researchers could share > data in a easily digestible format. That was not all. We had a political Web site established during the '92 election. I was in contact with Clinton's people when we had fewer than 100 Web sites. I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool for confirming the present social order which is manifestly corrupt. Phill From aga at dhp.com Tue Jan 28 14:12:14 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:12:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701282212.OAA04695@toad.com> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > aga wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > > suffice to be immediately terminated. No trial, huh? The best place to begin, in > > > the USA at least, would be the public freeways. There you have the > > > most acts of aggression in a short space, and the best pickings for > > > liquidation. Give me the power, and I'll show you all those nifty > > > techno-ways of eliminating people that have been kept from the public > > > by our benevolent government ("sources and methods"). > > > > > > BTW, I don't give a damn about someone "cutting me off", since I'm > > > not aggressive enough (outside of my liquidation duties) to be bothered > > > by that in most cases. I'm primarily concerned with vehicles who get > > > too close behind, who pass with no safety margin, etc. I call these > > > people anal-compulsive (as opposed to anal-retentive). You've seen > > > the videos on PBS, the various animal species whose male members > > > perform occasional "mounting" of others to intimidate. There are a > > > large percentage of humans who try to do the same thing, demonstrating > > > that they (IMO) have no further need of their lives. > > > Boy, it is a fucking Bitch living in that L.A. traffic, huh? > > I heard years ago that approximately 10% of the people on the street > are certifiably mentally unstable. Multiply that by two at least for > Los Angeles (suburban L.A., actually, Hollywood for example is much > safer than Altadena or Westlake Village). > Just carry a gun all of the time when you go over there. > Quincy M.D. (the old TV show) did an excellent piece once on how a > person can more-or-less legally commit murder with a car, by passing > a deliberate act off as an "accident". It's one area of our law > enforcement where the law (or rules) as stated by the state and as > enforced by the state cops don't even agree. > Maybe it is best to travel only on the net any more. The highways are deathtraps. From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 14:12:22 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:12:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701282212.OAA04711@toad.com> aga wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > suffice to be immediately terminated. The best place to begin, in > > the USA at least, would be the public freeways. There you have the > > most acts of aggression in a short space, and the best pickings for > > liquidation. Give me the power, and I'll show you all those nifty > > techno-ways of eliminating people that have been kept from the public > > by our benevolent government ("sources and methods"). > > > > BTW, I don't give a damn about someone "cutting me off", since I'm > > not aggressive enough (outside of my liquidation duties) to be bothered > > by that in most cases. I'm primarily concerned with vehicles who get > > too close behind, who pass with no safety margin, etc. I call these > > people anal-compulsive (as opposed to anal-retentive). You've seen > > the videos on PBS, the various animal species whose male members > > perform occasional "mounting" of others to intimidate. There are a > > large percentage of humans who try to do the same thing, demonstrating > > that they (IMO) have no further need of their lives. > Boy, it is a fucking Bitch living in that L.A. traffic, huh? I heard years ago that approximately 10% of the people on the street are certifiably mentally unstable. Multiply that by two at least for Los Angeles (suburban L.A., actually, Hollywood for example is much safer than Altadena or Westlake Village). Quincy M.D. (the old TV show) did an excellent piece once on how a person can more-or-less legally commit murder with a car, by passing a deliberate act off as an "accident". It's one area of our law enforcement where the law (or rules) as stated by the state and as enforced by the state cops don't even agree. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Tue Jan 28 14:12:27 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:12:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701282212.OAA04712@toad.com> At 10:47 PM 1/27/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: ... >You misunderstand AP, yet again. AP doesn't really take votes, it merely >totals donations. It is an essential element of the AP system that even a >tiny minority should be able to kill individuals who are seen as threats, as >long as this capability is universal. True, the smaller the minority the >more uneconomical such an action would be for them, but it would be well >within the ability of 1% of the population to avoid a another Holocaust by >getting rid of those pushing for it. > >In the current political system, in the US for instance, 51% of the >population is able to screw the remaining 49%, just as long as they can >maintain the majority. Or, perhaps even more accurately and ominously, a >tiny fraction of the population (the current leadership class) is able to >screw the 49%, as long as they have the un-thinking backing of the remaining >and relatively uninvolved 51%. > >AP disables this system. AP turns government into the moral equivalent of a >pick-up football game: Nobody is being forced to play, and everybody and >anybody can simply "get up and leave" whenever he wants to. The moment the >"rules of the game" to make an individual's continued participation >unsatisfying, he can leave. > ... In our society, which, if I remember correctly, 10% of the population control 90% of the wealth, AP would only lead to 10% of the population being able to screw the remaining 90%. At least as it is, it takes a simple majority. As for the murder of the rich, here is a scenerio. A collection of poor pool their capitol to have a tyrant killed. The tyrant assembles a counter-wager saying that anyone able to prove thier ability to kill him without harming him, and who can show they got through will get 110% of the poor's bid. The household is told that a standing bounty has been placed with a collection of individuals, on the head of the trigger man involved in the tyrants murder. The poor can not hope to match the tyrants bid as they only have 10% of the wealth, the household knows that thier participation in an attempt on the tyrant will get them killed. Even if the attempt was successful. The people from the outside who would benefit from the bounty benefit more by taking the tyrants offer and then trying again, i.e. tiger teams. From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 14:12:32 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:12:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701282212.OAA04726@toad.com> >That's it? The system collapsed because the guards left their posts? >And no mutiny charges? Incredible. I was there. The collapse of East Germany was quite spectacular. There was at most three months of warning. First there was a series of sit ins at foreign embassies, then a migration of large numbers of people in their twenties within the eastern block. I missed the actual collapse of the wall itself having to go to England. I was told of the sequence of events by friends in Berlin. By this time the protestors were confident enough to stage open demonstrations. The authorities had tolerated small scale demonstrations for some time provided they did not appear to be part of a larger movement. The sudden increase in numbers from tens to tens of thousands left the authorities unsure of what to do. They could not be sure of the reliability of the police should they attempt to violently suppress the demonstrations. To imprison the ringleaders was equally dangerous. The communists were aware that the South Africans had continued to be troubled by Mandela and Biko long after they were imprisoned or murdered. At some point a group of protesters approached the wall, probably hoping to goad the police into making an arrest. The guards made no response and the numbers increased to the point where firing of warning shots was impossible without causing a massacre. West German protesters joined from the other side of the wall. The border guards did try to use a water cannon but to little effect since the range was insufficient. At some point someone appeared with a sledge hammer and a pickaxe. Some people say that this was at the start of the protest, others that someone fetched them. I have heard people who believe that they were brought from either side of the wall. They started attacking the wall and soon had removed one of the panels. Next day the border guards quite literally abandoned their posts. The Brandenburg gate was opened for the first time in fifty years and the party apparatus all but collapsed. The only military activity during this period was GDR forces preparing against possible invasion by Soviet forces. Not that this was a logistical possibility since it was unlikely they would get across Poland unopposed. Read Norman Davies book "Europe a history" if you want to find out the background for the velvet revolution. It is one of the most amazing events in political history. It is a pity that people have forgotten so quickly about the real causes. It was not military power that prevailed but the protest movement. Unfortunately US commentators tend to see everything in terms of US cultural norms, many of which were explicitly rejected by the protestors. The East Germans wanted West German affluence, they wanted to be part of Western Europe. They were certainly not responding to US military spending as right wing theorists claim, nor was the economy collapsing because of the arms race, it was collapsing because of the costs of a totalitarian state and the incompatibility of that state with modern industrial organization. Phill From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 14:12:50 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:12:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy (fwd) Message-ID: <199701282212.OAA04749@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 01:28:19 -0800 > From: Greg Broiles > Subject: Re: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy > > Civil actions against people doing "graffiti" are only interesting where > the defendant has assets worth suing for. This economic dimension > substantially limits the number of suits which will be brought. Thank you for agreeing with my thesis that the legal industry is one driven by monetary gain and not justice. It is the one major problem with law today, it ignores those who are not 'worth it'. Justice is supposed to be blind and until that happens there can be no true liberty. Law should be involved in rights and wrongs and not 'how much money do I need to buy that villa in Spain'. There is also the aspect of 'reputation' of the organization which was defamed. This will become even more critical to good business over the Internet in the future than it is now. Now the only really important 'reputation' that one has to worry about is their credit report. Since it is very unlikely that such records will be made public in the future they won't be available so some other 'reputation' verification process will be required for parties interested in doing business with other parties they have no information on other than an email address or a webpage. This problem became very clear during the Austin Cypherpunks remailer project last year. The goal was to create a economicaly viable keyserver. The problem rapidly became one of trust and reputation and there was and still is no clear cut methodology for dealing with these concepts, let alone actualy trying to quantify them. Another aspect of this that keeps coming up is one of 'big' corporations with 'lots' of money, this monotonicity in legal thought is the reason I refer to the 'legal industry' and not 'legal profession'. Currently the main force driving law is how much money is available. Expansions of liberty simply can't happen in this environment because there is no mechanism to protect 'little' organizations or persons without 'lots' of cash. This problem is one that is not being addressed by anyone, most especialy lawyers who will loose income which they aren't apt to do voluntarily. > Criminal prosecutions for defamation (in the case of "graffiti") are still > unlikely - a much more straightforward charge would be unauthorized access > to a computer or some flavor of fraud, depending on the facts. This would be hard to do in the situation such as a mailing list because the parties would have 'authorized access' and it does not include the issue of inside parties nor 'web bbs's' where parties can enter comments and other statements in a 'authorized' manner. There are mechanisms to use computers for abuse of other parties besides hacking. > Confusion > aids defendants, so I predict prosecutors will avoid defamation law (and > its tar pits of actual malice and the defense of truth) when they are able > to do so and still have a reasonable chance of conviction. > > >If they don't > >understand the technology (eg forwarding private email to publicly > >accessible lists by accident) how in the world are they going to understand > >what is best, let along convince anyone else? > > There's a world of difference between understanding technology and screwing > up once in awhile. Absolutely. However, if there is not a fundamental understanding of the technology and its ramifications I certainly wouldn't want somebody making a case on my behalf because they would make assumptions which were not based in fact. In Toto's case the point I was refering to was not his sending private practice related material to a publicly accessible list (pretty reprehensible for my attorney accident or not) but rather his unsolicited admission that he didn't have any idea how it works. THAT would worry me if my liberty, possessions, or life were on the line. > I was that "party", and I guess that in trying to be civil I was actually > unclear. If you were a politically important person or organization, and if > Toto's message had caused you real damage, and if Toto were reasonably > available to prosecute, a prosecutor might get interested. But you're not > important, Toto would be difficult to extradite, and you weren't harmed. So > you picked a crappy example to make your point(s) with. Change the facts, > and you'll get a different answer. Duh. Actualy it is the PERFECT example of what is wrong with the law, it is the reason that I went to such extremes to force the situation. If the law can't protect Ma. and Pa. Kettle (their poor, being share croppers) under our 'democracy' it shure can't proctect them under a more 'liberalized' democracy which so many want and the technology will force. If the coming technocracy can't (or for monetary reasons won't) then it won't be any different that what we have now. A tyrant is a tyrant, my goal is to get rid of the cage and not to put a new layer of gilt on it. > You picked a hypothetical which did a poor job of illustrating the points > you're making in this later message. Do you want to talk about whether or > not Toto is criminally liable for making fun of you while making a point > about ownership of networks and its relationship to freedom of speech, or > do you want to talk about the more general case of liability for > misattribution? If it's the latter, yes, there are some issues there, but I > still think that defamation law is a poor way to address them. You seem to > be having an "I've got a hammer, everything looks like a nail" problem. The point is not whether Toto did or did not make fun of me, you seem to have a prediliction for personal attacks. It ain't. The point is that if joe-six-pack isn't secure in knowing that his views and expression are not protected from abuse he won't use it. We all loose in that case. > And all of this seems a bit contrived if the real crypto-relevant point is > "use digital signatures to avoid misattribution". You missed the point, keep pondering. I am shure it will come to you. > Despite your closing, I haven't seen you write anything about "how it > should be", Because I don't know how it should be, and it isn't my place or yours to make that decision. It is our responsibility to discuss this issue and to review the various solutions and what they will mean in the long run (as near as we can make the future out that is). In this example, if party A makes a statement and then B changes it and then re-distributes it as original comments by A then there is a problem irrespective of the monetary worth of A or B. Digital signatures in and of themselves won't help this from happening unless it is required to include the full text and signature of any quote in any subsequent use of that material otherwise the quote and the digital signature are out of sync and therefore worthless. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 14:13:48 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:13:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701282213.OAA04786@toad.com> Erp wrote in article <5cjlg0$2ij at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > > > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage > > son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in > > college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. > > Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? > > Well in reference to MIT.. I hope he has a 4.0 in highschool, is an > allsport, has a 1600 on his SAT's, and a prefect on his ACT.. Just to > even think about going there.. Let alone to include how well he'll have > to do on his interviews etc.. Also you may wish to have him look again at > what he wants to be before he goes to some major college such as MIT, > because tuition at MIT costs approx 100,000$/4 years. Actually MIT does not take notice of SATs, GSATs and other IQ nonsense. Basically the tests are meaningless at the upper end of the scale which is where most MIT students would score and a low score does not in itself demonstate stupidity. If he can get in then its difficult to imagine a better school for crypto in the US. There is a finacial support program and admission is "needs blind" so that grants are matched according to need. > I know pretty well positive that > MIT is excellent, but when you get down to the basics MIT is more of an > engineering school than a science/philosophical school which Computer > Sciences falls under.. Another good school from what I've heard is UCLA.. > then again you can discredit anything I've said, because I'm still a > HighSchool senior myself and have been looking into Computer Criminology > for the last three years, and I'm positive it is what i want so *shrug*.. Actually there is a reasonable school for philosophy just up the road but its not so good for computer science (it did produce Bill Gates.) The AI lab does have a number of people who lean quite heavilly to the philosophy side. Phill From jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca Tue Jan 28 14:13:53 1997 From: jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca (jbugden at smtplink.alis.ca) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:13:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy Message-ID: <199701282213.OAA04787@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: I have received several private emails inquiring into what possible crypto relevance the recent exchange over libel/slander and the law. It is clear that even in democratic countries like Canada (not know as a freedom of speech protectorate) slander/libel is covered under criminal codes. While it is true that currently these statutes are not heavily used, if at all, this will change as businesses and special interest groups move even further onto electronic networks. Consider the zealous use of the law by the CoS. Ask Julf if the ramifications are not 'real world'. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com Not one to ever let a mention of Canada go unchallenged - even when it is a simple fact or a compliment - I thought I should jump into the discussion. Like the CoS, many companies have threatened libel actions as a means to silence people. The McLibel Two in Britian quickly come to mind. However, also like the Cos, many companies are finding that the net effect of these libel suites are not in their favour even when they win. Some brilliant examples of subversive use of trademarks can be found at the site: http://www.adbusters.org Specific examples: http://www.adbusters.org/Corporate/Greasestick.html http://www.adbusters.org/Gallery/spoofabs.html http://www.adbusters.org/Corporate/Kalvin.html A little clever marketing could go a long way to promoting privacy issues in the public consciousness. Perhaps an NSA Friends and Family calling plan? James From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 14:14:09 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:14:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701282214.OAA04788@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote in article <5cg99p$7a at life.ai.mit.edu>... > The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of > 'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. The net is a bunch of computers, > running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and > EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility > support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody > else is along for the ride. The network is largely an intellectual creation. The hardware is relatively unimportant, it can always be replaced. > If we take your argument to its logical conclusion then once a box goes on > the net it belongs to nobody/everybody. Clearly utter nonsense. If you start from such a state and property centered ideology perhaps. I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of property you do. Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property" from the previous rulers. I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every philosopher since Locke. It is true that there is the convenience of the state as agency but the question is on whose behalf that agency is exercised. I see no reason why I should not meddle in the affairs of states I'm not a 'subject" of. > If you really and truly believe that the net belongs to everyone and nobody > has a right to limit or otherwise control the hardware and software along > with the associated comm links they own and pay for then you obviously don't > understand what is going on. They are allowed to connect their machinery to the Internet so long as they are prepared to accept the Internet's ethic. They are not allowed to have a free ride, to demand a valuable connection facility on their own terms. > ps I also support France's current attempt at forcing the Georgia university > web site on French soil to use French. As a citizen of Europe I disagree. I believe that the narrow and parochial attitude of the French province breaches undertakings in the Treaty of Rome and under the European declaration of human rights. France is not a sovereign state and does not have the right to pass laws that infringe on the rights granted to European citizens as a whole. Phill From warlord at MIT.EDU Tue Jan 28 14:46:19 1997 From: warlord at MIT.EDU (Derek Atkins) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 14:46:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701282246.OAA05596@toad.com> Erp writes: > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > > > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage > > son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in > > college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. > > Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? > > Well in reference to MIT.. I hope he has a 4.0 in highschool, is an > allsport, has a 1600 on his SAT's, and a prefect on his ACT.. Just to > even think about going there.. Let alone to include how well he'll have > to do on his interviews etc.. Also you may wish to have him look again at This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and 1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. You can think of being admitted with even lower scores, if you stand out in some way. MIT admissions looks for well-rounded students. You're much better off being a writer/artist/musician than being on the science or math teams. > what he wants to be before he goes to some major college such as MIT, > because tuition at MIT costs approx 100,000$/4 years. Personally that is > a hell of a lot, but then again *shrug*... I recommend going to a local It may be alot, but then again MIT is one of the best schools in the world (I'm not going to be egotistical enough to say it *is* the best, even tho Consumer Reports rated it such for the last N years). > small college, get his associates, see if that is what he still wants to > do, then go on from there. I know many people that started in Computer > Science and died after the first year. > Now colleges that are good for Computer Sc ience.. I have heard that RIT > is good.. but I'm nto sure on that.. I know pretty well positive that > MIT is excellent, but when you get down to the basics MIT is more of an > engineering school than a science/philosophical school which Computer This is untrue. The computer science department at MIT is really good. As are the sciences, and even business! The MIT Sloan School (Management and Economics) was rated #1 last year. The EECS department (EE and CS are together) is top notch, too. Ciro Maria writes: > Yeah Stevens Institute in Hoboken. Its pretty good I got there. Also > Caltech is good, I don't really know which else. When I looked at Caltech, their Engineering (and computer science) really lacked. They were excellent for the Sciences (Math, Physics, Chemistry, etc.) but their engineering school wasn't as good as others I was looking at (both EE and CS). Things may have changed in the last 8 years, however. Spyking, my advise to you: Look around at many schools. Go visit them. Talk to the students there. Talk to the professors. Talk to graduates. The more information you and your son have, the better decisions you and he can make. Personally, I loved MIT -- it was the right place for me. It isn't the right place for everyone. Make sure it is the right place for your son before he applies. For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high school, too ;) Good Luck, -derek -- Derek Atkins, SB '93 MIT EE, SM '95 MIT Media Laboratory Member, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) Home page: http://www.mit.edu:8001/people/warlord/home_page.html warlord at MIT.EDU PP-ASEL N1NWH PGP key available From vipul at pobox.com Tue Jan 28 15:03:18 1997 From: vipul at pobox.com (Vipul Ved Prakash) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 15:03:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet companies demonstrate portable security Message-ID: <199701290434.EAA00543@fountainhead.net> (Forward) Internet companies demonstrate portable security Six Internet companies have joined forces to develop a joint demonstration of smartcard technologies at the 1997 RSA Data Security Conference. Consensus Development Corporation, Gemplus, Hewlett-Packard, Litronic Inc., Netscape Communications Corporation and VeriSign, Inc., Monday announced "The Get Smartcard Demo." The interactive demo will allow each conference attendee to load X509v3 certificates on crypto-enabled smartcards. Participants will interact with the demo through mutually authenticated SSL connections and document signing. For the full text story, see http://www.merc.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=1274540-213 -- Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto vipul at pobox.com | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Multimedia From nobody at nowhere.com Tue Jan 28 15:14:39 1997 From: nobody at nowhere.com (nobody at nowhere.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 15:14:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: can Sun Tzu be a cypherpunks? Message-ID: <199701282258.OAA28486@miron.vip.best.com> Quotations from the Art Of War by Sun Tzu A Military operation involves deception. Even though you are competent, appear to be incompetent. Though effective, appear to be ineffective. Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion. Use humility to make them haughty. Tire them by flight. Cause division among them. Attack when they are unprepared, make your move when they do not expect it. The formation and procedure used by the military should not be divulged beforehand. Comment: He seems to be advocating security through obscurity here. The one who figures on victory at headquarters before even doing battle is the one who has the most strategic factors on his side. The one who figures on inability to prevail at headquarters before doing battle is the one who has the least strategic factors on his side. The one with many strategic factors in his favor wins, the one with few strategic factors in his favor loses--how much more so for the one with no strategic factors in his favor. Observing the matter this way, I can see who will win and who will lose. The superior militarist strikes while schemes are being laid. The next best is to attack alliances. The next best is to attack the army. Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent. Therefore skilled warriors are able to be invincible, but they cannot cause opponents to be vulnerable. That is why it is said that victory can be discerned but not manufactured. Invincibility is a matter of defense, vulnerability is a matter of attack. Therefore the victories of good warriors are not noted for cleverness or bravery. Therefore their victories in battle are not flukes. Their victories are not flukes because they position themselves where they will surely win, prevailing over those who have already lost. So it is that good warriors take their stand on ground where they cannot lose, and do not overlook conditions that make an opponent prone to defeat. Therefore a victorious army first wins and then seeks battle; a defeated army first battles and then seeks victory. Those who use arms well cultivate the Way and keep the rules. Thus they can govern in such a way as to prevail over the corrupt. Comment: Would it not be wonderful if we could prevail over the corrupt? Making the armies able to take on opponents without being defeated is a matter of unorthodox and orthodox methods. Therefore those skilled at the unorthodox are infinite as heaven and earth, inexhaustible as the great rivers. When they come to an end, they begin again, like the days and months; they die and are reborn, like the four seasons. The unorthodox and the orthodox give rise to each other, like a beginningless circle--who could exhaust them? Disorder arises from order, cowardice arises from courage, weakness arises from strength. Therefore those who skillfully move opponents make formations that the opponents are sure to follow, give what opponents are sure to take. They move opponents with the prospect of gain, waiting for them in ambush. To unfailingly take what you attack, attack where there is no defense. For unfailingly secure defense, defend where there is no attack. So in the case of those who are skilled in attack, their opponents do not know where to defend. In the case of those skilled in defense, their opponents do not know where to attack. Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate. Comment: Are cypherpunks capable of this? To advance irresistibly, push through their gaps, to retreat elusively, outspeed them. Induce them to adopt specific formations, in order to know the ground of death and life. Comment: Sounds like known plaintext attack to me. Therefore the consummation of forming an army is to arrive at formlessness. When you have no form, undercover espionage cannot find out anything, intelligence cannot form a strategy. Comment: Sun Tzu seems to being saying that if your cipher is properly designed, you need not rely on security through obscurity. Victory over multitudes by means of formation is unknowable to the multitudes. Everyone knows the form by which I am victorious, but no one knows the form by which I ensure victory. Military formation is like water--the form of water is to avoid the high and go to the low, the form of a military force is to avoid the full and attack the empty; the flow of water is determined by the earth, the victory of a military force is determined by the opponent. So a military force has not constant formation, water has no constant shape;the ability to gain victory by changing and adapting according to the opponent is called genius. Foreknowledge cannot be gotten from ghosts and spirits, cannot be had by analogy, cannot be found out by calculation. It must be obtained from people, people know the conditions of the enemy. There are five kinds of spy: The local spy, the inside spy, the reverse spy, the dead spy, and the living spy. When the five kinds of spies are all active, no one knows their routes--this is called organizational genius, and is valuable to the leadership. Local spies are hired from among the people of a locality; Inside spies are hired from among enemy officials. Reverse spies are hired from enemy spies. Dead spies transmit false intelligence to enemy spies. Living spies come back to report. Question: Can cypherpunks use these methods to defeat those who would take our freedom? From vipul at pobox.com Tue Jan 28 15:17:10 1997 From: vipul at pobox.com (Vipul Ved Prakash) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 15:17:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Child Porn Message-ID: <199701290448.EAA00573@fountainhead.net> (Forward) *** NY student charged with sending child sex photos over Internet Nathaniel Levy, a psychology major at New York State University, was charged Wednesday with using the Internet to transmit photos of infants having sex with adults, the New York state attorney general said. Levy, who wanted to be a kindergarten teacher, was arrested for promoting sexual performance of a child. If convicted he could receive seven years in prison. Levy, whose computer name was "NateTSnake," was released Wednesday on $20,000 bail. He allegedly transmitted 35 sexually explicit photos of children, some as young as 18 months. For the full text story, see http://www.merc.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=1219452-9f3 -- Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto vipul at pobox.com | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Multimedia From vznuri at netcom.com Tue Jan 28 15:22:09 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 15:22:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: c2 internet accounts Message-ID: <199701282321.PAA00678@netcom15.netcom.com> does c2net still offer internet accounts? I liked their offer for internet accounts with a 5 mb web site via telnet. does anyone else know of a place for cheap telnet only accounts? thanks; From vznuri at netcom.com Tue Jan 28 16:25:54 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:25:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: c2 internet accounts Message-ID: <199701290025.QAA08837@toad.com> does c2net still offer internet accounts? I liked their offer for internet accounts with a 5 mb web site via telnet. does anyone else know of a place for cheap telnet only accounts? thanks; From vipul at pobox.com Tue Jan 28 16:26:28 1997 From: vipul at pobox.com (Vipul Ved Prakash) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:26:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Child Porn Message-ID: <199701290026.QAA08900@toad.com> (Forward) *** NY student charged with sending child sex photos over Internet Nathaniel Levy, a psychology major at New York State University, was charged Wednesday with using the Internet to transmit photos of infants having sex with adults, the New York state attorney general said. Levy, who wanted to be a kindergarten teacher, was arrested for promoting sexual performance of a child. If convicted he could receive seven years in prison. Levy, whose computer name was "NateTSnake," was released Wednesday on $20,000 bail. He allegedly transmitted 35 sexually explicit photos of children, some as young as 18 months. For the full text story, see http://www.merc.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=1219452-9f3 -- Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto vipul at pobox.com | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Multimedia From sandfort at crl.com Tue Jan 28 16:26:36 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:26:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: c2 internet accounts In-Reply-To: <199701282321.PAA00678@netcom15.netcom.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > does c2net still offer internet accounts? I liked their > offer for internet accounts with a 5 mb web site via > telnet. does anyone else know of a place for cheap > telnet only accounts? C2Net no longer offers new shell accounts and we are phasing out pre-existing accounts. We still offer virtual web hosting. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From vipul at pobox.com Tue Jan 28 16:28:08 1997 From: vipul at pobox.com (Vipul Ved Prakash) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:28:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet companies demonstrate portable security Message-ID: <199701290028.QAA08966@toad.com> (Forward) Internet companies demonstrate portable security Six Internet companies have joined forces to develop a joint demonstration of smartcard technologies at the 1997 RSA Data Security Conference. Consensus Development Corporation, Gemplus, Hewlett-Packard, Litronic Inc., Netscape Communications Corporation and VeriSign, Inc., Monday announced "The Get Smartcard Demo." The interactive demo will allow each conference attendee to load X509v3 certificates on crypto-enabled smartcards. Participants will interact with the demo through mutually authenticated SSL connections and document signing. For the full text story, see http://www.merc.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=1274540-213 -- Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto vipul at pobox.com | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Multimedia From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 16:32:14 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:32:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... In-Reply-To: <199701282114.NAA02411@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701290028.SAA00380@manifold.algebra.com> harka at nycmetro.com wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hi there, > > does anybody know any contact points/Web pages, where I might get > some information on e-mail filtering via trigger-words? I am > interested in how this technology specifically works and a > collection of trigger-words would be nice too :) Look at http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/robomod/robomod.html, and look for the explanation of how bad.words.list works in my robomoderator. - Igor. From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Tue Jan 28 16:33:45 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:33:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ANNOUNCE] PGP Signatures Message-ID: <199701290032.QAA16759@sirius.infonex.com> Dinghy Vindictive K[ondom]OfTheMinute died of AIDS last night with his queer lover. _ O O _ \-|-\_/-|-/ Dinghy Vindictive K[ondom]OfTheMinute /^\ /^\ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ From winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net Tue Jan 28 16:37:14 1997 From: winsock at rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:37:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Genetic Algorithms Message-ID: <199701290036.QAA17853@sirius.infonex.com> What a joy to make a public mockery of Dr.Defecated L>eech< Vicious! |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ __ | \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ | O~-_ Dr.Defecated L>eech< Vicious | >----|-|-|-|-|-|-|--| __/ | / / / / / / / / |__\ |/ / / / / / / / From janzen at idacom.hp.com Tue Jan 28 16:46:42 1997 From: janzen at idacom.hp.com (Martin Janzen) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:46:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... Message-ID: <9701290046.AA10604@sabel.idacom.hp.com> harka at nycmetro.com writes: >does anybody know any contact points/Web pages, where I might get >some information on e-mail filtering via trigger-words? I am >interested in how this technology specifically works and a >acollection of trigger-words would be nice too :) You might start with the Mail Filtering FAQ: http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/mail/filtering-faq/faq.html It's pretty Unix-specific, covering procmail, Elm filter, and mailagent. For PC-based mailers, you're probably better off checking the documentation and/or the web page for the one you're using. Finally, take a look at the comp.mail.* newsgroups. Or just use the search engines, throwing in combinations of the above terms... -- Martin Janzen janzen at idacom.hp.com Pegasus Systems Group c/o Hewlett-Packard Company, CMD Vancouver From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 16:51:46 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:51:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: can Sun Tzu be a cypherpunks? In-Reply-To: <199701282258.OAA28486@miron.vip.best.com> Message-ID: <32EEB502.4813@sk.sympatico.ca> nobody at nowhere.com wrote: > Question: Can cypherpunks use these methods to defeat those > who would take our freedom? WARNING! "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" Is A Very Dangerous Document ------------------------------------------------------------------- It is reputed among many of the top minds in the Computer Industry to be a very real, and revealing, documentary of some of the horrors of the Industry which are sometimes rumored, but seldom exposed. But be warned-they say it in private, not in public. Though management at the major Corporations in the Industry brush aside the document as the mad ramblings of an unstable, failed business executive, the fact remains that there are more and more people coming forward who claim to have suffered demotions or loss of employment after deliberately or inadvertently revealing their support of the document's claims and it's authenticity. If you choose to read this manuscript, do not speak of it in casual conversation at your place of employment, or around strangers in any business or social environment. Though it is almost impossible to document cases of reprisal of this nature, the increasing numbers of ex-employees of major Corporations in the Computer Industry making these claims, and the devastating consequences they allege to their professional and private lives, make it wise to be discreet in expressing any opinion, or even knowledge, of this document. If you choose to share this document with others, it would be wise to do so discreetly, even anonymously, should you be unsure of the reliability and discretion of whomever you choose to share this knowledge with. Though I personally lean toward viewing the manuscript as authentic, my exhaustive research into it's origin has always come to a dead-end, even among the principals involved. C.J. Parker, former President of Pearl Harbor Computers, Inc., denied emphatically, in a face-to-face encounter with anything whatsoever to do with the document. When I pressed him with questions regarding the hasty demise of his business and the unraveling of his personal life after the public circulation of "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" began, he became very agitated and distraught, bordering on violence, and the interview was abruptly terminated. Dr. William M. Denney, one of the few principals in the manuscript referred to directly, was reluctant to be interviewed, but eventually made a few comments which I found to be very revealing. Dr. Denney, Vice-President of Basis, Inc. in Emmeryville, Ca., consistently rated as one of the top ten Unix Open Systems vendors in the world, said, "I deny any knowledge of or participation, in any way whatsoever, with anything connected to 'The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre', and it would be wise for others to do the same." I find this statement to be very cryptic and, at the same time, very revealing; very much in line with what would expect from one associated with the alleged underground computer society described in the manuscript. As for Mr. Torry Basford, a former employee of Bell Labs who was Mr. Parker's first mentor in the world of Unix and is rumored to be laboring in obscurity in a small community college somewhere in the southwestern U.S., Mr. Parker would only say, "The man has suffered enough, please leave him alone." Regardless of the origins or authenticity of the document, it is considered by many to be extremely unsettling, perhaps even dangerous, and one might be better served to avoid reading the manuscript, if for no other reason than simple peace of mind. ___________________________________ If you would like a copy of the manuscript, send me a private email indicating a desire to receive it. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 16:53:30 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:53:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy Tzu In-Reply-To: <199701282258.OAA28486@miron.vip.best.com> Message-ID: <32EEBB9C.46C3@sk.sympatico.ca> nobody at nowhere.com wrote: > Therefore those who skillfully move opponents make formations that the > opponents are sure to follow, give what opponents are sure to take. They > move opponents with the prospect of gain, waiting for them in ambush. Like skillfully moving the CypherPunks subscribers onto a different list than the one they subscribed to? Knowing that most subscribers would 'take' whatever was spoon-fed to them? I have the utmost respect for John's skill in manipulating the majority of CypherPunks subscribers into a pen from which they can leisurely munch on the fodder that Sandy throws over the fence to them. I am sure that they will grow 'fat' on the condensed crypto-food that is provided for them, especially since they will not have to move about in order to graze among all of the postings. But I am reminded of a Sunday-school teacher who told her class the story of the Prodigal Son, and afterwards asked one of the children, "Who was not happy to see the Prodigal Son return home?" He replied, "The fatted calf." Toto From rah at shipwright.com Tue Jan 28 16:59:41 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 16:59:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Russell Stuart MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:07:27 +1000 From: Russell Stuart To: Multiple recipients of Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... From: risko at csl.sri.com (RISKS List Owner) Newsgroups: comp.risks Subject: RISKS DIGEST 18.77 Message-ID: RISKS-LIST: Risks-Forum Digest Monday 20 January 1997 Volume 18 : Issue 77 FORUM ON RISKS TO THE PUBLIC IN COMPUTERS AND RELATED SYSTEMS (comp.risks) ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy, Peter G. Neumann, moderator ***** See last item for further information, disclaimers, caveats, etc. ***** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 97 23:52:00 +0100 From: Anders Andersson Subject: Leaking WWW surfer interest profiles I notice that AltaVista's inline advertisements link to a server outside Digital, "ad.doubleclick.net", and that the URL includes the user's list of keywords being searched. I'm concerned that these URL's may occasionally leak information about the user's interests and inclinations to third parties, information which the user may prefer to keep private. This is not a new problem that appeared with the inline ads, since also the Referer: field of the HTTP protocol discloses to a target server exactly what AltaVista index page led the user to it. However, this requires that the user willfully follows that link. If sensitive information being leaked via the Referer: field is a problem, the user may obtain client software that withholds Referer: data, either conditionally or unconditionally. Also, a user who has asked AltaVista for "gay" pages is probably not too concerned about accidentally disclosing this fact to the maintainer of said "gay" pages. However, the doubleclick.net ads appear to bear no relationship to the keywords being searched, and they appear not only in the URL for the hyperlink to follow, but also in the IMG SRC URL. This means that in order to avoid disclosing my keyword lists to doubleclick.net, I have to disable automatic loading of inline images when using AltaVista! Why is it that when I perform a search for, say, "gay OR nazi AND scientology", AltaVista tricks my browser to give this very search string away to an advertising company by means of an inline image (the contents of which has nothing to do with my search)? I think I can trust the AltaVista maintainers not to save my keyword lists for future analysis, but what about an advertising company? It's kind of serendipity reversed. When you open a book to look up information on a specific subject, the book scans your mind to find out what other interests and hobbies you have. Anders Andersson, Dept. of Computer Systems, Uppsala University Box 325, S-751 05 UPPSALA, Sweden +46 18 183170 andersa at DoCS.UU.SE ------------------------------ Regards Russell Stuart Software Development Manager RSM Technology PTY LTD ---------------------- Phone: +61 7 3844 9631 Fax: +61 7 3844 9522 Email: R.Stuart at rsm.com.au --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 17:11:12 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:11:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... Message-ID: <199701290111.RAA10710@toad.com> harka at nycmetro.com wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hi there, > > does anybody know any contact points/Web pages, where I might get > some information on e-mail filtering via trigger-words? I am > interested in how this technology specifically works and a > collection of trigger-words would be nice too :) Look at http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/usenet/scrm/robomod/robomod.html, and look for the explanation of how bad.words.list works in my robomoderator. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 17:14:59 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:14:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701282211.OAA04598@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701290111.TAA00779@manifold.algebra.com> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > > jim bell wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > > any recognition of this fact. > > Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility > or consistency. > > If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out > on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be > dead as a doornail in a week. But, if Jim writes the bot well, puts it in an unknown place (remember, all communications are done through remailers), he could die, but the assassination bot would still work. It may be an interesting problem: what steps are necessary to take to provide for the bot maintainers' sudden death in such a way that the bot would survive for a long time (at least 10 years) w/o any maintenance? Several things need to be done, such as running several versions of the bot so that they could all communicate and work as hot standbys in case one of the instances stops communicating; change their anonymous address from time to time to deal with shut down remailers; probably slowly propagate as virii, so that killing them all would be hard; what else? It could be done akin to Thompson's famous backdoor in /bin/login, as a perpetual trojan horse. How to prevent the bot's detection by sysadmins? - Igor. From janzen at idacom.hp.com Tue Jan 28 17:26:25 1997 From: janzen at idacom.hp.com (Martin Janzen) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:26:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... Message-ID: <199701290126.RAA11362@toad.com> harka at nycmetro.com writes: >does anybody know any contact points/Web pages, where I might get >some information on e-mail filtering via trigger-words? I am >interested in how this technology specifically works and a >acollection of trigger-words would be nice too :) You might start with the Mail Filtering FAQ: http://www.cis.ohio-state.edu/hypertext/faq/usenet/mail/filtering-faq/faq.html It's pretty Unix-specific, covering procmail, Elm filter, and mailagent. For PC-based mailers, you're probably better off checking the documentation and/or the web page for the one you're using. Finally, take a look at the comp.mail.* newsgroups. Or just use the search engines, throwing in combinations of the above terms... -- Martin Janzen janzen at idacom.hp.com Pegasus Systems Group c/o Hewlett-Packard Company, CMD Vancouver From rah at shipwright.com Tue Jan 28 17:26:25 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:26:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... Message-ID: <199701290126.RAA11363@toad.com> --- begin forwarded text Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Russell Stuart MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:07:27 +1000 From: Russell Stuart To: Multiple recipients of Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... From: risko at csl.sri.com (RISKS List Owner) Newsgroups: comp.risks Subject: RISKS DIGEST 18.77 Message-ID: RISKS-LIST: Risks-Forum Digest Monday 20 January 1997 Volume 18 : Issue 77 FORUM ON RISKS TO THE PUBLIC IN COMPUTERS AND RELATED SYSTEMS (comp.risks) ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy, Peter G. Neumann, moderator ***** See last item for further information, disclaimers, caveats, etc. ***** ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 3 Jan 97 23:52:00 +0100 From: Anders Andersson Subject: Leaking WWW surfer interest profiles I notice that AltaVista's inline advertisements link to a server outside Digital, "ad.doubleclick.net", and that the URL includes the user's list of keywords being searched. I'm concerned that these URL's may occasionally leak information about the user's interests and inclinations to third parties, information which the user may prefer to keep private. This is not a new problem that appeared with the inline ads, since also the Referer: field of the HTTP protocol discloses to a target server exactly what AltaVista index page led the user to it. However, this requires that the user willfully follows that link. If sensitive information being leaked via the Referer: field is a problem, the user may obtain client software that withholds Referer: data, either conditionally or unconditionally. Also, a user who has asked AltaVista for "gay" pages is probably not too concerned about accidentally disclosing this fact to the maintainer of said "gay" pages. However, the doubleclick.net ads appear to bear no relationship to the keywords being searched, and they appear not only in the URL for the hyperlink to follow, but also in the IMG SRC URL. This means that in order to avoid disclosing my keyword lists to doubleclick.net, I have to disable automatic loading of inline images when using AltaVista! Why is it that when I perform a search for, say, "gay OR nazi AND scientology", AltaVista tricks my browser to give this very search string away to an advertising company by means of an inline image (the contents of which has nothing to do with my search)? I think I can trust the AltaVista maintainers not to save my keyword lists for future analysis, but what about an advertising company? It's kind of serendipity reversed. When you open a book to look up information on a specific subject, the book scans your mind to find out what other interests and hobbies you have. Anders Andersson, Dept. of Computer Systems, Uppsala University Box 325, S-751 05 UPPSALA, Sweden +46 18 183170 andersa at DoCS.UU.SE ------------------------------ Regards Russell Stuart Software Development Manager RSM Technology PTY LTD ---------------------- Phone: +61 7 3844 9631 Fax: +61 7 3844 9522 Email: R.Stuart at rsm.com.au --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From mst114 at psu.edu Tue Jan 28 17:26:56 1997 From: mst114 at psu.edu (Matthew Toth) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:26:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <1.5.4.16.19970129012353.382f645c@email.psu.edu> MIT is one the best schools in the country for C.S. Close behind is Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh, PA. (the folks who put out CERT.) Not sure how much Crypto they do, though. From David.Garrard at EXCH.EDS.com Tue Jan 28 17:44:42 1997 From: David.Garrard at EXCH.EDS.com (Garrard, David) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 17:44:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Recovery of Windows NT administrator password Message-ID: An inherited Windows NT system that I am involved with has a lost administrator password ( no one no longer knows what it is ). Can anyone point me to software products/companies that can help in the recovery. Given Microsoft's dismal record on security I am sure there must be solutions to this dilemma. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Best Regards David L. Garrard From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Tue Jan 28 18:03:07 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:03:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970128210213.0093e370@gateway.grumman.com> At 12:32 PM 1/28/97 -0500, Derek Atkins wrote: >This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be >admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and >1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in Drama, and played Tennis. The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the Russian front!" >For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high >school, too Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess. MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ "He who knows, does not speak. He who speaks, does not know." From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 18:04:20 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:04:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701290204.UAA06554@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:12:36 -0500 > From: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > Jim Choate wrote in article <5cg99p$7a at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > The network is largely an intellectual creation. The hardware is > relatively unimportant, it can always be replaced. Try doing it without the hardware and software. There is a distinction, you apparently don't make, between the content and the methodology of distribution. Without the methodology there is no content. Ideas are cheap, distributing and trying them out (ie great social experiments) is expensive. This is why it is absolutely critical in a democratic society that those who own the means of distribution be left to their own means with minimal regulation based on the ideal 'if their actions do not harm another or their property without their prior consent' it isn't anyones business what they are doing with their distribution mechanisms. Whether you like it or not, each and every one of us have a responsibility to every other person on the planet. That responsibility is to ensure that our goals and desires don't infringe their goals and desires without their prior consent, this is a fundamenal responsibility of government. As hard as it is for many social scientist to accept privacy is a fundamental requirement for a equitable government. I express this simply by, "Democracy works not because of compromise but rather the refusal to compromise." > If you start from such a state and property centered ideology perhaps. > I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have > "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of > property you do. The 'state' is its subjects and the rules that are enacted to regulate their behaviour. In case it hasn't occured to you, even the regulators are subjects, and in the case of clearly oppressive societies victims as much as those they subjugate. It isn't some etherial entity. Only you, and those that proscribe to your views, are claiming that states are some homogenous (or should be) set of rules and actions. The way you speak of 'state' and 'citizen' implies some clearly observable demarcation, it don't exist. This is the problem with EVERY form of government except a democracy, it assumes that people are cogs in a machine. If it satisfies one it will satisfy all. A democracy recognizes this difference in what people value and the goals they desire as a fundamental distinction (ie. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) worth protecting. I would suggest you read the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution of the US and consider long and hard the ramifications of the (currently unenforced) limitations of government authority. Even European governments might learn something. > Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the > controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property" > from the previous rulers. Malarky. The origin of property is at least 300,000 years old, potentialy over a Million, and much older than China could ever hope to claim and most definitely NOT based on any concept of government. Property comes from small family clans of people who chose to move from a hunter-gather society to one of agriculture. To do that means that you have to lay out fields or other areas for cultivation. Initialy these groups moved around because the fields would go fallow. At some point some bright folks, either by accident or intentional experimentation (probably both), found that rotating crops would allow them to stay in one place. This allowed families to grow. In very fertile areas this caused population explosions as individual clans grew and began to interact with other local clans. At some critical size, undetermined as best as I can determine, this allows specialization of effort. This specialization of effort is what leads to governments as we recognize them. When property was 'invented' there were no rulers because there was no larger human organization than a familial tribe. I personaly believe that the concept of 'property' is a fundamental aspect of human psychology and not any structures they might impliment to express that need. I am as certain as it is possible to be that a Cro-magnon cave man felt that his throwing stick was 'his'. If not why did they bury their dead with flowers and other objects that apparently belonged to the person in life? It sounds like, by extrapolation, that your assertion is that they had government in the modern sense because of this. An assertion I find laughable at best. > I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is > a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model > you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every > philosopher since Locke. But I don't propose a slavish subject model, you keep trying to make it seem like that is what I am proposing. Let me make it clear, I utterly reject ANY model that makes distinctions between those who rule and those who are ruled. > It is true that there is the convenience of the state as agency but > the question is on whose behalf that agency is exercised. Nobodies. The state is a means to regulate resources and commerce, anything else is a misunderstanding of what a state is. > I see no reason why I should not meddle in the affairs of states > I'm not a 'subject" of. Then don't bitch when they meddle in your affairs. I am shure Saddam Hussein (who I personaly believe is a piece of shit) will find it reassuring that you won't raise a complaint next time he decides some place in Europe would be a nice place to hang out with his armies. > They are allowed Allowed, hell. They pay for the privilege just like everyone else. Despite what you might believe the Internet is not a right or something anyone has a right to. > to connect their machinery to the Internet so long > as they are prepared to accept the Internet's ethic. There is no Internet ethic just as there is no community standard. It is a convenient concept for intellectuals to pass off utterly senseless theories and explanations, and in many cases justify subjugation and regulation for no other reason than their own emotional and economic comfort. > As a citizen of Europe I disagree. I believe that the narrow and > parochial attitude of the French province breaches undertakings in the > Treaty of Rome and under the European declaration of human rights. Absolutely. The difference in our approaches is that you feel that you have found a solution that satisfies you and therefore it should satisfy everyone. With this I disagree completely. People are simply too diverse to lump into the categories that you would like. If the French have a model that won't work, let them figure it out on their own. > France is not a sovereign state and does not have the right to > pass laws that infringe on the rights granted to European citizens > as a whole. I suspect most French people would have something contrary to say about that. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From nobody at REPLAY.COM Tue Jan 28 18:05:57 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:05:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crypto verification needed for Pretty Safe Mail Message-ID: <199701290156.CAA27377@basement.replay.com> There have been questions raised on the newsgroups regarding Pretty Safe Mail, arguably the best implementation of a PGP product for the Macintosh. In response, the product manager at Highware has requested that a trusted third party verify the security of Pretty Safe Mail. However, a NON-U.S. cryptologer is needed. I'm including the post below. Please forward to any people you know who may qualify. Pretty Safe Mail is a GREAT product. If it can be shown to be safe and effective, it will do wonders to spread the use of strong crypto. ===== From: axel at highware.com (Axel de Landtsheer) Newsgroups: comp.security.pgp.discuss Subject: Re: Concerned about Pretty Safe Mail for Mac > I'm concerned about the product "Pretty Safe Mail" for the Macintosh, >by a company called Highware. I was wondering whether anyone here had >tried evaluating it at all. > > It is a complete PGP implementation (not a front-end). They claim >to have licensed some of PRZ's code from PGP. However, as far as I >can tell, they are not making any of the source code available. The source code for PSM is indeed not available. We are however eager to have the code checked by any trusted source. These sources cannot be US companies because of the new US regulations which state that US companies must not give such support to overseas companies. Us being a Belgian company, this makes things a little more difficult. Does anybody have a suggestion for such a trusted source outside the US? > As someone on the comp.security.pgp newsgroups pointed out, writing >a wonderful user interface on a PGP trojan horse that either crippled >the session key generator or used the session key to leak random >portions of secret key primes would be a perfect tactic for a >government wishing to penetrate PGP security. With such a great >interface, compared to the original PGP, it can't help but become >widely used. PSM is not a Trojan Horse. Does any trusted source want to check that? > I realize that without the source code, it's a major hassle, but >has anyone looked at Pretty Safe Mail (previously called Safemail) >at all for suspicious behavior? For example: > > 1) non-random session key generation? > 2) non-random key pair generation? > 3) unnecessary disk access to secret keys? > 4) anything else? Many people are worried about the random-key generation because they do not need to bang away on the keyboard for five minutes when they create a key pair. Apparently, this seems to loosen their nerves (I heard some people created about 10 key pairs a day - just a joke). In short, we use all events that happen on the Mac (clicks, typing, opening of windows, display of icons, ...) together with the time they happen, and encrypt these to fill a table which is the starting point for the random-number generator. Why make people type away on the keyboard if you have enough random events to start from? Again, we want to have this checked by a trusted source asap... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Axel de Landtsheer | Highware, Inc. | 109 av. H. Jaspar, 1060 Brussels, Belgium Product Manager | voice: +32 2 537-6810 fax: +32 2 537-5155 axel at highware.com | http://www.highware.com, ftp://ftp.highware.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To obtain my PGP key, send me a message with subject "Send PGP key" From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 18:12:34 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:12:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: CNN: Court ok's College control of Internet access Message-ID: <199701290212.UAA06609@einstein> Note: Heavily edited. Forwarded message: > COURT SAYS COLLEGES CAN RESTRICT INTERNET ACCESS > > > January 28, 1997 > Web posted at: 1:35 p.m. EST > > NORMAN, Oklahoma (CNN) -- A U.S. District Court in Oklahoma has > ruled universities have the right to limit access to explicit > material on the Internet. > > A federal judge ruled University of Oklahoma president David Boren, > a former U.S. senator, has every right to determine what sites > students and faculty can view while on the campus Internet system. > > Boren was sued by University professor, Bill Loving, who claimed his > First Amendment rights were being infringed upon. > > The court ruled against Loving, also an attorney, saying his > constitutional rights were not violated and that he is not entitled > to injunctive relief. > > "I am certainly pleased by the judge's decision," Boren said. "The > university did its best to strike a careful balance in order to > protect legitimate academic and intellectual freedom while at the > same time assuring that the university not act as a distributor of > obscene material, which is not protected by the First Amendment." > rule From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 18:12:53 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:12:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Physical meet, Sat. Feb. 15 - not 18. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701290212.UAA06654@einstein> Forwarded message: >From owner-austin-cpunks at ssz.com Tue Jan 28 20:10:19 1997 From: Jim Choate Message-Id: <199701290209.UAA06585 at einstein> Subject: Physical meet, Sat. Feb. 15 - not 18. To: austin-cpunks at einstein.ssz.com (Austin Cypherpunks) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:09:55 -0600 (CST) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL23] Content-Type: text Content-Length: 784 Sender: owner-austin-cpunks at einstein.ssz.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: austin-cpunks at einstein.ssz.com Hi all, I apparently didn't pay much attention to what month I was looking at when I made the initial meeting. Turns out the 18th is a Tuesday obviously a day that few of us can make. As a result I looked at the 'real' Feb. calendar and the meeting date is as follows: Saturday, Feb. 15, 1997 6pm. HEB Central Market Restaurant Look for the red 2nd. ed. Applied Cryptography book For more info email 'austin-cpunks at ssz.com' Also invited to this meet are members of the mailing lists: Experimental Science Instrumentation Advanced Computer Experimentation Sorry for the confusion. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From sandfort at crl.crl.com Tue Jan 28 18:15:14 1997 From: sandfort at crl.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:15:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: c2 internet accounts Message-ID: <199701290215.SAA13437@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > does c2net still offer internet accounts? I liked their > offer for internet accounts with a 5 mb web site via > telnet. does anyone else know of a place for cheap > telnet only accounts? C2Net no longer offers new shell accounts and we are phasing out pre-existing accounts. We still offer virtual web hosting. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 18:26:20 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:26:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: can Sun Tzu be a cypherpunks? Message-ID: <199701290226.SAA13870@toad.com> nobody at nowhere.com wrote: > Question: Can cypherpunks use these methods to defeat those > who would take our freedom? WARNING! "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" Is A Very Dangerous Document ------------------------------------------------------------------- It is reputed among many of the top minds in the Computer Industry to be a very real, and revealing, documentary of some of the horrors of the Industry which are sometimes rumored, but seldom exposed. But be warned-they say it in private, not in public. Though management at the major Corporations in the Industry brush aside the document as the mad ramblings of an unstable, failed business executive, the fact remains that there are more and more people coming forward who claim to have suffered demotions or loss of employment after deliberately or inadvertently revealing their support of the document's claims and it's authenticity. If you choose to read this manuscript, do not speak of it in casual conversation at your place of employment, or around strangers in any business or social environment. Though it is almost impossible to document cases of reprisal of this nature, the increasing numbers of ex-employees of major Corporations in the Computer Industry making these claims, and the devastating consequences they allege to their professional and private lives, make it wise to be discreet in expressing any opinion, or even knowledge, of this document. If you choose to share this document with others, it would be wise to do so discreetly, even anonymously, should you be unsure of the reliability and discretion of whomever you choose to share this knowledge with. Though I personally lean toward viewing the manuscript as authentic, my exhaustive research into it's origin has always come to a dead-end, even among the principals involved. C.J. Parker, former President of Pearl Harbor Computers, Inc., denied emphatically, in a face-to-face encounter with anything whatsoever to do with the document. When I pressed him with questions regarding the hasty demise of his business and the unraveling of his personal life after the public circulation of "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" began, he became very agitated and distraught, bordering on violence, and the interview was abruptly terminated. Dr. William M. Denney, one of the few principals in the manuscript referred to directly, was reluctant to be interviewed, but eventually made a few comments which I found to be very revealing. Dr. Denney, Vice-President of Basis, Inc. in Emmeryville, Ca., consistently rated as one of the top ten Unix Open Systems vendors in the world, said, "I deny any knowledge of or participation, in any way whatsoever, with anything connected to 'The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre', and it would be wise for others to do the same." I find this statement to be very cryptic and, at the same time, very revealing; very much in line with what would expect from one associated with the alleged underground computer society described in the manuscript. As for Mr. Torry Basford, a former employee of Bell Labs who was Mr. Parker's first mentor in the world of Unix and is rumored to be laboring in obscurity in a small community college somewhere in the southwestern U.S., Mr. Parker would only say, "The man has suffered enough, please leave him alone." Regardless of the origins or authenticity of the document, it is considered by many to be extremely unsettling, perhaps even dangerous, and one might be better served to avoid reading the manuscript, if for no other reason than simple peace of mind. ___________________________________ If you would like a copy of the manuscript, send me a private email indicating a desire to receive it. Toto From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 18:41:02 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:41:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701290241.SAA14333@toad.com> Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > > jim bell wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > > any recognition of this fact. > > Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility > or consistency. > > If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out > on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be > dead as a doornail in a week. But, if Jim writes the bot well, puts it in an unknown place (remember, all communications are done through remailers), he could die, but the assassination bot would still work. It may be an interesting problem: what steps are necessary to take to provide for the bot maintainers' sudden death in such a way that the bot would survive for a long time (at least 10 years) w/o any maintenance? Several things need to be done, such as running several versions of the bot so that they could all communicate and work as hot standbys in case one of the instances stops communicating; change their anonymous address from time to time to deal with shut down remailers; probably slowly propagate as virii, so that killing them all would be hard; what else? It could be done akin to Thompson's famous backdoor in /bin/login, as a perpetual trojan horse. How to prevent the bot's detection by sysadmins? - Igor. From Garrard Tue Jan 28 18:55:44 1997 From: Garrard (Garrard) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:55:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Recovery of Windows NT administrator password Message-ID: <199701290255.SAA14886@toad.com> An inherited Windows NT system that I am involved with has a lost administrator password ( no one no longer knows what it is ). Can anyone point me to software products/companies that can help in the recovery. Given Microsoft's dismal record on security I am sure there must be solutions to this dilemma. Any help would be greatly appreciated. Best Regards David L. Garrard From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 18:55:50 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:55:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Physical meet, Sat. Feb. 15 - not 18. Message-ID: <199701290255.SAA14900@toad.com> Hi all, I apparently didn't pay much attention to what month I was looking at when I made the initial meeting. Turns out the 18th is a Tuesday obviously a day that few of us can make. As a result I looked at the 'real' Feb. calendar and the meeting date is as follows: Saturday, Feb. 15, 1997 6pm. HEB Central Market Restaurant Look for the red 2nd. ed. Applied Cryptography book For more info email 'austin-cpunks at ssz.com' Also invited to this meet are members of the mailing lists: Experimental Science Instrumentation Advanced Computer Experimentation Sorry for the confusion. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Tue Jan 28 18:56:00 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:56:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701290256.SAA14915@toad.com> At 12:32 PM 1/28/97 -0500, Derek Atkins wrote: >This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be >admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and >1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in Drama, and played Tennis. The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the Russian front!" >For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high >school, too Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess. MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ "He who knows, does not speak. He who speaks, does not know." From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 18:56:04 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:56:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: CNN: Court ok's College control of Internet access Message-ID: <199701290256.SAA14916@toad.com> Note: Heavily edited. Forwarded message: > COURT SAYS COLLEGES CAN RESTRICT INTERNET ACCESS > > > January 28, 1997 > Web posted at: 1:35 p.m. EST > > NORMAN, Oklahoma (CNN) -- A U.S. District Court in Oklahoma has > ruled universities have the right to limit access to explicit > material on the Internet. > > A federal judge ruled University of Oklahoma president David Boren, > a former U.S. senator, has every right to determine what sites > students and faculty can view while on the campus Internet system. > > Boren was sued by University professor, Bill Loving, who claimed his > First Amendment rights were being infringed upon. > > The court ruled against Loving, also an attorney, saying his > constitutional rights were not violated and that he is not entitled > to injunctive relief. > > "I am certainly pleased by the judge's decision," Boren said. "The > university did its best to strike a careful balance in order to > protect legitimate academic and intellectual freedom while at the > same time assuring that the university not act as a distributor of > obscene material, which is not protected by the First Amendment." > rule From mst114 at psu.edu Tue Jan 28 18:57:30 1997 From: mst114 at psu.edu (Matthew Toth) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:57:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701290257.SAA14988@toad.com> MIT is one the best schools in the country for C.S. Close behind is Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh, PA. (the folks who put out CERT.) Not sure how much Crypto they do, though. From karn at qualcomm.com Tue Jan 28 18:58:56 1997 From: karn at qualcomm.com (Phil Karn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 18:58:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: <199701290258.SAA15049@toad.com> Read the following text from the introduction to the new December 30, 1996 regulations: A printed book or other printed material setting forth encryption source code is not itself subject to the EAR (see Sec. 734.3(b)(2)). However, notwithstanding Sec. 734.3(b)(2), encryption source code in electronic form or media (e.g., computer diskette or CD ROM) remains subject to the EAR (see Sec. 734.3(b)(3)). The administration continues to review whether and to what extent scannable encryption source or object code in printed form should be subject to the EAR and reserves the option to impose export controls on such software for national security and foreign policy reasons. This seems clear enough. If it's printed on paper, it's kosher for export. But if we're really overt about it, we may goad the government into attempting to control printed source code as well. That could prove most interesting. Phil From iang at cs.berkeley.edu Tue Jan 28 19:00:14 1997 From: iang at cs.berkeley.edu (Ian Goldberg) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:00:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701290300.TAA15101@toad.com> EXPORTABLE CRYPTOGRAPHY TOTALLY INSECURE: CHALLENGE CIPHER BROKEN IMMEDIATELY January 28, 1997 - Ian Goldberg, a UC Berkeley graduate student, announced today that he had successfully cracked RSA Data Security Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher in just under 3.5 hours. RSA challenged scientists to break their encryption technology, offering a $1000 award for breaking the weakest version of the code. Their offering was designed to stimulate research and practical experience with the security of today's codes. The number of bits in a cipher is an indication of the maximum level of security the cipher can provide. Each additional bit doubles the potential security level of the cipher. A recent panel of experts recommended using 90-bit ciphers, and 128-bit ciphers are commonly used throughout the world, but US government regulations restrict exportable US products to a mere 40 bits. Goldberg's announcement, which came just three and a half hours after RSA started their contest, provides very strong evidence that 40-bit ciphers are totally unsuitable for practical security. "This is the final proof of what we've known for years: 40-bit encryption technology is obsolete," Goldberg said. The US export restrictions have limited the deployment of technology that could greatly strengthen security on the Internet, often affecting both foreign and domestic users. "We know how to build strong encryption; the government just won't let us deploy it. We need strong encryption to uphold privacy, maintain security, and support commerce on the Internet -- these export restrictions on cryptography must be lifted," Goldberg explained. Fittingly, when Goldberg finally unscrambled the challenge message, it read: "This is why you should use a longer key." Goldberg used UC Berkeley's Network of Workstations (known as the NOW) to harness the computational resources of about 250 idle machines. This allowed him to test 100 billion possible "keys" per hour -- analogous to safecracking by trying every possible combination at high speed. This amount of computing power is available with little overhead cost to students and employees at many large educational institutions and corporations. Goldberg is a founding member of the ISAAC computer security research group at UC Berkeley. In the Fall of 1995, the ISAAC group made headlines by revealing a major security flaw in Netscape's web browser. From nobody at replay.com Tue Jan 28 19:00:19 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:00:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Crypto verification needed for Pretty Safe Mail Message-ID: <199701290300.TAA15110@toad.com> There have been questions raised on the newsgroups regarding Pretty Safe Mail, arguably the best implementation of a PGP product for the Macintosh. In response, the product manager at Highware has requested that a trusted third party verify the security of Pretty Safe Mail. However, a NON-U.S. cryptologer is needed. I'm including the post below. Please forward to any people you know who may qualify. Pretty Safe Mail is a GREAT product. If it can be shown to be safe and effective, it will do wonders to spread the use of strong crypto. ===== From: axel at highware.com (Axel de Landtsheer) Newsgroups: comp.security.pgp.discuss Subject: Re: Concerned about Pretty Safe Mail for Mac > I'm concerned about the product "Pretty Safe Mail" for the Macintosh, >by a company called Highware. I was wondering whether anyone here had >tried evaluating it at all. > > It is a complete PGP implementation (not a front-end). They claim >to have licensed some of PRZ's code from PGP. However, as far as I >can tell, they are not making any of the source code available. The source code for PSM is indeed not available. We are however eager to have the code checked by any trusted source. These sources cannot be US companies because of the new US regulations which state that US companies must not give such support to overseas companies. Us being a Belgian company, this makes things a little more difficult. Does anybody have a suggestion for such a trusted source outside the US? > As someone on the comp.security.pgp newsgroups pointed out, writing >a wonderful user interface on a PGP trojan horse that either crippled >the session key generator or used the session key to leak random >portions of secret key primes would be a perfect tactic for a >government wishing to penetrate PGP security. With such a great >interface, compared to the original PGP, it can't help but become >widely used. PSM is not a Trojan Horse. Does any trusted source want to check that? > I realize that without the source code, it's a major hassle, but >has anyone looked at Pretty Safe Mail (previously called Safemail) >at all for suspicious behavior? For example: > > 1) non-random session key generation? > 2) non-random key pair generation? > 3) unnecessary disk access to secret keys? > 4) anything else? Many people are worried about the random-key generation because they do not need to bang away on the keyboard for five minutes when they create a key pair. Apparently, this seems to loosen their nerves (I heard some people created about 10 key pairs a day - just a joke). In short, we use all events that happen on the Mac (clicks, typing, opening of windows, display of icons, ...) together with the time they happen, and encrypt these to fill a table which is the starting point for the random-number generator. Why make people type away on the keyboard if you have enough random events to start from? Again, we want to have this checked by a trusted source asap... ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Axel de Landtsheer | Highware, Inc. | 109 av. H. Jaspar, 1060 Brussels, Belgium Product Manager | voice: +32 2 537-6810 fax: +32 2 537-5155 axel at highware.com | http://www.highware.com, ftp://ftp.highware.com ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To obtain my PGP key, send me a message with subject "Send PGP key" From nobody at nowhere.com Tue Jan 28 19:00:48 1997 From: nobody at nowhere.com (nobody at nowhere.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:00:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: can Sun Tzu be a cypherpunks? Message-ID: <199701290300.TAA15126@toad.com> Quotations from the Art Of War by Sun Tzu A Military operation involves deception. Even though you are competent, appear to be incompetent. Though effective, appear to be ineffective. Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion. Use humility to make them haughty. Tire them by flight. Cause division among them. Attack when they are unprepared, make your move when they do not expect it. The formation and procedure used by the military should not be divulged beforehand. Comment: He seems to be advocating security through obscurity here. The one who figures on victory at headquarters before even doing battle is the one who has the most strategic factors on his side. The one who figures on inability to prevail at headquarters before doing battle is the one who has the least strategic factors on his side. The one with many strategic factors in his favor wins, the one with few strategic factors in his favor loses--how much more so for the one with no strategic factors in his favor. Observing the matter this way, I can see who will win and who will lose. The superior militarist strikes while schemes are being laid. The next best is to attack alliances. The next best is to attack the army. Invincibility is in oneself, vulnerability is in the opponent. Therefore skilled warriors are able to be invincible, but they cannot cause opponents to be vulnerable. That is why it is said that victory can be discerned but not manufactured. Invincibility is a matter of defense, vulnerability is a matter of attack. Therefore the victories of good warriors are not noted for cleverness or bravery. Therefore their victories in battle are not flukes. Their victories are not flukes because they position themselves where they will surely win, prevailing over those who have already lost. So it is that good warriors take their stand on ground where they cannot lose, and do not overlook conditions that make an opponent prone to defeat. Therefore a victorious army first wins and then seeks battle; a defeated army first battles and then seeks victory. Those who use arms well cultivate the Way and keep the rules. Thus they can govern in such a way as to prevail over the corrupt. Comment: Would it not be wonderful if we could prevail over the corrupt? Making the armies able to take on opponents without being defeated is a matter of unorthodox and orthodox methods. Therefore those skilled at the unorthodox are infinite as heaven and earth, inexhaustible as the great rivers. When they come to an end, they begin again, like the days and months; they die and are reborn, like the four seasons. The unorthodox and the orthodox give rise to each other, like a beginningless circle--who could exhaust them? Disorder arises from order, cowardice arises from courage, weakness arises from strength. Therefore those who skillfully move opponents make formations that the opponents are sure to follow, give what opponents are sure to take. They move opponents with the prospect of gain, waiting for them in ambush. To unfailingly take what you attack, attack where there is no defense. For unfailingly secure defense, defend where there is no attack. So in the case of those who are skilled in attack, their opponents do not know where to defend. In the case of those skilled in defense, their opponents do not know where to attack. Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent's fate. Comment: Are cypherpunks capable of this? To advance irresistibly, push through their gaps, to retreat elusively, outspeed them. Induce them to adopt specific formations, in order to know the ground of death and life. Comment: Sounds like known plaintext attack to me. Therefore the consummation of forming an army is to arrive at formlessness. When you have no form, undercover espionage cannot find out anything, intelligence cannot form a strategy. Comment: Sun Tzu seems to being saying that if your cipher is properly designed, you need not rely on security through obscurity. Victory over multitudes by means of formation is unknowable to the multitudes. Everyone knows the form by which I am victorious, but no one knows the form by which I ensure victory. Military formation is like water--the form of water is to avoid the high and go to the low, the form of a military force is to avoid the full and attack the empty; the flow of water is determined by the earth, the victory of a military force is determined by the opponent. So a military force has not constant formation, water has no constant shape;the ability to gain victory by changing and adapting according to the opponent is called genius. Foreknowledge cannot be gotten from ghosts and spirits, cannot be had by analogy, cannot be found out by calculation. It must be obtained from people, people know the conditions of the enemy. There are five kinds of spy: The local spy, the inside spy, the reverse spy, the dead spy, and the living spy. When the five kinds of spies are all active, no one knows their routes--this is called organizational genius, and is valuable to the leadership. Local spies are hired from among the people of a locality; Inside spies are hired from among enemy officials. Reverse spies are hired from enemy spies. Dead spies transmit false intelligence to enemy spies. Living spies come back to report. Question: Can cypherpunks use these methods to defeat those who would take our freedom? From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 19:03:21 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:03:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701290303.TAA15228@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 22:12:36 -0500 > From: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" > Subject: Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) > > Jim Choate wrote in article <5cg99p$7a at life.ai.mit.edu>... > > The network is largely an intellectual creation. The hardware is > relatively unimportant, it can always be replaced. Try doing it without the hardware and software. There is a distinction, you apparently don't make, between the content and the methodology of distribution. Without the methodology there is no content. Ideas are cheap, distributing and trying them out (ie great social experiments) is expensive. This is why it is absolutely critical in a democratic society that those who own the means of distribution be left to their own means with minimal regulation based on the ideal 'if their actions do not harm another or their property without their prior consent' it isn't anyones business what they are doing with their distribution mechanisms. Whether you like it or not, each and every one of us have a responsibility to every other person on the planet. That responsibility is to ensure that our goals and desires don't infringe their goals and desires without their prior consent, this is a fundamenal responsibility of government. As hard as it is for many social scientist to accept privacy is a fundamental requirement for a equitable government. I express this simply by, "Democracy works not because of compromise but rather the refusal to compromise." > If you start from such a state and property centered ideology perhaps. > I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have > "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of > property you do. The 'state' is its subjects and the rules that are enacted to regulate their behaviour. In case it hasn't occured to you, even the regulators are subjects, and in the case of clearly oppressive societies victims as much as those they subjugate. It isn't some etherial entity. Only you, and those that proscribe to your views, are claiming that states are some homogenous (or should be) set of rules and actions. The way you speak of 'state' and 'citizen' implies some clearly observable demarcation, it don't exist. This is the problem with EVERY form of government except a democracy, it assumes that people are cogs in a machine. If it satisfies one it will satisfy all. A democracy recognizes this difference in what people value and the goals they desire as a fundamental distinction (ie. life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness) worth protecting. I would suggest you read the 9th and 10th Amendments to the Constitution of the US and consider long and hard the ramifications of the (currently unenforced) limitations of government authority. Even European governments might learn something. > Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the > controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property" > from the previous rulers. Malarky. The origin of property is at least 300,000 years old, potentialy over a Million, and much older than China could ever hope to claim and most definitely NOT based on any concept of government. Property comes from small family clans of people who chose to move from a hunter-gather society to one of agriculture. To do that means that you have to lay out fields or other areas for cultivation. Initialy these groups moved around because the fields would go fallow. At some point some bright folks, either by accident or intentional experimentation (probably both), found that rotating crops would allow them to stay in one place. This allowed families to grow. In very fertile areas this caused population explosions as individual clans grew and began to interact with other local clans. At some critical size, undetermined as best as I can determine, this allows specialization of effort. This specialization of effort is what leads to governments as we recognize them. When property was 'invented' there were no rulers because there was no larger human organization than a familial tribe. I personaly believe that the concept of 'property' is a fundamental aspect of human psychology and not any structures they might impliment to express that need. I am as certain as it is possible to be that a Cro-magnon cave man felt that his throwing stick was 'his'. If not why did they bury their dead with flowers and other objects that apparently belonged to the person in life? It sounds like, by extrapolation, that your assertion is that they had government in the modern sense because of this. An assertion I find laughable at best. > I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is > a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model > you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every > philosopher since Locke. But I don't propose a slavish subject model, you keep trying to make it seem like that is what I am proposing. Let me make it clear, I utterly reject ANY model that makes distinctions between those who rule and those who are ruled. > It is true that there is the convenience of the state as agency but > the question is on whose behalf that agency is exercised. Nobodies. The state is a means to regulate resources and commerce, anything else is a misunderstanding of what a state is. > I see no reason why I should not meddle in the affairs of states > I'm not a 'subject" of. Then don't bitch when they meddle in your affairs. I am shure Saddam Hussein (who I personaly believe is a piece of shit) will find it reassuring that you won't raise a complaint next time he decides some place in Europe would be a nice place to hang out with his armies. > They are allowed Allowed, hell. They pay for the privilege just like everyone else. Despite what you might believe the Internet is not a right or something anyone has a right to. > to connect their machinery to the Internet so long > as they are prepared to accept the Internet's ethic. There is no Internet ethic just as there is no community standard. It is a convenient concept for intellectuals to pass off utterly senseless theories and explanations, and in many cases justify subjugation and regulation for no other reason than their own emotional and economic comfort. > As a citizen of Europe I disagree. I believe that the narrow and > parochial attitude of the French province breaches undertakings in the > Treaty of Rome and under the European declaration of human rights. Absolutely. The difference in our approaches is that you feel that you have found a solution that satisfies you and therefore it should satisfy everyone. With this I disagree completely. People are simply too diverse to lump into the categories that you would like. If the French have a model that won't work, let them figure it out on their own. > France is not a sovereign state and does not have the right to > pass laws that infringe on the rights granted to European citizens > as a whole. I suspect most French people would have something contrary to say about that. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 28 19:04:10 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:04:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ANNOUNCEMENT] FBI at it again Message-ID: <199701290303.TAA18661@mailmasher.com> Dr.Drunken Virus wears satin lingerie embroidered with pink swastikas, prancing around for his homosexual, AIDS infected lovers. ___ {~._.~} ( Y ) Dr.Drunken Virus ()~*~() (_)-(_) From haystack at holy.cow.net Tue Jan 28 19:08:27 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:08:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Mondex Message-ID: <199701290249.VAA04741@holy.cow.net> Degenerate L[ibel] Vandal K[ocksucker] Of The Minute will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking his own son's prepubescent body. o_o ( ) Degenerate L[ibel] Vandal K[ocksucker] Of The Minute ( | | ) ' " " ` From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 28 19:10:27 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:10:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: He's back Message-ID: <199701290308.TAA20105@mailmasher.com> Dr.Dumbbell Virus K]retin[ Of The Moment enjoys sucking the puss from his syphilitic queer friends. ,_, *-._W_,-* Dr.Dumbbell Virus K]retin[ Of The Moment `-;-;-' " " From mrosen at peganet.com Tue Jan 28 19:15:57 1997 From: mrosen at peganet.com (Mark Rosen) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:15:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: More Circumventing the ITAR Message-ID: <199701290307.WAA13939@mercury.peganet.com> I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for download at the web page below. On my web page, I have some stuff in bold print that informs about the ITAR and tells people to go away if they're not from the US or Canada. Does this count as an unrestricted FTP site? It's not all that much different from what MIT has up for PGP. Also, back to the question of registration numbers. A registration number is just a string of letters and numbers, and is essentially the same as a friendly letter; it contains no cryptographic code. For all anyone knows, I could just be charging for pseudo-random numbers, again, nothing of cryptographic significance. Is it illegal for me to mail someone outside of the US or Canada a registration code? Thanks for any help. Mark Rosen FireSoft - http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/2690 Mark Eats AOL - http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/6660 From drose at azstarnet.com Tue Jan 28 19:40:00 1997 From: drose at azstarnet.com (drose at azstarnet.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:40:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701290339.UAA01343@web.azstarnet.com> "Phill" wrote: >I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into >the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool >for confirming the present social order which is manifestly >corrupt. I am woman, hear me roar in numbers too big to ignore As R. J. Wagner once said, "Koo koo, baby." Hey, I hope that the above is construed as neither a flame nor as "off topic". May I additionally congratulate Nurdane on her birthday? Yo "Phill"! When's your cyber-revolutionary birthday? Maybe we can all chip in to buy you a biscuit. (See, in England, they say, "That certainly takes the biscuit". Eh, "Phill"?) BTW, "Phill", did you want to make good on your bet to Sandy at this time? Ain't C-punks fun nowadays? From jimbell at pacifier.com Tue Jan 28 19:44:45 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:44:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701290344.TAA03473@mail.pacifier.com> At 07:33 AM 1/28/97 -0500, aga wrote: >On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: > >> At 01:14 AM 1/27/97 -0600, ichudov at algebra.com wrote: >> >These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel >> >is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government >> >cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured >> >(libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. >> >> On the contrary, in some jurisdictions libel is indeed a crime. However, >> that doesn't mean that prosecutions happen anymore, but the laws are (in >> some places) still on the books. > >Jim, either you are full of shit or that Law is VERY >unconstitutional. The first amendment prohibits any Criminal Laws >from being made against libel. You'd think that, wouldn't you? Yes, I agree that those laws are unconstitutional, but so is about 90+% of what the Federal government does today. Sigh. Criminal libel statutes are apparently (in the US, at least) a holdover from an earlier era in which government took the place of King George, and wanted the power to punish people who were too outspoken. The fact that they are "never" (?) used anymore is presumably a reflection of their unconstitutionality. Criminal libel statues should also be considered unconstitutional because they give way too much leeway to the prosecutor to decide whom to prosecute. His friends will never be charged, but his enemies will. One obvious problem with the LACK of a criminal libel statute, from the standpoint of the "government-controlling-class," or "the bigshots," is that it's impossible to sue (and collect from) a (comparatively) poor person for defaming him...but it's still possible to put him in jail. Civil libel is, therefore, essentially useless to a government agent as a means of keeping the masses in line. Myself, I believe that libel should be eliminated as a cause of action in civil cases as well as it has, de facto, in the criminal area. If anything, the ability to sue for libel makes things worse: There is an illusion that this is easy and straightforward, if not economical. It is neither. The result is that people are actually MORE likely to believe a printed falsehood because they incorrectly assume that if it wasn't true, it couldn't be printed. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 19:55:05 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:55:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701290350.VAA02021@manifold.algebra.com> Steve Schear wrote: > > >jim bell wrote: > >> > >> At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: > >> >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') > >> >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > >> >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > >> >any recognition of this fact. > >> >........................................................ > >> > > >> >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? > >> > >> Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list > >> concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using > >> encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of > >> using encryption. > > > >Actually AP is one of the more interesting topics here. I think that there > >is a clear need for an AP bot. > > > >Do you feel like writing it? > > > > - Igor. > > Jim's all talk, I on the other hand am serious. Did you receive my Monday > e-mail? > yes, and found it interesting. - Igor. From mrosen at peganet.com Tue Jan 28 19:55:54 1997 From: mrosen at peganet.com (Mark Rosen) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 19:55:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: More Circumventing the ITAR Message-ID: <199701290355.TAA17298@toad.com> I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for download at the web page below. On my web page, I have some stuff in bold print that informs about the ITAR and tells people to go away if they're not from the US or Canada. Does this count as an unrestricted FTP site? It's not all that much different from what MIT has up for PGP. Also, back to the question of registration numbers. A registration number is just a string of letters and numbers, and is essentially the same as a friendly letter; it contains no cryptographic code. For all anyone knows, I could just be charging for pseudo-random numbers, again, nothing of cryptographic significance. Is it illegal for me to mail someone outside of the US or Canada a registration code? Thanks for any help. Mark Rosen FireSoft - http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/2690 Mark Eats AOL - http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/6660 From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 28 20:05:44 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (stewarts at ix.netcom.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:05:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <199701282359.PAA19881@cypherpunks.ca> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970128190443.00625320@popd.ix.netcom.com> Yee-hah! Congratulations (and enjoy the $1000 check!) So what did you do interesting cryptographically in the crack, other than coordinating a bunch of workstations? Was it just brute force with well-tuned code? Given the figures in your press release, it sounds like you tested about 350 billion keys out of a trillion possible, so you hit the winner a shade early. That's about 400,000 keys/sec/box. Are the machines mostly Pentiums, Alphas, Suns, etc.? At 03:59 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Ian Goldberg wrote: >EXPORTABLE CRYPTOGRAPHY TOTALLY INSECURE: CHALLENGE CIPHER BROKEN IMMEDIATELY > >January 28, 1997 - Ian Goldberg, a UC Berkeley graduate student, >announced today that he had successfully cracked RSA Data Security >Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher in just under 3.5 hours. .... >Goldberg used UC Berkeley's Network of Workstations (known as the NOW) >to harness the computational resources of about 250 idle machines. >This allowed him to test 100 billion possible "keys" per hour -- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From jimbell at pacifier.com Tue Jan 28 20:11:02 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:11:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701290411.UAA17826@toad.com> At 07:33 AM 1/28/97 -0500, aga wrote: >On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: > >> At 01:14 AM 1/27/97 -0600, ichudov at algebra.com wrote: >> >These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel >> >is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government >> >cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured >> >(libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. >> >> On the contrary, in some jurisdictions libel is indeed a crime. However, >> that doesn't mean that prosecutions happen anymore, but the laws are (in >> some places) still on the books. > >Jim, either you are full of shit or that Law is VERY >unconstitutional. The first amendment prohibits any Criminal Laws >from being made against libel. You'd think that, wouldn't you? Yes, I agree that those laws are unconstitutional, but so is about 90+% of what the Federal government does today. Sigh. Criminal libel statutes are apparently (in the US, at least) a holdover from an earlier era in which government took the place of King George, and wanted the power to punish people who were too outspoken. The fact that they are "never" (?) used anymore is presumably a reflection of their unconstitutionality. Criminal libel statues should also be considered unconstitutional because they give way too much leeway to the prosecutor to decide whom to prosecute. His friends will never be charged, but his enemies will. One obvious problem with the LACK of a criminal libel statute, from the standpoint of the "government-controlling-class," or "the bigshots," is that it's impossible to sue (and collect from) a (comparatively) poor person for defaming him...but it's still possible to put him in jail. Civil libel is, therefore, essentially useless to a government agent as a means of keeping the masses in line. Myself, I believe that libel should be eliminated as a cause of action in civil cases as well as it has, de facto, in the criminal area. If anything, the ability to sue for libel makes things worse: There is an illusion that this is easy and straightforward, if not economical. It is neither. The result is that people are actually MORE likely to believe a printed falsehood because they incorrectly assume that if it wasn't true, it couldn't be printed. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 28 20:12:40 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:12:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: >In our society, which, if I remember correctly, 10% of the population >control 90% of the wealth, AP would only lead to 10% of the population being >able to screw the remaining 90%. At least as it is, it takes a simple >majority. > >As for the murder of the rich, here is a scenerio. > >A collection of poor pool their capitol to have a tyrant killed. >The tyrant assembles a counter-wager saying that anyone able to prove thier >ability to kill him without harming him, and who can show they got through >will get 110% of the poor's bid. >The household is told that a standing bounty has been placed with a >collection of individuals, on the head of the trigger man involved in the >tyrants murder. >The poor can not hope to match the tyrants bid as they only have 10% of the >wealth, the household knows that thier participation in an attempt on the >tyrant will get them killed. Even if the attempt was successful. >The people from the outside who would benefit from the bounty benefit more >by taking the tyrants offer and then trying again, i.e. tiger teams. I think a hole in your thinking is to assume that the assasins have no motive other than financial gain. I would submit that there are those that have the skills, training and a political agenda coherent with the wagerers, lacking only the financial incentive to make the risks acceptable. These wetworkers won't consider accepting the bribe of the rich/powerful --Steve From drose at AZStarNet.com Tue Jan 28 20:12:43 1997 From: drose at AZStarNet.com (drose at AZStarNet.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:12:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701290412.UAA17890@toad.com> "Phill" wrote: >I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into >the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool >for confirming the present social order which is manifestly >corrupt. I am woman, hear me roar in numbers too big to ignore As R. J. Wagner once said, "Koo koo, baby." Hey, I hope that the above is construed as neither a flame nor as "off topic". May I additionally congratulate Nurdane on her birthday? Yo "Phill"! When's your cyber-revolutionary birthday? Maybe we can all chip in to buy you a biscuit. (See, in England, they say, "That certainly takes the biscuit". Eh, "Phill"?) BTW, "Phill", did you want to make good on your bet to Sandy at this time? Ain't C-punks fun nowadays? From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Tue Jan 28 20:13:00 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:13:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access In-Reply-To: <199701282156.NAA03998@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EECE0E.3BA1@vail.tivoli.com> Somebody wrote: > > This morning at the RSA keynote, David Aaron, the US Crypto > ambassador quoted the "Sovreign Right of Lawful Access" as > something that goverments were determined to preserve. Speaking as a private indiwidual, and not as a drone in the employ of IBM (don't get me started on the "but wait, key recovery *isn't* the same as key escrow" hoo-ha), that dude scared the piss out of me. As an IBM employee worried about commercial this-n-that, he was merely depressing. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 20:42:15 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:42:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701290442.WAA07196@einstein> Hi, It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects libelous or other defamatory speech. This is hokem. The 1st most certainly does not protect lies in any form. It protects opinion, this is distinctly different then stating a untruth about some party or distribution of material with the attributation to them without their permission. No civilized society can exist that permits lies and other defamations of character and expect to survive for any length of time. Simply for no other reason than contracts and other such instruments would not be worth the paper they were printed on. Let alone any laws or other issuances from the government itself. ARTICLE I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Where in there do you see a right to lie, cheat, or steal? If it did, it would be a lie because it would not protect the very freedom it says it is. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From blancw at cnw.com Tue Jan 28 20:53:37 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:53:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <01BC0D5D.E071B840@king2-20.cnw.com> From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis The Mafia in the U.S. doesn't work. The sicilian Mafia is very successful at assassinating any public officials that fucks with it. ............................................................ What do you suppose they would do if someone like you tried to break up their meetings? :>) .. Blanc From blancw at cnw.com Tue Jan 28 20:53:56 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:53:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <01BC0D5D.D7CD3200@king2-20.cnw.com> From: jim bell [ on discussing AP on the cpunk list]: Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of using encryption. -- Well, you're right, this is probably a good place to discuss it, so all the NSA spooks will know what some of youall are up to. [ why the Iraquis haven't thought of applying it themselves - to Saddam]: As for why the ordinary Iraquis didn't think of it... Or the ordinary people of any or every country, as well. Why didn't THEY think of it? -- I was thinking the reason that most people don't think of applying AP is because they're normal. It is not the first thought of a normal person to kill another human, just because they've been offended - even severely. It takes an extraordinary circumstance to motivate one to such destruction, especially if there are a thousand armed troops supporting the object of the attempt. But in fact I do think that many in Iraq (whoever they were) did consider it seriously and have attempted to get rid of Saddam. I heard on a TV special that he has survived about 5 or so attempts on his life. This means that not only was he not killed, but he didn't learn anything from it and it created no fear in him about continuing to rule as a dictator. It probably was more discouraging to his enemies than himself. [ on why the Mafia hasn't achieved a rational society by the use of AP]: In fact, apparently, they function diametrically opposed to the AP system. A complete AP-like system is structured (via encryption, etc) to totally avoid anybody having to trust anyone else. Each participant is kept honest mathematically. Nobody can inform on anyone else, because nobody knows anyone else's identity. -- There are extraordinary times when people, even though they be of sound mind and body, are moved to band together and kill another person. There are a few occurances in history that anyone can immediately think of as examples. But this is in an *extra-ordinary* situation. A society of people - where "society" indicates their desire to live in each other's company, associating openly and developing working relations - would not really be a "society", would not last as an association of people, if they were expecting extreme, destructive reactions from others in response to any degree of perceived insult from themselves. Therefore, although I can appreciate the need to be able to deal with political tyrants by just killing them, and currently encryption and anonymity makes it possible to do this "blindly" without anyone knowing each other, I can't see where implementing this method of relating to others, in a system of daily operating procedures, would do better than to create an atmosphere of total paranoia and psychological breakdowns. I think it is very important that individuals be able to defend themselves - from anyone. It is unfortunate that citizen-units are not typically instructed in the methods of self-defense, nor especially allowed to practice it without "official authorization". If we were better able to do this, the fact that anyone anywhere could immediately deal with threats to their existence would in itself be an impressive "deterrent", contributing to the general welfare and peace. Be that as it may, although the capacities of encryption and the internet make anonymous AP possible, the drive of human intelligence is toward knowledge, towards knowing the reasons for things. It would wish to know what is right or wrong, it would wish to know how to be the most accurate, it would wish to know about cause and effect, it would wish to know how to be in command of itself, normally. If someone does something "wrong" which makes another unhappy, normally they will wish to know what it was and how to correct it. If every time someone made a mistake they got punished, without the opportunity to understand the error and without the opportunity to make corrections, they would be a psychological wreck. If every time someone made mistake they got assassinated, not only would no one wish to do anything for fear of losing their lives, creating a "society" of timid sheep, there probably wouldn't be many people remaining to savor the triumph of being superior. AP is just another form of war. You can bet that if assassinations increased a hundred fold as a result of your method, not only "governments" but some very bright people would get together to figure out a defense against it, for they also would be "at risk". .. Blanc From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 20:54:12 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:54:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: M.M. / Re: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access In-Reply-To: <199701282156.NAA03998@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EEF3F6.1F03@sk.sympatico.ca> Mike McNally wrote: > Somebody wrote: > > This morning at the RSA keynote, David Aaron, the US Crypto > > ambassador quoted the "Sovreign Right of Lawful Access" as > > something that goverments were determined to preserve. > > Speaking as a private indiwidual, and not as a drone in the employ > of IBM (don't get me started on the "but wait, key recovery *isn't* > the same as key escrow" hoo-ha), that dude scared the piss out of > me. That plinking sound you hear is the sound of NSA's bloodhounds stamping the phrase, in reverse, on the bottom of their jackboots. "Sovreign Right" has that certain ring to it which suggests the rhetoric of Dictators who imagine themselves to be Kings. "Lawful Access" has that "Of course, we will only use this 'right' against drug dealers.", kind of feel to it. Perhaps the student who popped RSA's test balloon could propose the "Universal Right to Casual Access." Toto From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 28 21:00:23 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (stewarts at ix.netcom.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:00:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701282212.OAA04726@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970128205620.00624060@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 12:59 PM 1/28/97 -0500, "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" wrote: >>That's it? The system collapsed because the guards left their posts? >>And no mutiny charges? Incredible. >I was there. >The collapse of East Germany was quite spectacular. There >was at most three months of warning. First there was a series >of sit ins at foreign embassies, then a migration of large >numbers of people in their twenties within the eastern block. In particular, people started leaving East Germany by way of still-somewhat-communist Hungary (where the Germans let them go) and from there into Austria (where the Hungarians let them go), and it was getting to be tens of thousands of people per month. Once a system like that starts leaking, it's hard to contain. (ObCypherpunksContent: if substantial amounts of tax money starts escaping into Cypherspace, it's not easy to maintain a modern CorporatistWelfare-for-Bureaucrats state either.....) >Unfortunately US commentators tend to see everything in terms of >US cultural norms, many of which were explicitly rejected by the >protestors. The East Germans wanted West German affluence, they >wanted to be part of Western Europe. They were certainly not >responding to US military spending as right wing theorists claim, >nor was the economy collapsing because of the arms race, it >was collapsing because of the costs of a totalitarian state and >the incompatibility of that state with modern industrial >organization. The US right wing does argue that the Soviets couldn't afford to run a military industrial complex big enough to outrace theirs, and that it was a major contributor to the economic collapse (which it probably was.) Of course, they also consider that Communism isn't an economically viable system, ignoring the similar problems with the Good Old American Patriotic Military-Industrial-Complex, and somehow think that now that there aren't any Russian Commies to kick around any more that we need a bigger army, as well as a supply of easily-kicked-around enemies. Unfortunately, I suspect that sometime soon they'll remember that there still are a billion Commies left, and that Oceania has always been at war with EastAsia. Hopefully the Communist system in China will have fallen apart by then to the extent that it can admit to being a semi-capitalist kleptocracy instead of pretending to still be in charge of anything. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 21:10:49 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:10:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment In-Reply-To: <199701290442.WAA07196@einstein> Message-ID: <199701290507.XAA02510@manifold.algebra.com> [Cc to Dr. John Martin Grubor, Law Systems Institute] Jim Choate wrote: > > It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects > libelous or other defamatory speech. [I would appreciate if people with better knowledge of law correct me] I doubt that anyone made this assertion. What Greg Broiles and Dr. Grubor asserted was that because of the first amendment, the government can not initiate an action in a libel case. Which means that libel is not a crime. There may be some old statutes that declare libel a crime, as Greg noted, but they are not enforceable because of the first amendment. Suits can be brought by private individuals though. The government, even if it is defamed, cannot sue a private person for libel. For example, I can say that Congress regularly molests small children, and they will not be able to do anything about me. > This is hokem. The 1st most certainly does not protect lies in any form. It ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > protects opinion, this is distinctly different then stating a untruth about > some party or distribution of material with the attributation to them > without their permission. Not exactly. I can lie as much as I want about the government. No one would be able to prosecute me. These particular lies are protected, contrary to what you state. The law does not protect ALL opinions, as well. > No civilized society can exist that permits lies and other defamations of > character and expect to survive for any length of time. Simply for no other > reason than contracts and other such instruments would not be worth the > paper they were printed on. Let alone any laws or other issuances from the > government itself. You are mixing in totally unrelated things, Jim. Enforcement of contracts has nothing to do with freedom of speech. For example, if you borrow $100 from me and fail to return your debt in time, this is an issue of contract law and not of free speech. Contract law is not about speech, it is about promises. > ARTICLE I. > > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, > or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of > speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, > and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. > > > Where in there do you see a right to lie, cheat, or steal? If it did, it > would be a lie because it would not protect the very freedom it says it is. Do you think that all rights should be found in the first amendment? What does the right to steal have to do with what we are talking about? I suggest reading "The Fourth Estate and the Constitution: Freedom of the Press in America", by Lucas a Powe, Jr. As for stealing and cheating in contracts, read any textbook on business law for business students. It is very useful to read this stuff, by the way. Not that these books give one a complete picture on law, but they are very informative. - Igor. From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 21:11:18 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:11:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EEDAB6.51A6@gte.net> aga wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > aga wrote: > > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > > > suffice to be immediately terminated. > > No trial, huh? Good question. The law we have right now already assumes that there are situations where a criminal will not go peacefully, if at all. In some countries (years ago?) such as England, bobbies were known to not carry firearms for ordinary street duty. Am I right? But here in the USA, that would be unthinkable. So my proposal doesn't eliminate the responsibility portion of law enforcement. I'd say, if a target were eliminated thru negligence, malfeasance, or other wrongdoing under "color of law" or whatever, let the courts handle that as they do now. My suggestion would give the law enforcers the ability to dispense the first level of justice expeditiously, which they cannot accomplish now due to all of the red tape and the corrupt legal system (lawyers specialize in getting chronic offenders off, particularly "traffic" offenses). By transferring a major portion of the bureaucracy to the pencil pushers, we can free up the street cops to do what they do best, namely bust or eliminate criminals. I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better off when we do. From drose at azstarnet.com Tue Jan 28 21:13:27 1997 From: drose at azstarnet.com (drose at azstarnet.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:13:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701290513.WAA08719@web.azstarnet.com> Rick Osborne wrote: >Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying >overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess. Wrong! White-americans play a very important and useful role in the new multi-cultural society. Sheesh! _Someone's_ got to work, support their families, pay taxes, and obey the law. Hee hee! Him so stoopit! From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 28 21:20:04 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:20:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <01BC0D5D.D7CD3200@king2-20.cnw.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, blanc wrote: > From: jim bell > > [ on discussing AP on the cpunk list]: > > Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list > concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using > encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of > using encryption. > -- > [...] > I was thinking the reason that most people don't think of applying AP is > because they're normal. It is not the first thought of a normal person to > kill another human, just because they've been offended - even severely. It > takes an extraordinary circumstance to motivate one to such destruction, > especially if there are a thousand armed troops supporting the object of > the attempt. > Any normal person has potential to kill, why they don't...? They have other thoughts and dreams for a better future. oksas From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 21:21:34 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:21:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Physical meet, Sat. Feb. 15 - not 18. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701290212.UAA06654@einstein> Message-ID: <32EED877.5850@sk.sympatico.ca> Jim Choate wrote: Sender: owner-austin-cpunks at einstein.ssz.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: idiot at einstein.ssz.com > I apparently didn't pay much attention to what month I was looking at when I > made the initial meeting. If you're having trouble understanding the technology, perhaps you need to flame yourself. Toto From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 21:28:58 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:28:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701282159.NAA11748@kachina.jetcafe.org> Message-ID: <32EEDFCA.34E4@gte.net> Dave Hayes wrote: > Dale Thorn writes: > > I heard years ago that approximately 10% of the people on the street > > are certifiably mentally unstable. > This depends on your standads of "unstable". I'll bet genetic > diversity is now much more of a factor then when those standards were > written. > > Multiply that by two at least for > > Los Angeles (suburban L.A., actually, Hollywood for example is much > > safer than Altadena or Westlake Village). > I beg to differ. Which parts of Altadena and Hollywood are you > referring to? I used Altadena as a generic example of a suburb, although Camarillo would be even better, since it's not so cosmopolitan as most of the 'burbs right next to L.A. Hollywood (to me) is an ideal example of inner city, for a lot of reasons. I love the place, dirt and all. BTW, I was *not* referring to walking around, I was comparing driving, mainly on the freeway. Statistics have come out in major papers that back my experience up 100%. I drive from P.C.H. @ Seal Beach Blvd. to the Ventura County beach area every weekend, and back again. I used to go down the 101 to the 405, then south on the 405 to Seal Beach Blvd. Nowadays I take the 101 all the way into town to the 5, down the 5 to the 605, and down the 605 to 7th Street in Long Beach. It's 3 miles further thru town, and 20 minutes slower on average, but I get only about one psycho per 20 round trips now, as compared to at least one per trip on the 101-405 combo when I went that way. The difference was striking, and I can only surmise that rednecks and their ilk are more fearful of attacking other people in the inner city as opposed to the outlying regions. From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 21:30:38 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:30:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970128205620.00624060@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <199701290528.AAA01874@muesli.ai.mit.edu> One point I had forgotten. The demonstration took place on the 50th anniversary of Kristallnacht. This is one explanation as to why the border guards did not attempt to open fire with firearms or attempt to break up the demonstration with tear gas. Also consider that the Tiennamen square massacre had occurred only a few months before and it did not appear to have settled the issue of who controlled china. Many of the dissidents were still at large, China was a pariah nation. East Germany had recently been visited by Gorbachev who did not appear ready to help keep the regime if things got sticky. The mass defections were taking place at their peak at a rate of tens of thousands in a day. Something like a quarter of the youth between 18 and 25 had defected. Bill if anything understates this point. Certainly if the people decide that the structures of state are not worth supporting change can be astonishing. I think that the spending into bankrupcy thesis might be argued for the case of the USSR and more plausibly the US. The problem is that I don't think that the military spending in either case bore any relation to need, to the threat from the other side or to any rational determination. I think both budgets simply increased to the limit that the economies could support and beyond. There is a similar problem in the third world today. Many third world countries spend more on arms than they do on health or education. Much of the alledged "foreign aid" is in fact subsidies for this trade. The arms are primarily to suppress internal dissent. There are plenty of governments left in need of similar reform. Phill From snow at smoke.suba.com Tue Jan 28 21:32:22 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:32:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701282106.NAA01621@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701290550.XAA02789@smoke.suba.com> Paul said: > The list has been disentigrating for some time since the disgusting > incident when Dimitri was forcibly unsubscribed from the list. There Bullshit. This list was disentigrating well before that, and Vulis's actions were a part of that disentigration. > > a while." > > So, there would be no intellectual dishonesty in a country claiming > to be a free and open society "trying out" fascism for a month or > two? - After all it`s a private country just as this is a private > list.... As long as they let people leave at any point in the experiment, comment on the experiment, and start their own country if they don't like it. > There is a clear trend easily observable on the list whereby certain > members postings are censored when their content is of a standard > that, if the moderation were objective and based on content alone, > would warrant their being sent to the censored list. Really? Point to this "trend". I only know of 2 articles, and Sandy explained his (IMNTBHO incorrect) reasoning behind that. From snow at smoke.suba.com Tue Jan 28 21:34:47 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:34:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701282212.OAA04686@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701290552.XAA02798@smoke.suba.com> Phill said: > That was not all. We had a political Web site established > during the '92 election. I was in contact with Clinton's people > when we had fewer than 100 Web sites. > > I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into > the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool > for confirming the present social order which is manifestly > corrupt. Which of course is why you were in contact with Billy's boys right? From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 28 21:38:15 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (stewarts at ix.netcom.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:38:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved In-Reply-To: <199701282055.VAA11732@kom30.ethz.ch> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970128213757.006466d0@popd.ix.netcom.com> Any bets on whether the $5000 RC5-12/32/6 contest will be solved before the www.rsa.com contest status web page is updated? :-) Or how long before someone in the government starts talking about how 56 bits takes 65,000 times as long to solve as 40 bits, which is 26 years for a whole building full of computers, and even 48 bits ought to take a month and a half for a whole building full of computers (or supercomputers, if they hype it up....)? At 09:55 PM 1/28/97 +0100, Germano Caronni wrote: >challenge: RC5-32/12/5 >time: from start of contest until Tue Jan 28 21:54:58 1997 >method: massive distributed coordinated keysearch, details later which was a bit slower than Ian Goldberg's crack, but pretty close. How many machines were you using, on average? # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From rfiero at pophost.com Tue Jan 28 21:44:45 1997 From: rfiero at pophost.com (Richard Fiero) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:44:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701282157.NAA04110@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970128213609.006dc248@pop.pophost.com> Get it straight Sandy Sandfort. I'm not in your home. I am in my home and I will observe my priorities, not your's. Sandy Sandfort writes: > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mail lists are far >more like private homes, businesses or clubs. When you are a >guest there, you are subject to their rules of behavior. If Dr. Vulis was pushing the envelope in list-abuse as a multi-stage social experiment, Sandy Sandfort has surpassed him by far. In part I refer to a Sandy Sandfort reply to a criticism made by Paul Bradley. The reply was made public two hours before the criticism was. This is not moderation. It is manipulation and interference. Since I have a low tolerance for self-serving pedantry, I never would have noticed the criticism if it had not been preceded by the reply. In the reply, Sandy Sandfort employs the name-calling "sophist" and "hypocrite." Also in the reply is the Freudian slip or obscene proposition: > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Force," my ass. Shouldn't this have gone to cypherpunks-flames? One might wonder just what the rules of proper decorum are. -- Richard Fiero From snow at smoke.suba.com Tue Jan 28 21:46:12 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:46:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701282214.OAA04788@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701290603.AAA02837@smoke.suba.com> Phill wrote: > I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have > "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of > property you do. > > Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs to the community IS theft. I work, and as the result of that work something is created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved. > controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property" > from the previous rulers. They "won" it in combat. The people of china obviously prefered new government to the old one, or they would have prevented the takeover. > I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is > a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model > you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every > philosopher since Locke. Practically every philosopher since Locke has recieved their education at a Government or "Elite" sponsored school, and made their livings the same way. I'm not claiming conspiracy here, but those that feed at the trough aren't going to insult it overmuch. From zachb at netcom.com Tue Jan 28 21:49:39 1997 From: zachb at netcom.com (Z.B.) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:49:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970128190443.00625320@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997 stewarts at ix.netcom.com wrote: [snip] > >EXPORTABLE CRYPTOGRAPHY TOTALLY INSECURE: CHALLENGE CIPHER BROKEN IMMEDIATELY > > > >January 28, 1997 - Ian Goldberg, a UC Berkeley graduate student, > >announced today that he had successfully cracked RSA Data Security > >Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher in just under 3.5 hours. > .... > >Goldberg used UC Berkeley's Network of Workstations (known as the NOW) > >to harness the computational resources of about 250 idle machines. > >This allowed him to test 100 billion possible "keys" per hour -- > Good grief...I just remembered that this challenge started today when I read this letter. A question - how does DES differ from the RC5 cyphers that are also up for breaking? Where can I find some software to use on these? Zach Babayco zachb at netcom.com <-------finger for PGP public key If you need to know how to set up a mail filter or defend against emailbombs, send me a message with the words "get helpfile" (without the " marks) in the SUBJECT: header, *NOT THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE!* I have several useful FAQs and documents available. From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 21:50:25 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:50:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701290552.XAA02798@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: <199701290550.AAA01959@muesli.ai.mit.edu> > > I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into > > the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool > > for confirming the present social order which is manifestly > > corrupt. > > Which of course is why you were in contact with Billy's boys right? We did consider very early on the idea of proceedings of congress annotated with the campaign contributions of the various speakers. Imagine if instead of Newt Gingrich you saw Newt Gingrich ($243,493 Tobbacco Industry) as a speaker note. We were in contact with the Clinton folks because the Bush guys ignored the Web and the Internet completely. They just were not interested. Nor were the Perot folks either - odd since the electronic townhall was a big part of their platform. Even in this campaign the Perot page could not be read with Netscape 6 months before the election. On the other hand have a look at www.buchanan.org If you thought that Pat got a bum rap off the press when they called him a neo-Nazi just take a look at his site. Buchanan Brigade? Look at the choice of topics for the speaches. Phill From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 21:54:51 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:54:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trolling with Dale (a bite) In-Reply-To: <199701281448.GAA02231@mailmasher.com> Message-ID: <32EEE5F6.5C@gte.net> Huge Cajones Remailer wrote: > From: Dale Thorn > Subject: Re: overview.htm (fwd) > Dale Thorn hopelessly wrote: > >Let's be realistic about how AIDS is acquired. > Yes, Dale, let's. Dale makes an excellent case for having a moderated > list right here. What do his nutball beyond-the-fringe remarks have > to do with crypto, privacy, security? Cripes, in the old days even an > _accurate_ off-list remark would open a blast furnace of condemnation, > a la Jim B. If the list won't moderate itself to "guide" the Dale's, > it DESERVES to be moderated. He's gotta be trolling to keep it hard. Well, I don't know who you are, so (despite your remarks) I can't really tell what your question is. I suppose if we sat down with a human moderator and a copy of Applied Cryptography, you'd know the XOR's and S-boxes and whatnot better than I. That's why we need people like you on this list, especially the moderated list, since you know the conventional (academic) crypto really well. To be honest, I'm after more important things, but hey, keep plugging away and maybe I'll learn something from you. Hugs and stuff.... From nobody at REPLAY.COM Tue Jan 28 21:57:01 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:57:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible Message-ID: <199701290545.GAA06984@basement.replay.com> According to Rick Osborne: "I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in Drama, and played Tennis." People get into MIT--or don't get into MIT--for lots of reasons. Most intelligent people apply to several schools, knowing that admissions practices are subject to the vagaries of reality. In my case, my SATs were about 1500, with some 800s in achievement tests. And the usual bullshit high school clubs, political offices, etc. etc. I was accepted by MIT, but not by Caltech. I didn't lose any sleep over the way things turned out. And I decided not to go to MIT, either. "The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the Russian front!"" My guess is that "other factors" were involved. I noted with some interest, but little surprise, that the guy claiming MIT required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score could barely spell, and had major problems making a coherent point. Methinks this is why MIT rejected him, not his lack of a "1600." ">For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high >school, too "Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess." MIT offered me a substantial economic aid package, in the form of loans, grants, and various campus jobs. What does this tell you? "MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) I've known about a dozen or so MIT grads, and only one of them was a snooty asshole, and it was a _she_, one of the first MIT women grads (and she was _very_ impressed by this). Most MIT grads are perfectly reasonable. Xanthar -- From declan at pathfinder.com Tue Jan 28 22:00:01 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:00:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <199701290256.SAA14915@toad.com> Message-ID: MIT probably has a need-blind admissions policy; they don't care whether or not you have money. When they admit you, at least. Let me plug Carnegie Mellon University, which consistently ties with MIT and one of them California schools for first place in computer science. It's not quite as hard to get into as MIT, though you do have to deal with Pittsburgh winters. The town itself is small enough to be friendly, and big enough to be interesting. Jim Morris, the head of the computer science department, was my instructor for a data structures class and truly seemed to care about his students' well-being. Oh, and I remember we had t-shirts saying: "MIT -- the CMU of Massachusetts." -Declan Rick wrote: >At 12:32 PM 1/28/97 -0500, Derek Atkins wrote: >>This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be >>admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and >>1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. > >I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT >even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests >with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I >was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in >Drama, and played Tennis. > >The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I >made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need >full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the >Russian front!" > >>For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high >>school, too > >Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying >overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess. > >MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most >part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty >assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) >_________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ >"He who knows, does not speak. >He who speaks, does not know." ------------------------- Washington Correspondent The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ From mjw at VNET.IBM.COM Tue Jan 28 22:04:02 1997 From: mjw at VNET.IBM.COM (mjw at VNET.IBM.COM) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:04:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Altavista Message-ID: <199701290603.WAA20485@toad.com> From: Mark Waddington Subject: Altavista > However, the doubleclick.net ads appear to bear no relationship to the > keywords being searched... Interestingly, I've just noticed over the last couple of days that the in-line ads are directly relevant to the search words I enter. I did a search yesterday on "Quicken" and "security" and all the in-line ads I was shown referred to security or penetration detection products. Mark Waddington Interactive Financial Services | Phone : +61-3-96266574 Business Development Manager | Mobile: +61-412-217316 IBM Asia Pacific | Fax : +61-3-96266273 From blancw at cnw.com Tue Jan 28 22:10:43 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:10:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701290610.WAA20606@toad.com> From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis The Mafia in the U.S. doesn't work. The sicilian Mafia is very successful at assassinating any public officials that fucks with it. ............................................................ What do you suppose they would do if someone like you tried to break up their meetings? :>) .. Blanc From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Tue Jan 28 22:10:45 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:10:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access Message-ID: <199701290610.WAA20607@toad.com> Somebody wrote: > > This morning at the RSA keynote, David Aaron, the US Crypto > ambassador quoted the "Sovreign Right of Lawful Access" as > something that goverments were determined to preserve. Speaking as a private indiwidual, and not as a drone in the employ of IBM (don't get me started on the "but wait, key recovery *isn't* the same as key escrow" hoo-ha), that dude scared the piss out of me. As an IBM employee worried about commercial this-n-that, he was merely depressing. ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 22:10:50 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:10:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701290610.WAA20615@toad.com> Steve Schear wrote: > > >jim bell wrote: > >> > >> At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: > >> >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') > >> >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > >> >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > >> >any recognition of this fact. > >> >........................................................ > >> > > >> >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? > >> > >> Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list > >> concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using > >> encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of > >> using encryption. > > > >Actually AP is one of the more interesting topics here. I think that there > >is a clear need for an AP bot. > > > >Do you feel like writing it? > > > > - Igor. > > Jim's all talk, I on the other hand am serious. Did you receive my Monday > e-mail? > yes, and found it interesting. - Igor. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 28 22:10:55 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (stewarts at ix.netcom.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:10:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701290610.WAA20623@toad.com> Yee-hah! Congratulations (and enjoy the $1000 check!) So what did you do interesting cryptographically in the crack, other than coordinating a bunch of workstations? Was it just brute force with well-tuned code? Given the figures in your press release, it sounds like you tested about 350 billion keys out of a trillion possible, so you hit the winner a shade early. That's about 400,000 keys/sec/box. Are the machines mostly Pentiums, Alphas, Suns, etc.? At 03:59 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Ian Goldberg wrote: >EXPORTABLE CRYPTOGRAPHY TOTALLY INSECURE: CHALLENGE CIPHER BROKEN IMMEDIATELY > >January 28, 1997 - Ian Goldberg, a UC Berkeley graduate student, >announced today that he had successfully cracked RSA Data Security >Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher in just under 3.5 hours. .... >Goldberg used UC Berkeley's Network of Workstations (known as the NOW) >to harness the computational resources of about 250 idle machines. >This allowed him to test 100 billion possible "keys" per hour -- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Tue Jan 28 22:11:01 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:11:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701290611.WAA20631@toad.com> Hi, It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects libelous or other defamatory speech. This is hokem. The 1st most certainly does not protect lies in any form. It protects opinion, this is distinctly different then stating a untruth about some party or distribution of material with the attributation to them without their permission. No civilized society can exist that permits lies and other defamations of character and expect to survive for any length of time. Simply for no other reason than contracts and other such instruments would not be worth the paper they were printed on. Let alone any laws or other issuances from the government itself. ARTICLE I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Where in there do you see a right to lie, cheat, or steal? If it did, it would be a lie because it would not protect the very freedom it says it is. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From azur at netcom.com Tue Jan 28 22:11:08 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:11:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701290611.WAA20641@toad.com> >In our society, which, if I remember correctly, 10% of the population >control 90% of the wealth, AP would only lead to 10% of the population being >able to screw the remaining 90%. At least as it is, it takes a simple >majority. > >As for the murder of the rich, here is a scenerio. > >A collection of poor pool their capitol to have a tyrant killed. >The tyrant assembles a counter-wager saying that anyone able to prove thier >ability to kill him without harming him, and who can show they got through >will get 110% of the poor's bid. >The household is told that a standing bounty has been placed with a >collection of individuals, on the head of the trigger man involved in the >tyrants murder. >The poor can not hope to match the tyrants bid as they only have 10% of the >wealth, the household knows that thier participation in an attempt on the >tyrant will get them killed. Even if the attempt was successful. >The people from the outside who would benefit from the bounty benefit more >by taking the tyrants offer and then trying again, i.e. tiger teams. I think a hole in your thinking is to assume that the assasins have no motive other than financial gain. I would submit that there are those that have the skills, training and a political agenda coherent with the wagerers, lacking only the financial incentive to make the risks acceptable. These wetworkers won't consider accepting the bribe of the rich/powerful --Steve From blancw at cnw.com Tue Jan 28 22:11:11 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:11:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701290611.WAA20647@toad.com> From: jim bell [ on discussing AP on the cpunk list]: Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of using encryption. -- Well, you're right, this is probably a good place to discuss it, so all the NSA spooks will know what some of youall are up to. [ why the Iraquis haven't thought of applying it themselves - to Saddam]: As for why the ordinary Iraquis didn't think of it... Or the ordinary people of any or every country, as well. Why didn't THEY think of it? -- I was thinking the reason that most people don't think of applying AP is because they're normal. It is not the first thought of a normal person to kill another human, just because they've been offended - even severely. It takes an extraordinary circumstance to motivate one to such destruction, especially if there are a thousand armed troops supporting the object of the attempt. But in fact I do think that many in Iraq (whoever they were) did consider it seriously and have attempted to get rid of Saddam. I heard on a TV special that he has survived about 5 or so attempts on his life. This means that not only was he not killed, but he didn't learn anything from it and it created no fear in him about continuing to rule as a dictator. It probably was more discouraging to his enemies than himself. [ on why the Mafia hasn't achieved a rational society by the use of AP]: In fact, apparently, they function diametrically opposed to the AP system. A complete AP-like system is structured (via encryption, etc) to totally avoid anybody having to trust anyone else. Each participant is kept honest mathematically. Nobody can inform on anyone else, because nobody knows anyone else's identity. -- There are extraordinary times when people, even though they be of sound mind and body, are moved to band together and kill another person. There are a few occurances in history that anyone can immediately think of as examples. But this is in an *extra-ordinary* situation. A society of people - where "society" indicates their desire to live in each other's company, associating openly and developing working relations - would not really be a "society", would not last as an association of people, if they were expecting extreme, destructive reactions from others in response to any degree of perceived insult from themselves. Therefore, although I can appreciate the need to be able to deal with political tyrants by just killing them, and currently encryption and anonymity makes it possible to do this "blindly" without anyone knowing each other, I can't see where implementing this method of relating to others, in a system of daily operating procedures, would do better than to create an atmosphere of total paranoia and psychological breakdowns. I think it is very important that individuals be able to defend themselves - from anyone. It is unfortunate that citizen-units are not typically instructed in the methods of self-defense, nor especially allowed to practice it without "official authorization". If we were better able to do this, the fact that anyone anywhere could immediately deal with threats to their existence would in itself be an impressive "deterrent", contributing to the general welfare and peace. Be that as it may, although the capacities of encryption and the internet make anonymous AP possible, the drive of human intelligence is toward knowledge, towards knowing the reasons for things. It would wish to know what is right or wrong, it would wish to know how to be the most accurate, it would wish to know about cause and effect, it would wish to know how to be in command of itself, normally. If someone does something "wrong" which makes another unhappy, normally they will wish to know what it was and how to correct it. If every time someone made a mistake they got punished, without the opportunity to understand the error and without the opportunity to make corrections, they would be a psychological wreck. If every time someone made mistake they got assassinated, not only would no one wish to do anything for fear of losing their lives, creating a "society" of timid sheep, there probably wouldn't be many people remaining to savor the triumph of being superior. AP is just another form of war. You can bet that if assassinations increased a hundred fold as a result of your method, not only "governments" but some very bright people would get together to figure out a defense against it, for they also would be "at risk". .. Blanc From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:24:07 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:24:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: [noise] RE: Shave the Whales In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EEEB6C.4D7C@gte.net> Mullen, Patrick wrote: > Is there a way we can keep the caricatures w/out getting the rest of the > message > w/ these postings? I like the ASCII art, but... I've just started clipping and saving the characters w/o the text that accompanies them. I've got a dozen so far, so check back in a week or so and I'll forward a set to anyone who wants. Unless, of course, someone has a bucket of them now. BTW, some of the recent ones are pretty amazing: a bat, a scorpion, a cow, etc. From sameer at c2.net Tue Jan 28 22:25:22 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:25:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <199701290610.WAA20623@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701290640.WAA26004@gabber.c2.net> http://now.cs.berkeley.edu/ > Yee-hah! Congratulations (and enjoy the $1000 check!) > So what did you do interesting cryptographically in the crack, > other than coordinating a bunch of workstations? > Was it just brute force with well-tuned code? > Given the figures in your press release, it sounds like you > tested about 350 billion keys out of a trillion possible, > so you hit the winner a shade early. That's about 400,000 keys/sec/box. > Are the machines mostly Pentiums, Alphas, Suns, etc.? -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From drose at AZStarNet.com Tue Jan 28 22:25:44 1997 From: drose at AZStarNet.com (drose at AZStarNet.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:25:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701290625.WAA20851@toad.com> Rick Osborne wrote: >Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying >overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess. Wrong! White-americans play a very important and useful role in the new multi-cultural society. Sheesh! _Someone's_ got to work, support their families, pay taxes, and obey the law. Hee hee! Him so stoopit! From snow at smoke.suba.com Tue Jan 28 22:25:54 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:25:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701290625.WAA20876@toad.com> Phill said: > That was not all. We had a political Web site established > during the '92 election. I was in contact with Clinton's people > when we had fewer than 100 Web sites. > > I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into > the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool > for confirming the present social order which is manifestly > corrupt. Which of course is why you were in contact with Billy's boys right? From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Tue Jan 28 22:25:59 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:25:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701290625.WAA20884@toad.com> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, blanc wrote: > From: jim bell > > [ on discussing AP on the cpunk list]: > > Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list > concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using > encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of > using encryption. > -- > [...] > I was thinking the reason that most people don't think of applying AP is > because they're normal. It is not the first thought of a normal person to > kill another human, just because they've been offended - even severely. It > takes an extraordinary circumstance to motivate one to such destruction, > especially if there are a thousand armed troops supporting the object of > the attempt. > Any normal person has potential to kill, why they don't...? They have other thoughts and dreams for a better future. oksas From snow at smoke.suba.com Tue Jan 28 22:26:04 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:26:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701290626.WAA20899@toad.com> Paul said: > The list has been disentigrating for some time since the disgusting > incident when Dimitri was forcibly unsubscribed from the list. There Bullshit. This list was disentigrating well before that, and Vulis's actions were a part of that disentigration. > > a while." > > So, there would be no intellectual dishonesty in a country claiming > to be a free and open society "trying out" fascism for a month or > two? - After all it`s a private country just as this is a private > list.... As long as they let people leave at any point in the experiment, comment on the experiment, and start their own country if they don't like it. > There is a clear trend easily observable on the list whereby certain > members postings are censored when their content is of a standard > that, if the moderation were objective and based on content alone, > would warrant their being sent to the censored list. Really? Point to this "trend". I only know of 2 articles, and Sandy explained his (IMNTBHO incorrect) reasoning behind that. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 28 22:26:11 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (stewarts at ix.netcom.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:26:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved Message-ID: <199701290626.WAA20916@toad.com> Any bets on whether the $5000 RC5-12/32/6 contest will be solved before the www.rsa.com contest status web page is updated? :-) Or how long before someone in the government starts talking about how 56 bits takes 65,000 times as long to solve as 40 bits, which is 26 years for a whole building full of computers, and even 48 bits ought to take a month and a half for a whole building full of computers (or supercomputers, if they hype it up....)? At 09:55 PM 1/28/97 +0100, Germano Caronni wrote: >challenge: RC5-32/12/5 >time: from start of contest until Tue Jan 28 21:54:58 1997 >method: massive distributed coordinated keysearch, details later which was a bit slower than Ian Goldberg's crack, but pretty close. How many machines were you using, on average? # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:26:17 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:26:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701290626.WAA20919@toad.com> Dave Hayes wrote: > Dale Thorn writes: > > I heard years ago that approximately 10% of the people on the street > > are certifiably mentally unstable. > This depends on your standads of "unstable". I'll bet genetic > diversity is now much more of a factor then when those standards were > written. > > Multiply that by two at least for > > Los Angeles (suburban L.A., actually, Hollywood for example is much > > safer than Altadena or Westlake Village). > I beg to differ. Which parts of Altadena and Hollywood are you > referring to? I used Altadena as a generic example of a suburb, although Camarillo would be even better, since it's not so cosmopolitan as most of the 'burbs right next to L.A. Hollywood (to me) is an ideal example of inner city, for a lot of reasons. I love the place, dirt and all. BTW, I was *not* referring to walking around, I was comparing driving, mainly on the freeway. Statistics have come out in major papers that back my experience up 100%. I drive from P.C.H. @ Seal Beach Blvd. to the Ventura County beach area every weekend, and back again. I used to go down the 101 to the 405, then south on the 405 to Seal Beach Blvd. Nowadays I take the 101 all the way into town to the 5, down the 5 to the 605, and down the 605 to 7th Street in Long Beach. It's 3 miles further thru town, and 20 minutes slower on average, but I get only about one psycho per 20 round trips now, as compared to at least one per trip on the 101-405 combo when I went that way. The difference was striking, and I can only surmise that rednecks and their ilk are more fearful of attacking other people in the inner city as opposed to the outlying regions. From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:26:20 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:26:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701290626.WAA20920@toad.com> aga wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > aga wrote: > > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > > > suffice to be immediately terminated. > > No trial, huh? Good question. The law we have right now already assumes that there are situations where a criminal will not go peacefully, if at all. In some countries (years ago?) such as England, bobbies were known to not carry firearms for ordinary street duty. Am I right? But here in the USA, that would be unthinkable. So my proposal doesn't eliminate the responsibility portion of law enforcement. I'd say, if a target were eliminated thru negligence, malfeasance, or other wrongdoing under "color of law" or whatever, let the courts handle that as they do now. My suggestion would give the law enforcers the ability to dispense the first level of justice expeditiously, which they cannot accomplish now due to all of the red tape and the corrupt legal system (lawyers specialize in getting chronic offenders off, particularly "traffic" offenses). By transferring a major portion of the bureaucracy to the pencil pushers, we can free up the street cops to do what they do best, namely bust or eliminate criminals. I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better off when we do. From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 22:26:22 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:26:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701290626.WAA20921@toad.com> [Cc to Dr. John Martin Grubor, Law Systems Institute] Jim Choate wrote: > > It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects > libelous or other defamatory speech. [I would appreciate if people with better knowledge of law correct me] I doubt that anyone made this assertion. What Greg Broiles and Dr. Grubor asserted was that because of the first amendment, the government can not initiate an action in a libel case. Which means that libel is not a crime. There may be some old statutes that declare libel a crime, as Greg noted, but they are not enforceable because of the first amendment. Suits can be brought by private individuals though. The government, even if it is defamed, cannot sue a private person for libel. For example, I can say that Congress regularly molests small children, and they will not be able to do anything about me. > This is hokem. The 1st most certainly does not protect lies in any form. It ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > protects opinion, this is distinctly different then stating a untruth about > some party or distribution of material with the attributation to them > without their permission. Not exactly. I can lie as much as I want about the government. No one would be able to prosecute me. These particular lies are protected, contrary to what you state. The law does not protect ALL opinions, as well. > No civilized society can exist that permits lies and other defamations of > character and expect to survive for any length of time. Simply for no other > reason than contracts and other such instruments would not be worth the > paper they were printed on. Let alone any laws or other issuances from the > government itself. You are mixing in totally unrelated things, Jim. Enforcement of contracts has nothing to do with freedom of speech. For example, if you borrow $100 from me and fail to return your debt in time, this is an issue of contract law and not of free speech. Contract law is not about speech, it is about promises. > ARTICLE I. > > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, > or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of > speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, > and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. > > > Where in there do you see a right to lie, cheat, or steal? If it did, it > would be a lie because it would not protect the very freedom it says it is. Do you think that all rights should be found in the first amendment? What does the right to steal have to do with what we are talking about? I suggest reading "The Fourth Estate and the Constitution: Freedom of the Press in America", by Lucas a Powe, Jr. As for stealing and cheating in contracts, read any textbook on business law for business students. It is very useful to read this stuff, by the way. Not that these books give one a complete picture on law, but they are very informative. - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 22:26:49 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:26:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible In-Reply-To: <199701290545.GAA06984@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: <199701290622.AAA04564@manifold.algebra.com> can any kind soul tell me, what are the SAT scores needed to be in the top 10%, top 1%, and top 0.1% of all the students who take these tests? thank you igor Anonymous wrote: > > > > According to Rick Osborne: > > "I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT > even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests > with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I > was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in > Drama, and played Tennis." > > People get into MIT--or don't get into MIT--for lots of reasons. Most > intelligent people apply to several schools, knowing that admissions > practices are subject to the vagaries of reality. > > In my case, my SATs were about 1500, with some 800s in achievement tests. > And the usual bullshit high school clubs, political offices, etc. etc. I > was accepted by MIT, but not by Caltech. I didn't lose any sleep over the > way things turned out. > > And I decided not to go to MIT, either. > > "The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I > made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need > full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the > Russian front!"" > > My guess is that "other factors" were involved. > > I noted with some interest, but little surprise, that the guy claiming MIT > required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score could barely spell, and > had major problems making a coherent point. Methinks this is why MIT > rejected him, not his lack of a "1600." > > ">For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high > >school, too > > "Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying > overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess." > > MIT offered me a substantial economic aid package, in the form of loans, > grants, and various campus jobs. What does this tell you? > > "MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most > part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty > assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) > > I've known about a dozen or so MIT grads, and only one of them was a snooty > asshole, and it was a _she_, one of the first MIT women grads (and she was > _very_ impressed by this). > > Most MIT grads are perfectly reasonable. > > Xanthar > > > > > -- > - Igor. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 22:27:36 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:27:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: M.M. / Re: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access Message-ID: <199701290627.WAA20938@toad.com> Mike McNally wrote: > Somebody wrote: > > This morning at the RSA keynote, David Aaron, the US Crypto > > ambassador quoted the "Sovreign Right of Lawful Access" as > > something that goverments were determined to preserve. > > Speaking as a private indiwidual, and not as a drone in the employ > of IBM (don't get me started on the "but wait, key recovery *isn't* > the same as key escrow" hoo-ha), that dude scared the piss out of > me. That plinking sound you hear is the sound of NSA's bloodhounds stamping the phrase, in reverse, on the bottom of their jackboots. "Sovreign Right" has that certain ring to it which suggests the rhetoric of Dictators who imagine themselves to be Kings. "Lawful Access" has that "Of course, we will only use this 'right' against drug dealers.", kind of feel to it. Perhaps the student who popped RSA's test balloon could propose the "Universal Right to Casual Access." Toto From rfiero at pophost.com Tue Jan 28 22:27:52 1997 From: rfiero at pophost.com (Richard Fiero) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:27:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701290627.WAA20939@toad.com> Get it straight Sandy Sandfort. I'm not in your home. I am in my home and I will observe my priorities, not your's. Sandy Sandfort writes: > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mail lists are far >more like private homes, businesses or clubs. When you are a >guest there, you are subject to their rules of behavior. If Dr. Vulis was pushing the envelope in list-abuse as a multi-stage social experiment, Sandy Sandfort has surpassed him by far. In part I refer to a Sandy Sandfort reply to a criticism made by Paul Bradley. The reply was made public two hours before the criticism was. This is not moderation. It is manipulation and interference. Since I have a low tolerance for self-serving pedantry, I never would have noticed the criticism if it had not been preceded by the reply. In the reply, Sandy Sandfort employs the name-calling "sophist" and "hypocrite." Also in the reply is the Freudian slip or obscene proposition: > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Force," my ass. Shouldn't this have gone to cypherpunks-flames? One might wonder just what the rules of proper decorum are. -- Richard Fiero From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 22:27:58 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:27:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701290627.WAA20943@toad.com> One point I had forgotten. The demonstration took place on the 50th anniversary of Kristallnacht. This is one explanation as to why the border guards did not attempt to open fire with firearms or attempt to break up the demonstration with tear gas. Also consider that the Tiennamen square massacre had occurred only a few months before and it did not appear to have settled the issue of who controlled china. Many of the dissidents were still at large, China was a pariah nation. East Germany had recently been visited by Gorbachev who did not appear ready to help keep the regime if things got sticky. The mass defections were taking place at their peak at a rate of tens of thousands in a day. Something like a quarter of the youth between 18 and 25 had defected. Bill if anything understates this point. Certainly if the people decide that the structures of state are not worth supporting change can be astonishing. I think that the spending into bankrupcy thesis might be argued for the case of the USSR and more plausibly the US. The problem is that I don't think that the military spending in either case bore any relation to need, to the threat from the other side or to any rational determination. I think both budgets simply increased to the limit that the economies could support and beyond. There is a similar problem in the third world today. Many third world countries spend more on arms than they do on health or education. Much of the alledged "foreign aid" is in fact subsidies for this trade. The arms are primarily to suppress internal dissent. There are plenty of governments left in need of similar reform. Phill From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue Jan 28 22:28:01 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (stewarts at ix.netcom.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:28:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701290628.WAA20945@toad.com> At 12:59 PM 1/28/97 -0500, "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" wrote: >>That's it? The system collapsed because the guards left their posts? >>And no mutiny charges? Incredible. >I was there. >The collapse of East Germany was quite spectacular. There >was at most three months of warning. First there was a series >of sit ins at foreign embassies, then a migration of large >numbers of people in their twenties within the eastern block. In particular, people started leaving East Germany by way of still-somewhat-communist Hungary (where the Germans let them go) and from there into Austria (where the Hungarians let them go), and it was getting to be tens of thousands of people per month. Once a system like that starts leaking, it's hard to contain. (ObCypherpunksContent: if substantial amounts of tax money starts escaping into Cypherspace, it's not easy to maintain a modern CorporatistWelfare-for-Bureaucrats state either.....) >Unfortunately US commentators tend to see everything in terms of >US cultural norms, many of which were explicitly rejected by the >protestors. The East Germans wanted West German affluence, they >wanted to be part of Western Europe. They were certainly not >responding to US military spending as right wing theorists claim, >nor was the economy collapsing because of the arms race, it >was collapsing because of the costs of a totalitarian state and >the incompatibility of that state with modern industrial >organization. The US right wing does argue that the Soviets couldn't afford to run a military industrial complex big enough to outrace theirs, and that it was a major contributor to the economic collapse (which it probably was.) Of course, they also consider that Communism isn't an economically viable system, ignoring the similar problems with the Good Old American Patriotic Military-Industrial-Complex, and somehow think that now that there aren't any Russian Commies to kick around any more that we need a bigger army, as well as a supply of easily-kicked-around enemies. Unfortunately, I suspect that sometime soon they'll remember that there still are a billion Commies left, and that Oceania has always been at war with EastAsia. Hopefully the Communist system in China will have fallen apart by then to the extent that it can admit to being a semi-capitalist kleptocracy instead of pretending to still be in charge of anything. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:31:48 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:31:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: can Sun Tzu be a cypherpunks? In-Reply-To: <199701282258.OAA28486@miron.vip.best.com> Message-ID: <32EEEEA4.440E@gte.net> nobody at nowhere.com wrote: > Quotations from the Art Of War by Sun Tzu > A Military operation involves deception. Even though you are competent, > appear to be incompetent. Though effective, appear to be ineffective. > Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion. > Use humility to make them haughty. Tire them by flight. Cause division > among them. Attack when they are unprepared, make your move when they > do not expect it. The all-time master was Rudolph Wanderone (sp?), a.k.a. Minnesota Fats. There was an article on him that told how he cleaned the pool champ in Atlantic City circa 1960. In later years, he played Mosconi on TV several times, and had quite a few people convinced he wasn't a very good player, at least "not as good as" Mosconi. The movie Color Of Money shows what this meant, and just how unprepared the public is to believe that someone like Fats could really be the best. Kinda like Tom Wolfe and the pirates thing. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 22:37:16 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:37:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970128190443.00625320@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: <32EEEE17.7238@sk.sympatico.ca> > >January 28, 1997 - Ian Goldberg, a UC Berkeley graduate student, > >announced today that he had successfully cracked RSA Data Security > >Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher in just under 3.5 hours. I just ran out of asswipe. Does anyone have any RSA Data Security, Inc. stock they'd like to sell? Toto From zachb at netcom.com Tue Jan 28 22:40:46 1997 From: zachb at netcom.com (Z.B.) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:40:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701290640.WAA21235@toad.com> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997 stewarts at ix.netcom.com wrote: [snip] > >EXPORTABLE CRYPTOGRAPHY TOTALLY INSECURE: CHALLENGE CIPHER BROKEN IMMEDIATELY > > > >January 28, 1997 - Ian Goldberg, a UC Berkeley graduate student, > >announced today that he had successfully cracked RSA Data Security > >Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher in just under 3.5 hours. > .... > >Goldberg used UC Berkeley's Network of Workstations (known as the NOW) > >to harness the computational resources of about 250 idle machines. > >This allowed him to test 100 billion possible "keys" per hour -- > Good grief...I just remembered that this challenge started today when I read this letter. A question - how does DES differ from the RC5 cyphers that are also up for breaking? Where can I find some software to use on these? Zach Babayco zachb at netcom.com <-------finger for PGP public key If you need to know how to set up a mail filter or defend against emailbombs, send me a message with the words "get helpfile" (without the " marks) in the SUBJECT: header, *NOT THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE!* I have several useful FAQs and documents available. From hallam at ai.mit.edu Tue Jan 28 22:40:48 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:40:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701290640.WAA21236@toad.com> > > I am a cyber-revolutionary and the world has bought into > > the chaos of our revolution. I never intended the Web to be a tool > > for confirming the present social order which is manifestly > > corrupt. > > Which of course is why you were in contact with Billy's boys right? We did consider very early on the idea of proceedings of congress annotated with the campaign contributions of the various speakers. Imagine if instead of Newt Gingrich you saw Newt Gingrich ($243,493 Tobbacco Industry) as a speaker note. We were in contact with the Clinton folks because the Bush guys ignored the Web and the Internet completely. They just were not interested. Nor were the Perot folks either - odd since the electronic townhall was a big part of their platform. Even in this campaign the Perot page could not be read with Netscape 6 months before the election. On the other hand have a look at www.buchanan.org If you thought that Pat got a bum rap off the press when they called him a neo-Nazi just take a look at his site. Buchanan Brigade? Look at the choice of topics for the speaches. Phill From sandfort at crl.com Tue Jan 28 22:40:50 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:40:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970128213609.006dc248@pop.pophost.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Richard Fiero wrote: > Get it straight Sandy Sandfort. I'm not in your home. I am in > my home and I will observe my priorities, not your's. Silly things happen when one responds literally to an obvious metaphor. (see, "analogy.") > ...In part I refer to a > Sandy Sandfort reply to a criticism made by Paul Bradley. The reply was > made public two hours before the criticism was. Nonsense. Richard may have read my response on the Unedited list and Paul post on the Moderated list, but I sent my response to each list in the appropriate order, Paul's post, followed by my response. In any event, how would intentionally reversing the order have benefited me? This specious argument makes no sense. > In the reply, Sandy Sandfort employs the name-calling "sophist" > and "hypocrite." Nope, wrong again. I referenced sophistry and hypocracy. I leave the significance of the difference as an exercise to the student. (Hint: one is an argument to the man, the other isn't.) > Also in the reply is the Freudian slip or obscene proposition: > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Force," my ass. > Shouldn't this have gone to cypherpunks-flames? And wrong yet again. Not a personal attack but commentary on wooly thinking. > One might wonder just what the rules of proper decorum are. One might read my posts on this point and pay attention. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From snow at smoke.suba.com Tue Jan 28 22:42:32 1997 From: snow at smoke.suba.com (snow) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:42:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701290642.WAA21277@toad.com> Phill wrote: > I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have > "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of > property you do. > > Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs to the community IS theft. I work, and as the result of that work something is created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved. > controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property" > from the previous rulers. They "won" it in combat. The people of china obviously prefered new government to the old one, or they would have prevented the takeover. > I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is > a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model > you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every > philosopher since Locke. Practically every philosopher since Locke has recieved their education at a Government or "Elite" sponsored school, and made their livings the same way. I'm not claiming conspiracy here, but those that feed at the trough aren't going to insult it overmuch. From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:44:16 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:44:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EEF0AC.BF1@gte.net> OKSAS wrote: > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > > Well, can you say you've been 'anywhere else'? > > Atlanta has some nice babes, warm weather. > > Charleston. Much smaller than Atlanta. Very cozy. > > Southern Germany. Very, very nice. Loved Berchtesgaden (sp?). > > What about you? > I am not into girls...sorry. Too bad. They're cleaner, more polite, less aggressive, make far better love than men. If only they were interested in real computing (other than as a job or school work). From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:49:00 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:49:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EEF298.2130@gte.net> OKSAS wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, blanc wrote: > > From: jim bell > > I was thinking the reason that most people don't think of applying AP is > > because they're normal. It is not the first thought of a normal person to > > kill another human, just because they've been offended - even severely. It > > takes an extraordinary circumstance to motivate one to such destruction, > > especially if there are a thousand armed troops supporting the object of > > the attempt. > Any normal person has potential to kill, > why they don't...? They have other thoughts > and dreams for a better future. Some people in society are like a bad dream (ok, ok). Anyway, they are a lot harder to get rid of than just waking up and going back to sleep. But AP offers the first practical solution to this problem. Get rid of the bad dreams, have good dreams. What could be better? From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 22:55:48 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:55:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701290655.WAA21731@toad.com> > >January 28, 1997 - Ian Goldberg, a UC Berkeley graduate student, > >announced today that he had successfully cracked RSA Data Security > >Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher in just under 3.5 hours. I just ran out of asswipe. Does anyone have any RSA Data Security, Inc. stock they'd like to sell? Toto From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:55:53 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:55:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: [noise] RE: Shave the Whales Message-ID: <199701290655.WAA21747@toad.com> Mullen, Patrick wrote: > Is there a way we can keep the caricatures w/out getting the rest of the > message > w/ these postings? I like the ASCII art, but... I've just started clipping and saving the characters w/o the text that accompanies them. I've got a dozen so far, so check back in a week or so and I'll forward a set to anyone who wants. Unless, of course, someone has a bucket of them now. BTW, some of the recent ones are pretty amazing: a bat, a scorpion, a cow, etc. From mjw at VNET.IBM.COM Tue Jan 28 22:55:55 1997 From: mjw at VNET.IBM.COM (mjw at VNET.IBM.COM) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:55:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Altavista Message-ID: <199701290655.WAA21750@toad.com> From: Mark Waddington Subject: Altavista > However, the doubleclick.net ads appear to bear no relationship to the > keywords being searched... Interestingly, I've just noticed over the last couple of days that the in-line ads are directly relevant to the search words I enter. I did a search yesterday on "Quicken" and "security" and all the in-line ads I was shown referred to security or penetration detection products. Mark Waddington Interactive Financial Services | Phone : +61-3-96266574 Business Development Manager | Mobile: +61-412-217316 IBM Asia Pacific | Fax : +61-3-96266273 From sameer at c2.net Tue Jan 28 22:56:05 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:56:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701290656.WAA21785@toad.com> http://now.cs.berkeley.edu/ > Yee-hah! Congratulations (and enjoy the $1000 check!) > So what did you do interesting cryptographically in the crack, > other than coordinating a bunch of workstations? > Was it just brute force with well-tuned code? > Given the figures in your press release, it sounds like you > tested about 350 billion keys out of a trillion possible, > so you hit the winner a shade early. That's about 400,000 keys/sec/box. > Are the machines mostly Pentiums, Alphas, Suns, etc.? -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:56:11 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:56:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trolling with Dale (a bite) Message-ID: <199701290656.WAA21792@toad.com> Huge Cajones Remailer wrote: > From: Dale Thorn > Subject: Re: overview.htm (fwd) > Dale Thorn hopelessly wrote: > >Let's be realistic about how AIDS is acquired. > Yes, Dale, let's. Dale makes an excellent case for having a moderated > list right here. What do his nutball beyond-the-fringe remarks have > to do with crypto, privacy, security? Cripes, in the old days even an > _accurate_ off-list remark would open a blast furnace of condemnation, > a la Jim B. If the list won't moderate itself to "guide" the Dale's, > it DESERVES to be moderated. He's gotta be trolling to keep it hard. Well, I don't know who you are, so (despite your remarks) I can't really tell what your question is. I suppose if we sat down with a human moderator and a copy of Applied Cryptography, you'd know the XOR's and S-boxes and whatnot better than I. That's why we need people like you on this list, especially the moderated list, since you know the conventional (academic) crypto really well. To be honest, I'm after more important things, but hey, keep plugging away and maybe I'll learn something from you. Hugs and stuff.... From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:56:14 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:56:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: can Sun Tzu be a cypherpunks? Message-ID: <199701290656.WAA21793@toad.com> nobody at nowhere.com wrote: > Quotations from the Art Of War by Sun Tzu > A Military operation involves deception. Even though you are competent, > appear to be incompetent. Though effective, appear to be ineffective. > Draw them in with the prospect of gain, take them by confusion. > Use humility to make them haughty. Tire them by flight. Cause division > among them. Attack when they are unprepared, make your move when they > do not expect it. The all-time master was Rudolph Wanderone (sp?), a.k.a. Minnesota Fats. There was an article on him that told how he cleaned the pool champ in Atlantic City circa 1960. In later years, he played Mosconi on TV several times, and had quite a few people convinced he wasn't a very good player, at least "not as good as" Mosconi. The movie Color Of Money shows what this meant, and just how unprepared the public is to believe that someone like Fats could really be the best. Kinda like Tom Wolfe and the pirates thing. From sandfort at crl7.crl.com Tue Jan 28 22:56:17 1997 From: sandfort at crl7.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:56:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701290656.WAA21794@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Richard Fiero wrote: > Get it straight Sandy Sandfort. I'm not in your home. I am in > my home and I will observe my priorities, not your's. Silly things happen when one responds literally to an obvious metaphor. (see, "analogy.") > ...In part I refer to a > Sandy Sandfort reply to a criticism made by Paul Bradley. The reply was > made public two hours before the criticism was. Nonsense. Richard may have read my response on the Unedited list and Paul post on the Moderated list, but I sent my response to each list in the appropriate order, Paul's post, followed by my response. In any event, how would intentionally reversing the order have benefited me? This specious argument makes no sense. > In the reply, Sandy Sandfort employs the name-calling "sophist" > and "hypocrite." Nope, wrong again. I referenced sophistry and hypocracy. I leave the significance of the difference as an exercise to the student. (Hint: one is an argument to the man, the other isn't.) > Also in the reply is the Freudian slip or obscene proposition: > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Force," my ass. > Shouldn't this have gone to cypherpunks-flames? And wrong yet again. Not a personal attack but commentary on wooly thinking. > One might wonder just what the rules of proper decorum are. One might read my posts on this point and pay attention. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From declan at pathfinder.com Tue Jan 28 22:56:19 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:56:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701290656.WAA21795@toad.com> MIT probably has a need-blind admissions policy; they don't care whether or not you have money. When they admit you, at least. Let me plug Carnegie Mellon University, which consistently ties with MIT and one of them California schools for first place in computer science. It's not quite as hard to get into as MIT, though you do have to deal with Pittsburgh winters. The town itself is small enough to be friendly, and big enough to be interesting. Jim Morris, the head of the computer science department, was my instructor for a data structures class and truly seemed to care about his students' well-being. Oh, and I remember we had t-shirts saying: "MIT -- the CMU of Massachusetts." -Declan Rick wrote: >At 12:32 PM 1/28/97 -0500, Derek Atkins wrote: >>This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be >>admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and >>1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. > >I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT >even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests >with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I >was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in >Drama, and played Tennis. > >The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I >made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need >full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the >Russian front!" > >>For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high >>school, too > >Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying >overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess. > >MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most >part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty >assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) >_________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ >"He who knows, does not speak. >He who speaks, does not know." ------------------------- Washington Correspondent The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 22:57:40 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:57:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701290657.WAA21808@toad.com> OKSAS wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, blanc wrote: > > From: jim bell > > I was thinking the reason that most people don't think of applying AP is > > because they're normal. It is not the first thought of a normal person to > > kill another human, just because they've been offended - even severely. It > > takes an extraordinary circumstance to motivate one to such destruction, > > especially if there are a thousand armed troops supporting the object of > > the attempt. > Any normal person has potential to kill, > why they don't...? They have other thoughts > and dreams for a better future. Some people in society are like a bad dream (ok, ok). Anyway, they are a lot harder to get rid of than just waking up and going back to sleep. But AP offers the first practical solution to this problem. Get rid of the bad dreams, have good dreams. What could be better? From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 22:58:00 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:58:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible Message-ID: <199701290658.WAA21810@toad.com> can any kind soul tell me, what are the SAT scores needed to be in the top 10%, top 1%, and top 0.1% of all the students who take these tests? thank you igor Anonymous wrote: > > > > According to Rick Osborne: > > "I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT > even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests > with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I > was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in > Drama, and played Tennis." > > People get into MIT--or don't get into MIT--for lots of reasons. Most > intelligent people apply to several schools, knowing that admissions > practices are subject to the vagaries of reality. > > In my case, my SATs were about 1500, with some 800s in achievement tests. > And the usual bullshit high school clubs, political offices, etc. etc. I > was accepted by MIT, but not by Caltech. I didn't lose any sleep over the > way things turned out. > > And I decided not to go to MIT, either. > > "The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I > made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need > full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the > Russian front!"" > > My guess is that "other factors" were involved. > > I noted with some interest, but little surprise, that the guy claiming MIT > required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score could barely spell, and > had major problems making a coherent point. Methinks this is why MIT > rejected him, not his lack of a "1600." > > ">For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high > >school, too > > "Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying > overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess." > > MIT offered me a substantial economic aid package, in the form of loans, > grants, and various campus jobs. What does this tell you? > > "MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most > part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty > assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) > > I've known about a dozen or so MIT grads, and only one of them was a snooty > asshole, and it was a _she_, one of the first MIT women grads (and she was > _very_ impressed by this). > > Most MIT grads are perfectly reasonable. > > Xanthar > > > > > -- > - Igor. From ichudov at algebra.com Tue Jan 28 22:59:02 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:59:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <32EEF0AC.BF1@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701290653.AAA04799@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Too bad. They're cleaner, more polite, less aggressive, make far > better love than men. If only they were interested in real computing > (other than as a job or school work). Most of women are not worthy. > If only they were interested in real computing > (other than as a job or school work). I know one who is truly interested in computing. - Igor. From tobin at mail.edm.net Tue Jan 28 22:59:22 1997 From: tobin at mail.edm.net (Tobin Fricke) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:59:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: <199701290612.WAA04048@ns2.snni.com> > This seems clear enough. If it's printed on paper, it's kosher for > export. But if we're really overt about it, we may goad the government > into attempting to control printed source code as well. That could > prove most interesting. Hmmm.. Printing out, say, PGP as a book where each page is a 2 dimensional bar code would be rather interesting. Then again, OCR works pretty well for normal text. A printed book or other printed material setting forth encryption source code is not itself subject to the EAR (see Sec. 734.3(b)(2)). However, notwithstanding Sec. 734.3(b)(2), encryption source code in electronic form or media (e.g., computer diskette or CD ROM) remains subject to the EAR (see Sec. 734.3(b)(3)). Does a barcode fall under "electronic form or media" or is it "printed material"? What about punched cards? (-: Tobin Fricke From nobody at replay.com Tue Jan 28 22:59:45 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 22:59:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible Message-ID: <199701290659.WAA21869@toad.com> According to Rick Osborne: "I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in Drama, and played Tennis." People get into MIT--or don't get into MIT--for lots of reasons. Most intelligent people apply to several schools, knowing that admissions practices are subject to the vagaries of reality. In my case, my SATs were about 1500, with some 800s in achievement tests. And the usual bullshit high school clubs, political offices, etc. etc. I was accepted by MIT, but not by Caltech. I didn't lose any sleep over the way things turned out. And I decided not to go to MIT, either. "The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the Russian front!"" My guess is that "other factors" were involved. I noted with some interest, but little surprise, that the guy claiming MIT required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score could barely spell, and had major problems making a coherent point. Methinks this is why MIT rejected him, not his lack of a "1600." ">For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high >school, too "Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess." MIT offered me a substantial economic aid package, in the form of loans, grants, and various campus jobs. What does this tell you? "MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) I've known about a dozen or so MIT grads, and only one of them was a snooty asshole, and it was a _she_, one of the first MIT women grads (and she was _very_ impressed by this). Most MIT grads are perfectly reasonable. Xanthar -- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Tue Jan 28 23:10:48 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 23:10:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701280118.RAA12047@toad.com> Message-ID: <8P181D93w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Nurdane Oksas writes: > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > > > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > > > > > > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > > > > > > > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lot > > > > > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > > > > > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; > > > > > > The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- > > > > distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can > > > > go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but > > > > it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. > > > > > i don't see why she would wear a bikini if she already is tan. > > > She just goes to show off right??? California is know for > > > very beautiful girls ... I like the pale look :) > > > > There are two really major beaches in the L.A. area that I know of. > > One is Bolsa Chica, several miles long, north of Huntington Beach, > > which attracts most of the young'uns south of L.A., and Zuma in the > > northmost points of Malibu, which gets a lot of Valley people > > (fer sure). To quote the L.A. Weekly of a few years ago, in a > > "Best of L.A." review, "Why do all those hot young girls go to Zuma? > > Because that's where all the hot young boys are." > > I see. > > > But the real babes don't go there. They get skates and nifty little > > costumes and zip up and down the boardwalks in Santa Monica and > > Pacific Palisades mostly, in case some hot producer/director should > > happen along. > > I see. > Why is a mere "I see" classified as cypherpunks-flames??? Stop picking on girls, Sandy. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Tue Jan 28 23:18:32 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 23:18:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: In-Reply-To: <199701290212.UAA06654@einstein> Message-ID: <32EF1652.1AB7@sk.sympatico.ca> From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 23:22:08 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 23:22:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to subscribe In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EEFA4D.BAC@gte.net> Theodor.SCHLICKMANN at BXL.DG13.cec.be wrote: > I have learned from the discussions in this list that there are other lists related to this one. Can anybody send me information on what is available and when this confusion created by having different lists will stop. > cypherpunks : unmoderated and uncensored > cypherpunks : unmoderated and censored > cypherpunks : moderated and uncensored > cypherpunks : moderated and censored Theodor - where did you get the info on the 4 lists above? > cypherpunks : US eyes only -- export restrictions > cypherpunks : Europe > cypherpunks : private mail > Theodor W. Schlickmann From tobin at mail.edm.net Tue Jan 28 23:26:02 1997 From: tobin at mail.edm.net (Tobin Fricke) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 23:26:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: <199701290726.XAA22535@toad.com> > This seems clear enough. If it's printed on paper, it's kosher for > export. But if we're really overt about it, we may goad the government > into attempting to control printed source code as well. That could > prove most interesting. Hmmm.. Printing out, say, PGP as a book where each page is a 2 dimensional bar code would be rather interesting. Then again, OCR works pretty well for normal text. A printed book or other printed material setting forth encryption source code is not itself subject to the EAR (see Sec. 734.3(b)(2)). However, notwithstanding Sec. 734.3(b)(2), encryption source code in electronic form or media (e.g., computer diskette or CD ROM) remains subject to the EAR (see Sec. 734.3(b)(3)). Does a barcode fall under "electronic form or media" or is it "printed material"? What about punched cards? (-: Tobin Fricke From sandfort at crl.com Tue Jan 28 23:26:02 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 23:26:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <8P181D93w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > > > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > > > > > > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > > > > > > > > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. > > > > > > > > > Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lot > > > > > > of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; > > > > > > we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; > > > > > > > > The real babes in So. Cal. go to tanning salons. That way the evenly- > > > > > distributed tan looks best with, say, a pure white bikini. You can > > > > > go to the beach, of course, and hang out with the hoi polloi, but > > > > > it's mostly kids with pimples and stuff. > > > > > > > i don't see why she would wear a bikini if she already is tan. > > > > She just goes to show off right??? California is know for > > > > very beautiful girls ... I like the pale look :) > > > > > > There are two really major beaches in the L.A. area that I know of. > > > One is Bolsa Chica, several miles long, north of Huntington Beach, > > > which attracts most of the young'uns south of L.A., and Zuma in the > > > northmost points of Malibu, which gets a lot of Valley people > > > (fer sure). To quote the L.A. Weekly of a few years ago, in a > > > "Best of L.A." review, "Why do all those hot young girls go to Zuma? > > > Because that's where all the hot young boys are." > > > > I see. > > > > > But the real babes don't go there. They get skates and nifty little > > > costumes and zip up and down the boardwalks in Santa Monica and > > > Pacific Palisades mostly, in case some hot producer/director should > > > happen along. > > > > I see. > > > > Why is a mere "I see" classified as cypherpunks-flames??? > Stop picking on girls, Sandy. > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > It wasn't and I wasn't. From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 23:36:43 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 23:36:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <8P181D93w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <32EEFDDF.3ABC@gte.net> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Nurdane Oksas writes: > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > But the real babes don't go there. They get skates and nifty little > > > costumes and zip up and down the boardwalks in Santa Monica and > > > Pacific Palisades mostly, in case some hot producer/director should > > > happen along. > > I see. > Why is a mere "I see" classified as cypherpunks-flames??? > Stop picking on girls, Sandy. You are now at level 2, Starfighter. You must defend the Federation against the Kodan(sp?) Armada. (There are an infinite number of levels, BTW). From nobody at huge.cajones.com Tue Jan 28 23:46:15 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 23:46:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Meet-in-the-middle attack Message-ID: <199701290745.XAA19388@mailmasher.com> The main difference between Tim Maya and shit is that shit smells better. __[I]__ o-o' __oOo__(-)_oOo__ Tim Maya V From dthorn at gte.net Tue Jan 28 23:49:19 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 23:49:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701290653.AAA04799@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32EF00D3.5A71@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > Too bad. They're cleaner, more polite, less aggressive, make far > > better love than men. If only they were interested in real computing > > (other than as a job or school work). > Most of women are not worthy. > I know one who is truly interested in computing. How many eyes, ears, and noses does she have? Is she particularly nervous around microwave ovens? Does she wear strange, mismatched clothing? Any strange eating habits, such as French fries with a spoon? No sense of humor, or laughs at times when nobody else does? Takes off a lot of days sick? Takes a lot of notes? Uses any common items in a bizarre way, such as nail-painting with Wite-out? Asks a lot of questions that any normal person would know? Secretive about her personal life? Does she ever talk to herself, as in practicing speech? -just curious. From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 29 00:11:16 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 00:11:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <32EF00D3.5A71@gte.net> Message-ID: <199701290807.CAA00493@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Too bad. They're cleaner, more polite, less aggressive, make far > > > better love than men. If only they were interested in real computing > > > (other than as a job or school work). > > > Most of women are not worthy. > > I know one who is truly interested in computing. > > How many eyes, ears, and noses does she have? Is she particularly > nervous around microwave ovens? Does she wear strange, mismatched > clothing? Any strange eating habits, such as French fries with a > spoon? No sense of humor, or laughs at times when nobody else does? > Takes off a lot of days sick? Takes a lot of notes? Uses any common > items in a bizarre way, such as nail-painting with Wite-out? Asks > a lot of questions that any normal person would know? Secretive > about her personal life? Does she ever talk to herself, as in > practicing speech? -just curious. > She sings to herself, but the answer to all other true/false questions is no. - Igor. From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jan 29 00:14:03 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 00:14:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Child Porn Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970129001035.006f3328@192.100.81.136> At 04:48 AM 1/29/97 +0000, Vipul Ved Prakash wrote: >(Forward) >*** NY student charged with sending child sex photos over Internet > >Nathaniel Levy, a psychology major at New York State University, was >charged Wednesday with using the Internet to transmit photos of >infants having sex with adults, the New York state attorney general >said. This is hilarious, given the fact that San Francisco State University's psychology department has what probably amounts to the largest collection of child pornography on the planet. Their collection also includes primary sources on any other type of kink you can imagine. And some that no sane person ever could imagine. [You have to be at least working on a PhD to access the collection.] -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From das at sgi.com Wed Jan 29 00:24:20 1997 From: das at sgi.com (Anil Das) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 00:24:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: More Circumventing the ITAR In-Reply-To: <199701290355.TAA17298@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EF0C85.167E@sgi.com> Mark Rosen wrote: > > I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically > about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for > download at the web page below. On my web page, I have some stuff in bold > print that informs about the ITAR and tells people to go away if they're > not from the US or Canada. Does this count as an unrestricted FTP site? > It's not all that much different from what MIT has up for PGP. What you need to do to provide FTP access to crypto software is spelled out in the EAR regulations. Here is a summary. I am not a lawyer. 1) Users (downloaders) should be asked to answer some questions to indicate that: They are aware of the crypto export regulations. They and their computers are in the US/Canada. They intend to follow the the crypto export regulations and not export the software they download. They are US persons as defined in the EAR regulations. 2) The server should check that the client site requesting the download is in the US or Canada. In other words, just displaying a warning is not enough. > Also, back to the question of registration numbers. A registration number > is just a string of letters and numbers, and is essentially the same as a > friendly letter; it contains no cryptographic code. For all anyone knows, I > could just be charging for pseudo-random numbers, again, nothing of > cryptographic significance. Is it illegal for me to mail someone outside of > the US or Canada a registration code? Thanks for any help. I wouldn't try to circumvent the regulations by trying to follow the letter of the law while ignoring its spirit. You don't have to be convicted of a crime to make life a lot difficult. Ask Phil Zimmerman, who never even uploaded pgp to the Internet. -- Anil Das From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Jan 29 01:17:44 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:17:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy (fwd) Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970129012206.0073d510@mail.io.com> At 10:42 AM 1/28/97 -0600, Jim Choate: >> From: Greg Broiles >> Civil actions against people doing "graffiti" are only interesting where >> the defendant has assets worth suing for. This economic dimension >> substantially limits the number of suits which will be brought. > >Thank you for agreeing with my thesis that the legal industry is one >driven by monetary gain and not justice. It is the one major problem >with law today, it ignores those who are not 'worth it'. Justice is >supposed to be blind and until that happens there can be no true >liberty. Law should be involved in rights and wrongs and not 'how much >money do I need to buy that villa in Spain'. Um, I was making the reciprocal of your point - that people with no assets have a special *advantage* with respect to civil suits, they're able to get away with a fair amount of misbehavior because it's not cost-effective for plaintiffs to sue them. If you're a defendant, being ignored as not 'worth it' is a good thing, not a bad thing. >There is also the aspect of 'reputation' of the organization which was >defamed. This will become even more critical to good business over the >Internet in the future than it is now. Now the only really important >'reputation' that one has to worry about is their credit report. I disagree strongly here. Think about the reputations of Odwalla and Sizzler and (Burger King? can't remember) after their E. Coli problems. Think about the reputation of Radio Shack for making mostly crappy products. Think about the reputation of some ISP's (Netcom, AOL) for continuing to charge people's credit cards for months after a cancellation. Reputation has many dimensions beyond credit reports. > Another aspect of this >that keeps coming up is one of 'big' corporations with 'lots' of money, >this monotonicity in legal thought is the reason I refer to the 'legal >industry' and not 'legal profession'. Currently the main force driving >law is how much money is available. Expansions of liberty simply can't >happen in this environment because there is no mechanism to protect >'little' organizations or persons without 'lots' of cash. This problem is >one that is not being addressed by anyone, most especialy lawyers who >will loose income which they aren't apt to do voluntarily. I agree that people get screwed because they can't afford to litigate or they can't afford a [good] attorney. But I think that the economic dimension to litigation is not necessarily all bad - if litigation were costless, what would prevent people from suing over essentially negligible disputes? I think it's good for people to stop and ask themselves "Is this dispute really worth fighting over?" The relatively high cost of litigation is a way to ration access to a relatively expensive resource, e.g., the courts. If litigants don't pay that cost, then taxpayers will. (And shifting more costs to losing litigants makes it easier, not harder, to be effectively judgment-proof by having few assets.) >> Criminal prosecutions for defamation (in the case of "graffiti") are still >> unlikely - a much more straightforward charge would be unauthorized access >> to a computer or some flavor of fraud, depending on the facts. > >This would be hard to do in the situation such as a mailing list because >the parties would have 'authorized access' and it does not include the issue >of inside parties nor 'web bbs's' where parties can enter comments and >other statements in a 'authorized' manner. There are mechanisms to use >computers for abuse of other parties besides hacking. I don't think that that web BBS or mailing list messages alone will lead to much criminal liability for defamation because I think it's difficult to do a lot of harm in that medium. BBS's have existed for 20+ years now - and how many online defamation cases have we seen? Maybe 10, total. Off the top of my head the only ones I remember are _Cubby v. Compuserve_ and _Stratton-Oakmont_, but there are probably others. Still, we're seeing what, at best one reported case for every 2 years? Online defamation liability exists, but I don't think there's ever going to be an avalanche of cases, simply because the damage involved tends to be relatively small compared to the monetary and emotional costs of litigation. >The point is that if joe-six-pack isn't secure in knowing that his views >and expression are not protected from abuse he won't use it. We all loose >in that case. But Joe Sixpack's lack of protection from abuse is also Joe Sixpack's protection from prosecution when he hasn't done anything wrong. Look at how pissed off some people are when Sandy moderates the list - imagine how much worse it would be if prosecutors were sifting through the list, identifying messages they thought were "over the line" with respect to defamation and then prosecuting the wrongdoers. Yow. Some people would be facing three-strikes minimums based on a single day's messages. :) I much prefer a world where we can engage in spirited debate without being afraid of prosecution (or civil suits) over a world where a tiny misstep means jail or litigation. You're of course free to want something else, but it's hard for me to see the logic behind arguing against private moderation but in favor of significant state regulation. Look at the way that big corporations use SLAPP suits to pick on Ma and Pa Kettle now, and imagine what big corporations could do if it was easier to create criminal liability for defamation. I think your proposed strengthening of defamation rules will prove to hurt the "little guys", not help them. >In this example, if party A makes a statement and then B changes it and >then re-distributes it as original comments by A then there is a problem >irrespective of the monetary worth of A or B. Digital signatures in and of >themselves won't help this from happening unless it is required to include >the full text and signature of any quote in any subsequent use of that >material otherwise the quote and the digital signature are out of sync and >therefore worthless. But people who receive the message unsigned know they're getting an unsigned message (or know that it was signed by the quoter, but not the quoted author) and can make the appropriate assumptions about the truth of the attributions, and adjust their assessment of the veracity of the quoter if it turns out that the quoter is a liar, or if someone challenges the quoter to produce a signed version of the statement and they cannot. We seem to have survived OK so far without special rules to punish people for lying - why do we need special ones for the Net? -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 29 01:17:46 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:17:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [noise] RE: Shave the Whales In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EF1CB2.4416@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Mullen, Patrick wrote: > > Is there a way we can keep the caricatures w/out getting the rest of the > > message > > w/ these postings? I like the ASCII art, but... > > BTW, some of the recent ones are pretty amazing: a bat, a scorpion, > a cow, etc. Maybe we could have the original cypherpunks list saved as an historical ASCII arts treasure. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 29 01:25:50 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:25:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: [noise] RE: Shave the Whales Message-ID: <199701290925.BAA25538@toad.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > Mullen, Patrick wrote: > > Is there a way we can keep the caricatures w/out getting the rest of the > > message > > w/ these postings? I like the ASCII art, but... > > BTW, some of the recent ones are pretty amazing: a bat, a scorpion, > a cow, etc. Maybe we could have the original cypherpunks list saved as an historical ASCII arts treasure. Toto From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jan 29 01:25:58 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:25:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Child Porn Message-ID: <199701290925.BAA25546@toad.com> At 04:48 AM 1/29/97 +0000, Vipul Ved Prakash wrote: >(Forward) >*** NY student charged with sending child sex photos over Internet > >Nathaniel Levy, a psychology major at New York State University, was >charged Wednesday with using the Internet to transmit photos of >infants having sex with adults, the New York state attorney general >said. This is hilarious, given the fact that San Francisco State University's psychology department has what probably amounts to the largest collection of child pornography on the planet. Their collection also includes primary sources on any other type of kink you can imagine. And some that no sane person ever could imagine. [You have to be at least working on a PhD to access the collection.] -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From das at sgi.com Wed Jan 29 01:26:00 1997 From: das at sgi.com (Anil Das) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:26:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: More Circumventing the ITAR Message-ID: <199701290926.BAA25555@toad.com> Mark Rosen wrote: > > I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically > about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for > download at the web page below. On my web page, I have some stuff in bold > print that informs about the ITAR and tells people to go away if they're > not from the US or Canada. Does this count as an unrestricted FTP site? > It's not all that much different from what MIT has up for PGP. What you need to do to provide FTP access to crypto software is spelled out in the EAR regulations. Here is a summary. I am not a lawyer. 1) Users (downloaders) should be asked to answer some questions to indicate that: They are aware of the crypto export regulations. They and their computers are in the US/Canada. They intend to follow the the crypto export regulations and not export the software they download. They are US persons as defined in the EAR regulations. 2) The server should check that the client site requesting the download is in the US or Canada. In other words, just displaying a warning is not enough. > Also, back to the question of registration numbers. A registration number > is just a string of letters and numbers, and is essentially the same as a > friendly letter; it contains no cryptographic code. For all anyone knows, I > could just be charging for pseudo-random numbers, again, nothing of > cryptographic significance. Is it illegal for me to mail someone outside of > the US or Canada a registration code? Thanks for any help. I wouldn't try to circumvent the regulations by trying to follow the letter of the law while ignoring its spirit. You don't have to be convicted of a crime to make life a lot difficult. Ask Phil Zimmerman, who never even uploaded pgp to the Internet. -- Anil Das From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Jan 29 01:26:04 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:26:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy (fwd) Message-ID: <199701290926.BAA25563@toad.com> At 10:42 AM 1/28/97 -0600, Jim Choate: >> From: Greg Broiles >> Civil actions against people doing "graffiti" are only interesting where >> the defendant has assets worth suing for. This economic dimension >> substantially limits the number of suits which will be brought. > >Thank you for agreeing with my thesis that the legal industry is one >driven by monetary gain and not justice. It is the one major problem >with law today, it ignores those who are not 'worth it'. Justice is >supposed to be blind and until that happens there can be no true >liberty. Law should be involved in rights and wrongs and not 'how much >money do I need to buy that villa in Spain'. Um, I was making the reciprocal of your point - that people with no assets have a special *advantage* with respect to civil suits, they're able to get away with a fair amount of misbehavior because it's not cost-effective for plaintiffs to sue them. If you're a defendant, being ignored as not 'worth it' is a good thing, not a bad thing. >There is also the aspect of 'reputation' of the organization which was >defamed. This will become even more critical to good business over the >Internet in the future than it is now. Now the only really important >'reputation' that one has to worry about is their credit report. I disagree strongly here. Think about the reputations of Odwalla and Sizzler and (Burger King? can't remember) after their E. Coli problems. Think about the reputation of Radio Shack for making mostly crappy products. Think about the reputation of some ISP's (Netcom, AOL) for continuing to charge people's credit cards for months after a cancellation. Reputation has many dimensions beyond credit reports. > Another aspect of this >that keeps coming up is one of 'big' corporations with 'lots' of money, >this monotonicity in legal thought is the reason I refer to the 'legal >industry' and not 'legal profession'. Currently the main force driving >law is how much money is available. Expansions of liberty simply can't >happen in this environment because there is no mechanism to protect >'little' organizations or persons without 'lots' of cash. This problem is >one that is not being addressed by anyone, most especialy lawyers who >will loose income which they aren't apt to do voluntarily. I agree that people get screwed because they can't afford to litigate or they can't afford a [good] attorney. But I think that the economic dimension to litigation is not necessarily all bad - if litigation were costless, what would prevent people from suing over essentially negligible disputes? I think it's good for people to stop and ask themselves "Is this dispute really worth fighting over?" The relatively high cost of litigation is a way to ration access to a relatively expensive resource, e.g., the courts. If litigants don't pay that cost, then taxpayers will. (And shifting more costs to losing litigants makes it easier, not harder, to be effectively judgment-proof by having few assets.) >> Criminal prosecutions for defamation (in the case of "graffiti") are still >> unlikely - a much more straightforward charge would be unauthorized access >> to a computer or some flavor of fraud, depending on the facts. > >This would be hard to do in the situation such as a mailing list because >the parties would have 'authorized access' and it does not include the issue >of inside parties nor 'web bbs's' where parties can enter comments and >other statements in a 'authorized' manner. There are mechanisms to use >computers for abuse of other parties besides hacking. I don't think that that web BBS or mailing list messages alone will lead to much criminal liability for defamation because I think it's difficult to do a lot of harm in that medium. BBS's have existed for 20+ years now - and how many online defamation cases have we seen? Maybe 10, total. Off the top of my head the only ones I remember are _Cubby v. Compuserve_ and _Stratton-Oakmont_, but there are probably others. Still, we're seeing what, at best one reported case for every 2 years? Online defamation liability exists, but I don't think there's ever going to be an avalanche of cases, simply because the damage involved tends to be relatively small compared to the monetary and emotional costs of litigation. >The point is that if joe-six-pack isn't secure in knowing that his views >and expression are not protected from abuse he won't use it. We all loose >in that case. But Joe Sixpack's lack of protection from abuse is also Joe Sixpack's protection from prosecution when he hasn't done anything wrong. Look at how pissed off some people are when Sandy moderates the list - imagine how much worse it would be if prosecutors were sifting through the list, identifying messages they thought were "over the line" with respect to defamation and then prosecuting the wrongdoers. Yow. Some people would be facing three-strikes minimums based on a single day's messages. :) I much prefer a world where we can engage in spirited debate without being afraid of prosecution (or civil suits) over a world where a tiny misstep means jail or litigation. You're of course free to want something else, but it's hard for me to see the logic behind arguing against private moderation but in favor of significant state regulation. Look at the way that big corporations use SLAPP suits to pick on Ma and Pa Kettle now, and imagine what big corporations could do if it was easier to create criminal liability for defamation. I think your proposed strengthening of defamation rules will prove to hurt the "little guys", not help them. >In this example, if party A makes a statement and then B changes it and >then re-distributes it as original comments by A then there is a problem >irrespective of the monetary worth of A or B. Digital signatures in and of >themselves won't help this from happening unless it is required to include >the full text and signature of any quote in any subsequent use of that >material otherwise the quote and the digital signature are out of sync and >therefore worthless. But people who receive the message unsigned know they're getting an unsigned message (or know that it was signed by the quoter, but not the quoted author) and can make the appropriate assumptions about the truth of the attributions, and adjust their assessment of the veracity of the quoter if it turns out that the quoter is a liar, or if someone challenges the quoter to produce a signed version of the statement and they cannot. We seem to have survived OK so far without special rules to punish people for lying - why do we need special ones for the Net? -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 29 01:27:47 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:27:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible In-Reply-To: <199701290658.WAA21810@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EF1825.2ECF@disposable.com> ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > can any kind soul tell me, what are the SAT scores needed to be in > the top 10%, top 1%, and top 0.1% of all the students who take these > tests? I'm not sure what this has to do with, well, anything, but here goes. Scores from before April 1995 are not comparable to scores today because the method of scoring has changed to recenter the distribution. The 99th percentile starts at 1440 for women and 1490 for men. Full stats at http://www.collegeboard.org/sat/html/topsrs29.html Please note that this is for "college-bound seniors." It's not a stat that applies to the general population (i.e., 1490+ is the top 1% of the elite 30% or so that go to college), and it doesn't include people who were satisfied with the score they got the beginning of their junior year, and didn't take it again (i.e., me). I don't know about MIT, but I'd think that their numbers would be even higher than those for Stanford, because MIT doesn't recruit football players. Some of Stanford's numbers are at http://www-portfolio.stanford.edu/105549 MIT and the like aren't impossible. Fucking elitist, yes. Worth it? Probably, though two of my closest and most intelligent friends have no college degrees at all. Of course, they had to earn people's respect, whereas I had people recruiting me based largely on the fact that I still had a pulse five years after taking the SAT. What counts is what people want you to do five years after that. -rich From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 29 01:54:14 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 01:54:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701290627.WAA20943@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EF1EBC.181D@disposable.com> Hallam-Baker wrote: > > One point I had forgotten. The demonstration took place > on the 50th anniversary of Kristallnacht. This is one explanation > as to why the border guards did not attempt to open fire with > firearms or attempt to break up the demonstration with tear gas. I think the timing was a coincidence. (And I'm told that Kristallnacht wasn't well advertised in East Germany; especially after the Soviets sided the United Arab Republic, the official story was that Hitler had been exterminating good Communists, not Jews.) While the final week was pretty spectacular, the demonstrations and defections had been building for months, as you say: > The mass defections were taking place at their peak at a rate of > tens of thousands in a day. Something like a quarter of the youth > between 18 and 25 had defected. Bill if anything understates this > point. I wasn't there, but an East German friend of mine was 20 when the wall came down. He was doing his compulsory military service at the time. Even in early 1987, as he was being interviewed by the Stasi concerning the direction the state would allow him to take his life, he says he felt no real fear telling them, up front, "Sure, I'll carry a gun, and I'll go where you tell me to go, but I will not hurt anyone." They gave him a gun and put him on the front, where he waved to his friends as they walked across the border. I think a lot of the border guards were like Thomas. > I think that the spending into bankrupcy thesis might be argued for > the case of the USSR and more plausibly the US. The problem is that > I don't think that the military spending in either case bore any > relation to need, to the threat from the other side or to any > rational determination. I think both budgets simply increased to > the limit that the economies could support and beyond. > > There is a similar problem in the third world today. Many third world > countries spend more on arms than they do on health or education. > Much of the alledged "foreign aid" is in fact subsidies for this > trade. The arms are primarily to suppress internal dissent. There > are plenty of governments left in need of similar reform. Yeah, yeah. Economics has soomething to do with it. But I think it comes down to "Sure, I'll carry a gun, and I'll go where you tell me to go, but I will not hurt anyone." Ideas matter. -rich From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 29 02:11:41 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 02:11:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... In-Reply-To: <199701290126.RAA11363@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EF22D3.1344@disposable.com> Yes, I mentioned that here and in comp.org.eff.talk a couple weeks ago. No need to turn images off. Just tell AltaVista you want text-only: http://altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/query?pg=&text=yes You may also find the text-only page a hell of a lot faster. -rich From kent at songbird.com Wed Jan 29 02:17:12 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 02:17:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701290642.WAA21277@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701291120.DAA01312@songbird.com> snow allegedly said: > > Phill wrote: > > I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have > > "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of > > property you do. > > > > Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the > > BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming > that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs > to the community IS theft. He was making a slightly more subtle point, I believe, though fallacious just the same. It is clear that "ownership" or "property rights" are constructs of society. That is, property rights are rights conferred on the individual by the society. For example, if society determines that you don't own your house, then you don't own it. Contrariwise, if you are alone on a desert island you "own" whatever you say you own, since at that point you are a society of one -- you want the Milky Way -- it's yours -- you just grant yourself full rights and title to it. So the origin of property isn't theft, and it isn't labor -- it's whatever society says it is. Of course, "society" is not a monolith, and it may be at odds with itself. > I work, and as the result of that work something is > created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that > work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those > shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved. Possession of objects like shoes is of no consequence -- they aren't the kind of propert that is at issue. Land is the fundamental property item. Arguably every piece of land in the world has been stolen from someone at one time or another. > > controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property" > > from the previous rulers. > > They "won" it in combat. Therefore, if I beat you over the head with a crowbar and take your shoes, it is not theft, but merely the spoils of war. That's convenient for those with big crowbars. > The people of china obviously prefered new > government to the old one, or they would have prevented the takeover. What a crock. Obviously, by your reasoning, every murder victim must secretly have preferred death, otherwise they would have prevented it. > > I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is > > a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model > > you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every > > philosopher since Locke. > > Practically every philosopher since Locke has recieved their education > at a Government or "Elite" sponsored school, and made their livings the same > way. I'm not claiming conspiracy here, but those that feed at the trough > aren't going to insult it overmuch. Like you, for example? You are feeding at the trough of society just as much as anyone else. You wouldn't be on the net, otherwise. But I agree, citing "every philosopher since Locke" is bogus. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 29 02:22:42 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 02:22:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <199701290656.WAA21795@toad.com> Message-ID: <32EF2569.7E09@disposable.com> Declan McCullagh wrote: > > Let me plug Carnegie Mellon University, which consistently ties with > MIT and one of them California schools for first place in computer > science. You must be joking. After all you've said about the school, you're recommending it? Isn't "Mr. L-18 Tag" the head of the department now? Anyway, our correspondent is asking the wrong question. There is no "best" school. If you want to be a brilliant programmer, I think you have to be born that way. If you want theory, you need to be specific about your research interests. If you want mass-marketable experience in Windoze, avoid the big-name schools, which tend to treat Windows with the respect is deserves. (At Stanford, despite having a very nice Paul Allen Center for Integrated Systems and a posh new Bill Gates Information Sciences building, all instruction is done in Think C or UNIX.) -rich From harka at nycmetro.com Wed Jan 29 02:24:09 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 02:24:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercen Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- -=> Quoting In:dthorn at gte.net to Harka <=- > The Cold War was not won by the arms race, it was won in > Eastern Europe which was never a major participant. The main > instrument that won it was West German TV which broadcast > pictures of supermarkets with full shelves into the homes > of East Germans every night. The viewers could see that it > was not mere propaganda and their relatives confirmed the > fact. As a result the East German guards on the Berlin wall > simply decided to leave their posts one night. In> That's it? The system collapsed because the guards left their posts? In> And no mutiny charges? Incredible. Actually not quite right. On November 9th, 1989 the East-German government established a new law (under pressure from the demonstrating public), that would allow every East-German to go _up to_ 30 days/per year to a western country. Visas to do so would be given out without problems, effective immediately. At the evening press-conference however, the government speaker Guenther Schabowskie (can't recall his exact position at that time) introduced that new law and then he made the BIG error: after hearing the new provisions of the new travel law, a foreign journalist stood up and asked him "Does _that_ mean, that every East-german citizen could right now go to the western border and gain free entry to West-Germany (or West-Berlin) without problems?" And my man Guenther was looking desperately in all his papers (funny as hell! :)) and then, after finding no pre-made answer, he said: "Yeah, I guess so!"... After which the journalists sped out and cabeled their interpretation of the situation: "The wall is open!". Which in fact was quite a dangerous situation then, cause East-Germans heard that and actually went to the west-german border (and West-Berlin as well). The Border-Control guards however were even less informed then my man Guenther :), with the difference, that they had the order to shoot in case of "Desertion of the Republic". But faced with hundreds of people, who were all talking about some new travel law, they just shrugged and opened the gates without being stupid (they after all, were mostly young men in 1 1/2 or 3 year military service/draft, who were normal people just like everybody else). In fact, for acting in such a way, a lot of people gave them flowers and champaigne later on in that wild night of celebration... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMunadDltEBIEF0MBAQHw5Af9FTchTTk9/G6Nq/StYwwLv3vt5hFmNUjn jyS5eDOM2rlh9107Awv4TwdGnV43RlJVKvNSnYUOg+dRiYhysewfyyJ4klmmsTBP x+9Cn81o1Jqeqp5aovP52YLgdCKUL9l7BOnvQsXzJIJRglj1KC/Hr+5kXWNsyI6l wN7WSnFPLJ0c+q5QXkkpQfWUj4LwOZItbh+I2Sy+kIdJuhVi66L45oCkJyHwfq2+ SgbuqaGabAGVakOMl53yffuhc6TXKcWcs30Vi2axwqXE//hlwO/NFg/OaoMUz+6i fJZmUtI33iCpsTtELPZzIqeP7DM13CaZ5u1r4URVWUOdXFDRs9Hytw== =YiP5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From harka at nycmetro.com Wed Jan 29 02:24:32 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 02:24:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In> harka at nycmetro.com writes: >does anybody know any contact points/Web pages, where I might get >some information on e-mail filtering via trigger-words? I am >interested in how this technology specifically works and a >acollection of trigger-words would be nice too :) Actually, I might not have chosen the correct words for what I wanted... I am looking for sniffer-programs, that analyze e-mail traffic on the Net and filtering out all e-mails potentially interesting for _intelligence services_. For example, I've heard, that if an e-mail contains the words: "assassinate President" (DISCLAIMER: I hope, our President lives a long and happy life, even after his impeachment...:)), it will automatically get filtered and checked out by the Secret Service. Different intelligence agencies might have similar things in place. Where could I get some more information about that? Thanks in advance... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMunaiDltEBIEF0MBAQHVFAf/TbYVKOSoH4G0GRaHcJJDREUbzkr4nczs Vi7EMagZci3FRx0atVAkMz4GNwBYCf5CJdnDTIR7tOADs1OamMIRhsGV00r3ZbCB dAWTKbjKcXHno+Eztmelk9P5F50ryP2B25mjWT2CJDTZqyml6Bhe5AW8K0lSDPfw AHCGPk701pXB62POXf2rwccQusOFAMaR4X/44xcOdamrWBsKJKaE1Sz/wvzvzxob 7t8Dh7x48oEgMQ68cQz2luZlZlIUzHV3x0npZNetYbEzRTKMEITXfKqzb0iG8pfD r1K13Jlr4Li93f59OKci5Rrz6eiCIvXlII9w4o2ejYJp8EPZdNsTKg== =Mh6f -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com Wed Jan 29 02:25:04 1997 From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com (Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 02:25:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: verisign_1.html Message-ID: <199701291026.FAA08091@linux.nycmetro.com> Reuters New Media [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Kodak Near Deal With Wang - Report Next Story: AT&T To Build Business Calling Base _________________________________________________________________ Tuesday January 28 9:52 AM EST VeriSign Commercializes New Encryption Standard SAN FRANCISCO - VeriSign, hoping to push some recent Internet encryption research into use, says it has begun commercializing several products based on new industry encryption standards. First it has taken the Secure Electronic Transactions (SET) standard developed last year by an industry group led by Visa and MasterCard and started online distribution of digital IDs based on SET to Visa customers. At a conference in San Francisco sponsored by RSA Data Security, VeriSign also demonstrated digital ID smart cards using a PC/SC standard to get access to Internet sites. In a partnership with Schlumberger, which also manufactures the smart cards, Litronic, which makes readers of smart cards, and Microsoft on whose Internet Explorer 3.0 browser the smart cards will work, VeriSign showed how the smart cards would be useful for providing secure access to restricted Internet sites, or for transactions on the Net. "We are starting to see the industry support this Visa- MasterCard initiative with a lot of product efforts," VeriSign Chief Executive Stratton Sclavos said about SET. Smart cards are credit card-shaped plastic cards that hold a microchip that endows them with computer intelligence and processing capabilities. As officials from VeriSign, Spyrus and others described here, an employee would use the smart card to get access from anywhere to a corporate network and have all the key personal information as if the computer was programmed for that person's use. Likewise, a consumer might use the smart card in many different sites to do Internet-based transactions from kiosks or ATMs and so on. Sclavos forecast that Internet transactions requiring security will gain consumer acceptance in 1998 or 1999. He said 1997 will be the year that security apparatus is installed or deployed by merchants, banks and other companies. Then once deployed, consumers will start using it about a year later. Security remains a key concern of consumers about electronic commerce and Internet transactions, he said. VeriSign also announced its so-called private label digital ID program in which it is making encryption products for large customer-oriented companies, like brokerage firms, to distribute to customers for access to online accounts. And it announced a new service for the Electronic Data Interchange market that allows EDI to take place over the Internet instead of proprietary networks. Mountain View, Calif-based VeriSign considers itself the leader in providing digital certification for Internet access and electronic commerce. It has issued digital IDs based on other encryption technology it developed to about 500,000 people and on 14,000 Web sites, it added. Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved _________________________________________________________________ ________________________ ___________ Help _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Kodak Near Deal With Wang - Report Next Story: AT&T To Build Business Calling Base _________________________________________________________________ [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Reuters Limited Questions or Comments From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 29 02:25:40 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 02:25:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701290603.AAA02837@smoke.suba.com> Message-ID: <32EF4257.2BBE@sk.sympatico.ca> snow wrote: > > Phill wrote: > > I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have > > "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of > > property you do. > > Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the > BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming > that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs > to the community IS theft. "All your private property, is target for your enemies." Jefferson Airplane From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Jan 29 03:22:59 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 03:22:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970129032232.0077eabc@mail.io.com> At 10:42 PM 1/28/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects >libelous or other defamatory speech. Defamation is not protected by the First Amendment; but the First Amendment limits the application of defamation law in many circumstances. For example, the First Amendment requires plaintiffs to prove "actual malice" if they are a public official, public figure, or a private person seeking punitive damages. So if you want to think of defamatory statements as those which are false and injurious to someone's reputation, yes, the First Amendment protects some of them. (By definition, defamation is outside the protection of the First Amendment, but I get the impression that you're not trying to use it as a term of art.) >This is hokem. The 1st most certainly does not protect lies in any form. The First Amendment protects some lies. As Justice Powell wrote for the majority in _Gertz v. Robert Welch_, 418 U.S. 323, 339 (1974): "Under the First Amendment, there is no such thing as a false idea. However pernicious an opinion may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of judges and juries, but on the competition of other ideas. But there is no constitutional value in false statements of fact. Neither the intentional lie nor the careless error materially advances society's interest in "uninhibited, robust, and wide-open" debate on public issues. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. at 270. They belong to that category of utterances which "are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality." Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568, 572 (1942). "Although the erroneous statement of fact is not worthy of constitutional protection, it is nevertheless inevitable in free debate. As James Madison pointed out in the Report on the Virginia Resolutions of 1798: "Some degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of every thing; and in no instance is this more true than in that of the press." 4 J. Elliot, Debates on the Federal Constitution of 1787, p. 571 (1876). And punishment of error runs the risk of inducing a cautious and restrictive exercise of the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of speech and press. Our decisions recognize that a rule of strict liability that compels a publisher or broadcaster to guarantee the accuracy of his factual assertions may lead to intolerable self-censorship. Allowing the media to avoid liability only by proving the truth of all injurious statements does not accord adequate protection to First Amendment liberties. As the Court stated in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, supra, at 279: 'Allowance of the defense of truth, with the burden of proving it on the defendant, does not mean that only false speech will be deterred.' "The First Amendment requires that we protect some falsehood in order to protect speech that matters." and Justice Brennan, in _NAACP v. Button_ 371 U.S. 415, 444 (1963): "For the Constitution protects expression and association without regard to the race, creed, or political or religious affiliation of the members of the group which invokes its shield, or to the truth, popularity, or social utility of the ideas and beliefs which are offered." So, yes, the First Amendment protects some lies. According to your hypothesis, the country should be collapsing around us any day now because of it. Last one out turn off the lights, ok? -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 29 03:43:42 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 03:43:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy Loses His Gold Star In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EF54AD.7C0A@sk.sympatico.ca> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > Why is a mere "I see" classified as cypherpunks-flames??? > > Stop picking on girls, Sandy. > It wasn't and I wasn't. It was and you did. Sorry, Sandy, but I'm going to have to take off the 'gold star' I put on your chart on Monday, and put on a 'red star'. Toto From mix at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Wed Jan 29 03:51:24 1997 From: mix at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (lead remailer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 03:51:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GAK] FBI at it again Message-ID: <199701291137.EAA10711@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> > Dr.Dimitri L"iposuction" Vegetable had his foreskin ripped off > last night by a vacuum cleaner. > > ,/ \, > ((__,-"""-,__)) > `--)~ ~(--` > .-'( )`-, Dr.Dimitri L"iposuction" Vegetable > `~~`d\ /b`~~` > | | > (6___6) > `---` I thought Dimitri was Jewish. From harka at nycmetro.com Wed Jan 29 04:25:01 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 04:25:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP Key Preview... Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, is there a way to preview the contents of a received public key, without adding it automatically to the public key ring? Thanks a lot in advance... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMunrbjltEBIEF0MBAQEisgf+OBS8Q06g3pNfKgntaKQdCkHyLXZWHjI7 hOnVeF47C0qgsFjEEymnrQMl4b1l2zcRgqUKTY8jXhmaY6yeGcoRXc5hgo1679MY l+7BTNKIy2YTnzjhFk5bOKXk6V9DDWfq4chhCE2dpEVdUgRPVTfkfbm5VEN+zmn8 gaXyIf/bYv5GEs2F/FPc1kTmySx/NT5CvbvQRHaQdfEDk+QatnRjRLSsprln8cnt vxqZO9a6lveygA/wECPdx1gnHBhrscUeaLHIXz4YVVaSMrkEHJfLWOrzQHg2CGwQ o5OcKmuY0FcvzfpS2Yo0/lA8+/Ez83yUAdeEeY+yF7p2XgrLaOiFnw== =o/jO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 29 05:00:08 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:00:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Call for Participants: The Financial Cryptography 1997 Workshopfor Senior Managers and IS Professionals Message-ID: CALL FOR PARTICIPANTS The Financial Cryptography 1997 (FC97) Workshop for Senior Managers and IS Professionals February 17-21, 1997 The InterIsland Hotel Anguilla, BWI Workshop Update: January 29, 1997 FC97 is sponsored by: The Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce Offshore Information Services e$ C2NET See Your Name Here! FC97 Workshop for Senior Managers and IS Professionals February 17-21, 1997 FC97 Conference and Exhibition, February 24-28, 1997 The Inter-Island Hotel Anguilla, BWI Workshop and Conference Reservations: The world's first intensive financial cryptography workshop for senior managers and IS professionals will be held Monday through Friday, February 17-21 1997, from 9:00am to 6:00pm, at the Inter-Island Hotel on the Carribbean island of Anguilla. This workshop will be the prelude to the world's first peer-reviewed financial cryptography conference and commercial exhibition, Financial Cryptography 1997 (FC97), which will be held the following week, February 24-28, 1997. The goals of the combined workshop, conference and exhibition are: -- to give senior managers and IS professionals a solid understanding of the fundamentals of strong cryptgraphy as applied to financial operations on public networks, -- to provide a peer-reviewed forum for important research in financial cryptography and the effects it will have on society, and, -- to showcase the newest products in financial cryptography. Workshop and Conference participants are encouraged to bring their families, though Workshop participants should expect to be busy the first week. :-). The Workshop Ian Goldberg, the Workshop chair, has picked an outstanding team of instructors in financial cryptography and internet financial system security to teach the courses in this workshop. The Workshop will consist of 40 hours of intensive instruction and lab time over 5 days. Each student will have their own internet workstation, and the lab will be open 24 hours. The SSL internet commerce server used in the workshop will be Stronghold, developed by C2NET, of Berkeley, California. For information on Stronghold, please see . Thanks to C2NET for their gracious donation of this outstanding software to the FC97 Workshop. Who Should Attend The Workshop is intended for senior IS managers and technical professionals who want to get completely up to speed on the design, development, and implementation of financial cryptography systems, the core technology of internet commerce. After the workshop, senior managers will have a hands-on understanding the strengths and liabilities of currently available financial cryptography and internet transaction security software and hardware, and thus be able to make better asset allocation decisions in this area of explosive technology growth. Senior technical professionals with strong IS experience will be able to implement those technologies and to pass on what they've learned to their clients and colleagues when they return home. The Workshop will be held in a casual but intensive atmosphere at the very cutting edge of financial technology on the internet. Someone has likened the experience to a financial cryptography bootcamp. At the end, Workshop attendees will be utterly conversant in cryptography as it applies to finance, and will be quite prepared for the technical papers in the FC97 conference the following week. Workshop participants will not only know what everyone else is doing now in internet commerce, but, more important, because they understand the implications of strong financial cryptography on ubiquitous public networks, they will be able to know what to do *next*. The Workshop Leader Ian Goldberg is a Ph.D. student in security and cryptography at the University of California, Berkeley. Just last night, he cracked RSA Data Security Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher in just under 3.5 hours. In late 1995, he discovered what became a much-publicized flaw in Netscape's implementation of SSL. He is a recognized expert in electronic payment systems, and in DigiCash's ecash digital bearer certificate protocol in particular. He has produced several ecash clients for Unix and Windows, as well as an ecash module for the Stronghold web server, which has extended the existing ecash system for better security, privacy, and ease-of-use. The Principal Instructors Gary Howland worked on digital cash systems for DigiCash, and then moved to Systemics, where he developed the SOX protocol, a flexible payments system currently in use in a bond trading environment, soon to be available to the public. He also developed the Cryptix and PGP libraries in Perl, and assisted on the Cryptix and PGP library implementations in Java. Adam Shostack is a security consultant based in the Boston area. He has extensive background in designing, implementing and testing secure systems for clients in the medical, computer, and financial industries. His recent public work includes 'Apparent Weaknesses in the Security Dynamics Client Server Protocol,' 'Source Code Review Guidelines,' and comparisons of freely available cryptographic libraries. His clients include Fidelity Investments and the Brigham and Women's Hospital, in Boston. Additional Instructors The Workshop will have student-to-instructor ratio of 5 to 1, not including the Workshop leader. The Workshop will have an initial enrollment of 10 students, and an additional instructor will be added for each 5 students up to a 25 student maximum enrollment. Workshop Topics The following is the complete list of topics that the workshop will cover: Security on the Internet Internet Protocols: IP, TCP, UDP Higher-level Protocols: Telnet, FTP, HTTP, SSL Solid Foundations for Cryptographic Systems A History of Internet Attacks Building Internet Firewalls Building a Bastion Host Turning your Bastion Host into a Web Server Non-internet Internet Security Cryptography The Need for Cryptography History of Cryptography Classical Methods Modern Methods Private and Public Key Cryptography Authentication vs. Security Certification and Public Key Infrastructures Cryptographic Protocols Engineering a Cryptographically Secure System Why Cryptography is Harder than it Looks Security Through Obscurity and How to Recognize Snake Oil Internet Payment Systems Payment models: coin-based, cheque-based, account-based Security Issues Privacy and Anonymity Issues Smartcards vs. Software Existing Payment Schemes Credit Cards First Virtual CyberCash DigiCash Forthcoming Payment Schemes SET Mondex Millicent micropayments Setting Up an ecash-Enabled Web Server Setting up the Web Server Signing up for ecash Installing the ecash Module Setting Prices Logging Advanced Methods ecashiers moneychangers The workshop has been covered by Wired Magazine, and FC97 was the featured conference in the January 1997 "Deductible Junkets" section. So, if you have already decided to come to the FC97 Workshop and Conference, please register and make your plane and hotel reservations as soon as possible. Workshop space is extremely limited. The price of the workshop is $5,000 U.S. You can pay for your FC97 workshop ticket with Visa or MasterCard, with ecash, or with any of a number of other internet commerce payment protocols, at the regstriation site: . The workshop price includes meals (but not lodging) at the InterIsland Hotel and lab space, plus the delivery and installation of hardware, network access, internet commerce software, all to a location like Anguilla. And, of course, 40 hours of instruction and structured lab activity. We have priced the workshop to be competitive with other comprehensive business and professional technology workshops of similar total session length. In addition, the first 10 FC97 workshop participants will receive a 50% reduction in their FC97 Conference and Exhibition fee, for a savings of $500 off the $1,000 conference admission. You can register, and pay for, your workshop ticket at: Air Transportation and Hotels Air travel to Anguilla is typically done through San Juan, St. Thomas or St. Maarten/Martin. There are several non-stop flights a day from various US and European locations. Connection through to Anguilla can be made through American Eagle, or through LIAT, or in the case of St. Maarten, with a short ferry ride to Anguilla. See your travel agent for details. Anguilla's runway is 3600 feet, with a displaced threshold of 600 feet, and can accomodate business jets. Obviously, you should talk to your aviation staff for details about your own aircraft's capabilities in this regard. Anguilla import duties are not imposed on hardware or software which will leave the island again, so, as long as you take it with you when you leave, you won't pay import duties. PLEASE NOTE: Your FC97 Workshop fee only covers *meals* at the InterIsland Hotel. The InterIsland is actually a small guesthouse attached to a large conference facility, and so rooms there are in short supply. Fortunately, there are lots of small hotels and guesthouses nearby. For more information on these hotels, please see for more information. Other hotels on Anguilla range from spartan to luxurious, all within easy walking or driving distance of the Workshop at the InterIsland. More information about Anguillan hotels can be obtained from your travel agent, or at . Registration and Information for Other FC97 Events To register and pay for your ticket to the FC97 conference itself, see: For information the selection of papers for the FC97 conference see: If you're interested in Exhibition space, please contact Julie Rackliffe: If you're interested in sponsoring FC97, also contact Julie Rackliffe: Financial Cryptography '97 is held in cooperation with the International Association for Cryptologic Research. The conference proceedings will be published on the web by the Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce. . The FC97 Organizing Committee: Vince Cate and Bob Hettinga, General Chairs Ray Hirschfeld, Conference Chair Ian Goldberg, Workshop Chair Julie Rackliffe, Conference, Exhibit, and Sponsorship Manager And our sponsors... The Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce Offshore Information Services e$ C2NET See Your Name Here ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Wed Jan 29 05:03:29 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:03:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: overview.htm (fwd) In-Reply-To: <32EEF0AC.BF1@gte.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > OKSAS wrote: > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > > > > > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > > > > Well, can you say you've been 'anywhere else'? > > > > Atlanta has some nice babes, warm weather. > > > Charleston. Much smaller than Atlanta. Very cozy. > > > Southern Germany. Very, very nice. Loved Berchtesgaden (sp?). > > > What about you? > > > I am not into girls...sorry. > > Too bad. They're cleaner, more polite, less aggressive, make far > better love than men. If only they were interested in real computing > (other than as a job or school work). Yes, what would i know... oksas From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 29 05:18:31 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:18:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: FC97: PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE PROGRAM Message-ID: Financial Cryptography '97 February 24-28 1997, Anguilla, BWI PRELIMINARY PROGRAM General Information: Financial Cryptography '97 (FC97) is a new conference on the security of digital financial transactions. The first meeting will be held on the island of Anguilla in the British West Indies on February 24-28, 1997. FC97 aims to bring together persons involved in both the financial and data security fields to foster cooperation and exchange of ideas. Original papers were solicited on all aspects of financial data security and digital commerce in general. Program Committee: Matthew Franklin, AT&T Laboratories--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA Michael Froomkin, U. Miami School of Law, Coral Gables, FL, USA Rafael Hirschfeld (Program Chair), CWI, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Arjen Lenstra, Citibank, New York, NY, USA Mark Manasse, Digital Equipment Corporation, Palo Alto, CA, USA Kevin McCurley, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA Charles Merrill, McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, USA Clifford Neuman, Information Sciences Institute, Marina del Rey, CA, USA Sholom Rosen, Citibank, New York, NY, USA Israel Sendrovic, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, New York, NY, USA Preliminary Conference Program for FC97: Monday 24 February 1997 830 -- 905 Anonymity Control in E-Cash Systems George Davida (University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA), Yair Frankel (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA), Yiannis Tsiounis (Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA), Moti Yung (CertCo, New York, NY, USA) 905 -- 940 How to Make Personalized Web Browsing Simple, Secure, and Anonymous Eran Gabber, Phil Gibbons, Yossi Matias, Alain Mayer (Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies) 940 -- 1015 An Anonymous Networking Infrastructure and Virtual Intranets Jim McCoy (Electric Communities, Cupertino, CA, USA) 1015 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 Unlinkable Serial Transactions Paul F. Syverson (Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, USA), Stuart G. Stubblebine (AT&T Labs--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA), David M. Goldschlag (Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, USA) 1120 -- 1155 Efficient Electronic Cash with Restricted Privacy Cristian Radu, Rene Govaerts, Joos Vandewalle (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium) 1155 -- 1230 The SPEED Cipher Yuliang Zheng (Monash University, Melbourne, Australia) Tuesday 25 February 1997 830 -- 930 Invited Speaker To Be Announced 930 -- 1005 Smart Cards and Superhighways The technology-driven denationalisation of money David G.W. Birch, Neil A. McEvoy (Hyperion, Surrey, England) 1005 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 Fault Induction Attacks, Tamper Resistance, and Hostile Reverse Engineering in Perspective David P. Maher (AT&T Labs--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA) 1120 -- 1155 Some Critical Remarks on "Dynamic Data Authentication" as specified in EMV '96 Louis C. Guillou (CCETT, Cesson-Sevigne, France) 1155 -- 1230 Single-chip implementation of a cryptosystem for financial applications Nikolaus Lange (SICAN Braunschweig GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany) Wednesday 26 February 1997 830 -- 930 Invited Speaker Ronald Rivest (MIT Lab for Computer Science, Cambridge, MA, USA) 930 -- 1005 Cyberbanking and Privacy: The Contracts Model Peter P. Swire (Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA) 1005 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 SVP: a Flexible Micropayment Scheme Jacques Stern, Serge Vaudenay (Ecole Normale Superieure, Paris, France) 1120 -- 1155 An efficient micropayment system based on probabilistic polling Stanislaw Jarecki (MIT Lab for Computer Science, Cambridge, MA, USA), Andrew Odlyzko (AT&T Labs--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA) 1155 -- 1230 On the continuum between on-line and off-line e-cash systems - I Yacov Yacobi (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) Thursday 27 February 1997 830 -- 905 Auditable Metering with Lightweight Security Matthew K. Franklin, Dahlia Malkhi (AT&T Labs--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA) 905 -- 940 Applying Anti-Trust Policies to Increase Trust in a Versatile E-Money System Markus Jakobsson (UCSD, La Jolla, CA, USA), Moti Yung (BTEC/CertCo, New York, NY, USA) 940 -- 1015 Towards Multiple-payment Schemes for Digital Money H. Pagnia, R. Jansen (University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany) 1015 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 Legal Issues in Cryptography Edward J. Radlo (Fenwick & West LLP, Palo Alto, CA, USA) 1120 -- 1230 Panel Discussion Legal Issues of Digital Signatures Michael Froomkin (University of Miami School of Law, Miami, FL, USA), Charles Merrill (McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, USA), Benjamin Wright (Dallas, TX, USA) Friday 28 February 1997 830 -- 930 Invited Speaker To Be Announced 930 -- 1005 The Gateway Security Model in the Java Electronic Commerce Framework Theodore Goldstein (Sun Microsystems Laboratories/Javasoft) 1005 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 Highly Scalable On-line Payments Via Task Decoupling David William Kravitz (CertCo LLC, Albuquerque, NM, USA) 1120 -- 1155 GUMP; Grand Unified Meta-Protocols Recipes for Simple, Standards-based Financial Cryptography Barbara Fox, Brian Beckman (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) 1155 -- 1230 Secure Network Communications and Secure Store & Forward Mechanisms with SAP R/3 Bernhard Esslinger (SAP AG, Walldorf, Germany) The conference will run from 8:30 AM to 12:30 PM, for five days, February 24-28 1997. Breakfast provided at the conference. The conference organizers have left the afternoon and evenings open for corporate sponsored events, for networking, and for recreational activities on the resort island of Anguilla. Participants are encouraged to bring their families. Workshop: A 40-hour workshop, intended for anyone with commercial software development experience who wants hands-on familiarity with the issues and technology of financial cryptography, is planned in conjunction with FC97, to be held during the week preceding the conference. For more information on the workshop, please see the URL http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~iang/fc97/workshop.html . For workshop registration, see the URL http://www.offshore.com.ai/fc97/ . Venue: The InterIsland Hotel is a small 14-room guesthouse and a large, comfortable 150 seat conference facility with additional space for a small 10-booth exhibition. The Inter-Island is on Road Bay, near Sandy Ground Village, in the South Hill section of Anguilla. The conference, workshop, and exhibition will have TCP/IP internet access. The rooms at the InterIsland itself have sold out, but there are many other hotels and guesthouses on Anguilla, and shuttle service to the conference will be available. Air Transportation and Hotels: Air travel to Anguilla is typically done through either San Juan or St. Thomas for US flights, or St. Maarten/Martin for flights from Europe and the US. Anguillan import duties are not imposed on hardware or software which will leave the island again. There are no other taxes -- or cryptography import/export restrictions -- on Anguilla. Hotels range from spartan to luxurious, and more information about hotels on Anquilla can be obtained from your travel agent, or at the URL http://www.offshore.com.ai/fc97/ . General Chairs: Robert Hettinga, Shipwright/e$, Boston, MA, USA; rah at shipwright.com Vincent Cate, Offshore Information Services, Anguilla, BWI; vince at offshore.com.ai Conference, Exhibits, and Sponsorship Manager: Julie Rackliffe, Boston, MA, USA; rackliffe at tcm.org Workshop Leader: Ian Goldberg, Berkeley, CA, USA; iang at cs.berkeley.edu Registration: You can register and pay for conference admission on the World Wide Web at the URL http://www.offshore.com.ai/fc97/ . The cost of the FC97 Conference is US$1,000. Booths for the exhibition start at US$5,000 and include two conference tickets. For more information about exhibit space, contact Julie Rackliffe, rackliffe at tcm.org . Sponsorship opportunities for FC97 are still available. The cost of the workshop is US$5000, and includes meals but not lodging. You can register for the workshop, which runs the week prior to the conference, at the URL Financial Cryptography '97 is held in cooperation with the International Association for Cryptologic Research. It is sponsored by: The Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce Offshore Information Services e$ C2NET See Your Name Here ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Jan 29 05:42:03 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:42:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... In-Reply-To: <199701290126.RAA11363@toad.com> Message-ID: <0mvpAZ200YUd02MHY0@andrew.cmu.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Robert Hettinga writes: > --- begin forwarded text > > > Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com > Reply-To: Russell Stuart > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Precedence: Bulk > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:07:27 +1000 > From: Russell Stuart > However, the doubleclick.net ads appear to bear no relationship to the > keywords being searched, and they appear not only in the URL for the > hyperlink to follow, but also in the IMG SRC URL. This means that in > order > to avoid disclosing my keyword lists to doubleclick.net, I have to > disable > automatic loading of inline images when using AltaVista! Actually, the ads *do* relate to the keywords. Try doing a search for "flowers" and a search for "sex." http://www.anonymizer.com/ Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMu9TH8kz/YzIV3P5AQEL8AL/Tj6fj0hRMYZVK1ppuh/DSxtB89urgSDy DDmA6ycn0DmmUg1TL7w8k2vkN/srUfvddA6pu3vZGU8Pa3unA4LSAe3ipCygzuGK d1s0BW+Cy15HDjdTdFe9I0tYfjdNQo2B =26sJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jan 29 05:42:47 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:42:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: COO_kin Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970129133722.006c9ca4@pop.pipeline.com> 1-29-97. NYP: GAK-czar cooks key hooks. FBI cooks lab books. ----- COO_kin From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Jan 29 05:52:30 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 05:52:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <199701290257.SAA14988@toad.com> Message-ID: <0mvpLz200YUd02MKw0@andrew.cmu.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Matthew Toth writes: > MIT is one the best schools in the country for C.S. > Close behind is Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh, > PA. (the folks who put out CERT.) Not sure how much Crypto they do, though. I think there's one class on crypto (explicitly), but there's some talent here. One who was interested could get an independant study or a research job without too much trouble. After all, MIT isn't the only place that writes kerberos, AFS, and the like. (In case you're wondering, the "A" in AFS stands for "Andrew," of Andrew Carnegie.) Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMu9V+skz/YzIV3P5AQH/XgL/VFA/4M1XTD8xl86Y6GrtU46YGpmGnhn6 lDKSA/xaxAzUToPTXQdyNqY5xg5CpfwYraVEiyLIvWKsIvOWtJgG3cZzF+xqlx39 sgbM0L6aMXrXkGqLdosZMjrr9Rqc6KE5 =FTU1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From smb at research.att.com Wed Jan 29 06:15:12 1997 From: smb at research.att.com (Steven Bellovin) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:15:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701291411.JAA01361@raptor.research.att.com> It is dangerously naive to label this success the ``last nail for US crypto export policy''. Everyone concerned with this issue, from the NSA to the FBI to anyone who wants to use crypto, understands this and accepts it. 40-bit keys are good for protection against casual snooping, and nothing more -- and no one is going to claim that you need supercomputers to crack them. In fact, I assert that the U.S. government is *happy* about these results -- because it's going to push folks towards wanting stronger crypto for export. The only problem, of course, is the terms under which such code can be exported... I'll go further -- in my opinion, the only reason the government doesn't want DES to fall just yet is that alternatives aren't ready. That is, the banks and financial institutions, and for that matter the government agencies, have not converted to 3DES or Clipper or what have you, and can't do so on short notice; the commercial products they need just aren't ready yet. No one wants to risk a loss of confidence in the financial system. Two years from now, though, when some key escrow products are ready, it may be a different story. From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Wed Jan 29 06:53:42 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:53:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) In-Reply-To: <199701290258.SAA15049@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701291453.JAA05208@wauug.erols.com> Phil Karn sez: > > This seems clear enough. If it's printed on paper, it's kosher for > export. But if we're really overt about it, we may goad the government > into attempting to control printed source code as well. That could > prove most interesting. I wonder where the ADA-approved Large Print for the vision-impaired edition falls. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 29 06:55:56 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:55:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... Message-ID: <199701291455.GAA03313@toad.com> Yes, I mentioned that here and in comp.org.eff.talk a couple weeks ago. No need to turn images off. Just tell AltaVista you want text-only: http://altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/query?pg=&text=yes You may also find the text-only page a hell of a lot faster. -rich From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 29 06:55:59 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:55:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701291455.GAA03319@toad.com> snow wrote: > > Phill wrote: > > I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have > > "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of > > property you do. > > Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the > BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming > that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs > to the community IS theft. "All your private property, is target for your enemies." Jefferson Airplane From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 29 06:56:35 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:56:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible Message-ID: <199701291456.GAA03369@toad.com> ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > can any kind soul tell me, what are the SAT scores needed to be in > the top 10%, top 1%, and top 0.1% of all the students who take these > tests? I'm not sure what this has to do with, well, anything, but here goes. Scores from before April 1995 are not comparable to scores today because the method of scoring has changed to recenter the distribution. The 99th percentile starts at 1440 for women and 1490 for men. Full stats at http://www.collegeboard.org/sat/html/topsrs29.html Please note that this is for "college-bound seniors." It's not a stat that applies to the general population (i.e., 1490+ is the top 1% of the elite 30% or so that go to college), and it doesn't include people who were satisfied with the score they got the beginning of their junior year, and didn't take it again (i.e., me). I don't know about MIT, but I'd think that their numbers would be even higher than those for Stanford, because MIT doesn't recruit football players. Some of Stanford's numbers are at http://www-portfolio.stanford.edu/105549 MIT and the like aren't impossible. Fucking elitist, yes. Worth it? Probably, though two of my closest and most intelligent friends have no college degrees at all. Of course, they had to earn people's respect, whereas I had people recruiting me based largely on the fact that I still had a pulse five years after taking the SAT. What counts is what people want you to do five years after that. -rich From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 29 06:56:36 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:56:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701291456.GAA03370@toad.com> Hallam-Baker wrote: > > One point I had forgotten. The demonstration took place > on the 50th anniversary of Kristallnacht. This is one explanation > as to why the border guards did not attempt to open fire with > firearms or attempt to break up the demonstration with tear gas. I think the timing was a coincidence. (And I'm told that Kristallnacht wasn't well advertised in East Germany; especially after the Soviets sided the United Arab Republic, the official story was that Hitler had been exterminating good Communists, not Jews.) While the final week was pretty spectacular, the demonstrations and defections had been building for months, as you say: > The mass defections were taking place at their peak at a rate of > tens of thousands in a day. Something like a quarter of the youth > between 18 and 25 had defected. Bill if anything understates this > point. I wasn't there, but an East German friend of mine was 20 when the wall came down. He was doing his compulsory military service at the time. Even in early 1987, as he was being interviewed by the Stasi concerning the direction the state would allow him to take his life, he says he felt no real fear telling them, up front, "Sure, I'll carry a gun, and I'll go where you tell me to go, but I will not hurt anyone." They gave him a gun and put him on the front, where he waved to his friends as they walked across the border. I think a lot of the border guards were like Thomas. > I think that the spending into bankrupcy thesis might be argued for > the case of the USSR and more plausibly the US. The problem is that > I don't think that the military spending in either case bore any > relation to need, to the threat from the other side or to any > rational determination. I think both budgets simply increased to > the limit that the economies could support and beyond. > > There is a similar problem in the third world today. Many third world > countries spend more on arms than they do on health or education. > Much of the alledged "foreign aid" is in fact subsidies for this > trade. The arms are primarily to suppress internal dissent. There > are plenty of governments left in need of similar reform. Yeah, yeah. Economics has soomething to do with it. But I think it comes down to "Sure, I'll carry a gun, and I'll go where you tell me to go, but I will not hurt anyone." Ideas matter. -rich From kent at songbird.com Wed Jan 29 06:56:37 1997 From: kent at songbird.com (Kent Crispin) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:56:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701291456.GAA03371@toad.com> snow allegedly said: > > Phill wrote: > > I'm a philosophical anarchist and I don't consider the state to have > > "rights" over its "subjects", nor do I believe in the pure ideology of > > property you do. > > > > Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the > > BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming > that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs > to the community IS theft. He was making a slightly more subtle point, I believe, though fallacious just the same. It is clear that "ownership" or "property rights" are constructs of society. That is, property rights are rights conferred on the individual by the society. For example, if society determines that you don't own your house, then you don't own it. Contrariwise, if you are alone on a desert island you "own" whatever you say you own, since at that point you are a society of one -- you want the Milky Way -- it's yours -- you just grant yourself full rights and title to it. So the origin of property isn't theft, and it isn't labor -- it's whatever society says it is. Of course, "society" is not a monolith, and it may be at odds with itself. > I work, and as the result of that work something is > created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that > work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those > shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved. Possession of objects like shoes is of no consequence -- they aren't the kind of propert that is at issue. Land is the fundamental property item. Arguably every piece of land in the world has been stolen from someone at one time or another. > > controllers of China literally so since they stole most of their "property" > > from the previous rulers. > > They "won" it in combat. Therefore, if I beat you over the head with a crowbar and take your shoes, it is not theft, but merely the spoils of war. That's convenient for those with big crowbars. > The people of china obviously prefered new > government to the old one, or they would have prevented the takeover. What a crock. Obviously, by your reasoning, every murder victim must secretly have preferred death, otherwise they would have prevented it. > > I believe that the relationship between a state and individual is > > a much more complex one than the slavish subjection model > > you propose. In this I am in agreement with practically every > > philosopher since Locke. > > Practically every philosopher since Locke has recieved their education > at a Government or "Elite" sponsored school, and made their livings the same > way. I'm not claiming conspiracy here, but those that feed at the trough > aren't going to insult it overmuch. Like you, for example? You are feeding at the trough of society just as much as anyone else. You wouldn't be on the net, otherwise. But I agree, citing "every philosopher since Locke" is bogus. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent at songbird.com,kc at llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F From Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com Wed Jan 29 06:56:39 1997 From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com (Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:56:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: verisign_1.html Message-ID: <199701291456.GAA03372@toad.com> Reuters New Media [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Kodak Near Deal With Wang - Report Next Story: AT&T To Build Business Calling Base _________________________________________________________________ Tuesday January 28 9:52 AM EST VeriSign Commercializes New Encryption Standard SAN FRANCISCO - VeriSign, hoping to push some recent Internet encryption research into use, says it has begun commercializing several products based on new industry encryption standards. First it has taken the Secure Electronic Transactions (SET) standard developed last year by an industry group led by Visa and MasterCard and started online distribution of digital IDs based on SET to Visa customers. At a conference in San Francisco sponsored by RSA Data Security, VeriSign also demonstrated digital ID smart cards using a PC/SC standard to get access to Internet sites. In a partnership with Schlumberger, which also manufactures the smart cards, Litronic, which makes readers of smart cards, and Microsoft on whose Internet Explorer 3.0 browser the smart cards will work, VeriSign showed how the smart cards would be useful for providing secure access to restricted Internet sites, or for transactions on the Net. "We are starting to see the industry support this Visa- MasterCard initiative with a lot of product efforts," VeriSign Chief Executive Stratton Sclavos said about SET. Smart cards are credit card-shaped plastic cards that hold a microchip that endows them with computer intelligence and processing capabilities. As officials from VeriSign, Spyrus and others described here, an employee would use the smart card to get access from anywhere to a corporate network and have all the key personal information as if the computer was programmed for that person's use. Likewise, a consumer might use the smart card in many different sites to do Internet-based transactions from kiosks or ATMs and so on. Sclavos forecast that Internet transactions requiring security will gain consumer acceptance in 1998 or 1999. He said 1997 will be the year that security apparatus is installed or deployed by merchants, banks and other companies. Then once deployed, consumers will start using it about a year later. Security remains a key concern of consumers about electronic commerce and Internet transactions, he said. VeriSign also announced its so-called private label digital ID program in which it is making encryption products for large customer-oriented companies, like brokerage firms, to distribute to customers for access to online accounts. And it announced a new service for the Electronic Data Interchange market that allows EDI to take place over the Internet instead of proprietary networks. Mountain View, Calif-based VeriSign considers itself the leader in providing digital certification for Internet access and electronic commerce. It has issued digital IDs based on other encryption technology it developed to about 500,000 people and on 14,000 Web sites, it added. Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved _________________________________________________________________ ________________________ ___________ Help _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Kodak Near Deal With Wang - Report Next Story: AT&T To Build Business Calling Base _________________________________________________________________ [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Reuters Limited Questions or Comments From rcgraves at disposable.com Wed Jan 29 06:57:48 1997 From: rcgraves at disposable.com (Rich Graves) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:57:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701291457.GAA03377@toad.com> Declan McCullagh wrote: > > Let me plug Carnegie Mellon University, which consistently ties with > MIT and one of them California schools for first place in computer > science. You must be joking. After all you've said about the school, you're recommending it? Isn't "Mr. L-18 Tag" the head of the department now? Anyway, our correspondent is asking the wrong question. There is no "best" school. If you want to be a brilliant programmer, I think you have to be born that way. If you want theory, you need to be specific about your research interests. If you want mass-marketable experience in Windoze, avoid the big-name schools, which tend to treat Windows with the respect is deserves. (At Stanford, despite having a very nice Paul Allen Center for Integrated Systems and a posh new Bill Gates Information Sciences building, all instruction is done in Think C or UNIX.) -rich From harka at nycmetro.com Wed Jan 29 06:58:16 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:58:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... Message-ID: <199701291458.GAA03382@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In> harka at nycmetro.com writes: >does anybody know any contact points/Web pages, where I might get >some information on e-mail filtering via trigger-words? I am >interested in how this technology specifically works and a >acollection of trigger-words would be nice too :) Actually, I might not have chosen the correct words for what I wanted... I am looking for sniffer-programs, that analyze e-mail traffic on the Net and filtering out all e-mails potentially interesting for _intelligence services_. For example, I've heard, that if an e-mail contains the words: "assassinate President" (DISCLAIMER: I hope, our President lives a long and happy life, even after his impeachment...:)), it will automatically get filtered and checked out by the Secret Service. Different intelligence agencies might have similar things in place. Where could I get some more information about that? Thanks in advance... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMunaiDltEBIEF0MBAQHVFAf/TbYVKOSoH4G0GRaHcJJDREUbzkr4nczs Vi7EMagZci3FRx0atVAkMz4GNwBYCf5CJdnDTIR7tOADs1OamMIRhsGV00r3ZbCB dAWTKbjKcXHno+Eztmelk9P5F50ryP2B25mjWT2CJDTZqyml6Bhe5AW8K0lSDPfw AHCGPk701pXB62POXf2rwccQusOFAMaR4X/44xcOdamrWBsKJKaE1Sz/wvzvzxob 7t8Dh7x48oEgMQ68cQz2luZlZlIUzHV3x0npZNetYbEzRTKMEITXfKqzb0iG8pfD r1K13Jlr4Li93f59OKci5Rrz6eiCIvXlII9w4o2ejYJp8EPZdNsTKg== =Mh6f -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From harka at nycmetro.com Wed Jan 29 06:58:17 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:58:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercen Message-ID: <199701291458.GAA03383@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- -=> Quoting In:dthorn at gte.net to Harka <=- > The Cold War was not won by the arms race, it was won in > Eastern Europe which was never a major participant. The main > instrument that won it was West German TV which broadcast > pictures of supermarkets with full shelves into the homes > of East Germans every night. The viewers could see that it > was not mere propaganda and their relatives confirmed the > fact. As a result the East German guards on the Berlin wall > simply decided to leave their posts one night. In> That's it? The system collapsed because the guards left their posts? In> And no mutiny charges? Incredible. Actually not quite right. On November 9th, 1989 the East-German government established a new law (under pressure from the demonstrating public), that would allow every East-German to go _up to_ 30 days/per year to a western country. Visas to do so would be given out without problems, effective immediately. At the evening press-conference however, the government speaker Guenther Schabowskie (can't recall his exact position at that time) introduced that new law and then he made the BIG error: after hearing the new provisions of the new travel law, a foreign journalist stood up and asked him "Does _that_ mean, that every East-german citizen could right now go to the western border and gain free entry to West-Germany (or West-Berlin) without problems?" And my man Guenther was looking desperately in all his papers (funny as hell! :)) and then, after finding no pre-made answer, he said: "Yeah, I guess so!"... After which the journalists sped out and cabeled their interpretation of the situation: "The wall is open!". Which in fact was quite a dangerous situation then, cause East-Germans heard that and actually went to the west-german border (and West-Berlin as well). The Border-Control guards however were even less informed then my man Guenther :), with the difference, that they had the order to shoot in case of "Desertion of the Republic". But faced with hundreds of people, who were all talking about some new travel law, they just shrugged and opened the gates without being stupid (they after all, were mostly young men in 1 1/2 or 3 year military service/draft, who were normal people just like everybody else). In fact, for acting in such a way, a lot of people gave them flowers and champaigne later on in that wild night of celebration... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMunadDltEBIEF0MBAQHw5Af9FTchTTk9/G6Nq/StYwwLv3vt5hFmNUjn jyS5eDOM2rlh9107Awv4TwdGnV43RlJVKvNSnYUOg+dRiYhysewfyyJ4klmmsTBP x+9Cn81o1Jqeqp5aovP52YLgdCKUL9l7BOnvQsXzJIJRglj1KC/Hr+5kXWNsyI6l wN7WSnFPLJ0c+q5QXkkpQfWUj4LwOZItbh+I2Sy+kIdJuhVi66L45oCkJyHwfq2+ SgbuqaGabAGVakOMl53yffuhc6TXKcWcs30Vi2axwqXE//hlwO/NFg/OaoMUz+6i fJZmUtI33iCpsTtELPZzIqeP7DM13CaZ5u1r4URVWUOdXFDRs9Hytw== =YiP5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Jan 29 06:58:19 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 06:58:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701291458.GAA03384@toad.com> At 10:42 PM 1/28/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: >It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects >libelous or other defamatory speech. Defamation is not protected by the First Amendment; but the First Amendment limits the application of defamation law in many circumstances. For example, the First Amendment requires plaintiffs to prove "actual malice" if they are a public official, public figure, or a private person seeking punitive damages. So if you want to think of defamatory statements as those which are false and injurious to someone's reputation, yes, the First Amendment protects some of them. (By definition, defamation is outside the protection of the First Amendment, but I get the impression that you're not trying to use it as a term of art.) >This is hokem. The 1st most certainly does not protect lies in any form. The First Amendment protects some lies. As Justice Powell wrote for the majority in _Gertz v. Robert Welch_, 418 U.S. 323, 339 (1974): "Under the First Amendment, there is no such thing as a false idea. However pernicious an opinion may seem, we depend for its correction not on the conscience of judges and juries, but on the competition of other ideas. But there is no constitutional value in false statements of fact. Neither the intentional lie nor the careless error materially advances society's interest in "uninhibited, robust, and wide-open" debate on public issues. New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. at 270. They belong to that category of utterances which "are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality." Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568, 572 (1942). "Although the erroneous statement of fact is not worthy of constitutional protection, it is nevertheless inevitable in free debate. As James Madison pointed out in the Report on the Virginia Resolutions of 1798: "Some degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of every thing; and in no instance is this more true than in that of the press." 4 J. Elliot, Debates on the Federal Constitution of 1787, p. 571 (1876). And punishment of error runs the risk of inducing a cautious and restrictive exercise of the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of speech and press. Our decisions recognize that a rule of strict liability that compels a publisher or broadcaster to guarantee the accuracy of his factual assertions may lead to intolerable self-censorship. Allowing the media to avoid liability only by proving the truth of all injurious statements does not accord adequate protection to First Amendment liberties. As the Court stated in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan, supra, at 279: 'Allowance of the defense of truth, with the burden of proving it on the defendant, does not mean that only false speech will be deterred.' "The First Amendment requires that we protect some falsehood in order to protect speech that matters." and Justice Brennan, in _NAACP v. Button_ 371 U.S. 415, 444 (1963): "For the Constitution protects expression and association without regard to the race, creed, or political or religious affiliation of the members of the group which invokes its shield, or to the truth, popularity, or social utility of the ideas and beliefs which are offered." So, yes, the First Amendment protects some lies. According to your hypothesis, the country should be collapsing around us any day now because of it. Last one out turn off the lights, ok? -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From jya at pipeline.com Wed Jan 29 07:10:42 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:10:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: COO_kin Message-ID: <199701291510.HAA03568@toad.com> 1-29-97. NYP: GAK-czar cooks key hooks. FBI cooks lab books. ----- COO_kin From mrosen at peganet.com Wed Jan 29 07:10:50 1997 From: mrosen at peganet.com (Mark Rosen) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:10:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: More Circumventing the ITAR Message-ID: <199701291510.HAA03591@toad.com> I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for download at the web page below. On my web page, I have some stuff in bold print that informs about the ITAR and tells people to go away if they're not from the US or Canada. Does this count as an unrestricted FTP site? It's not all that much different from what MIT has up for PGP. Also, back to the question of registration numbers. A registration number is just a string of letters and numbers, and is essentially the same as a friendly letter; it contains no cryptographic code. For all anyone knows, I could just be charging for pseudo-random numbers, again, nothing of cryptographic significance. Is it illegal for me to mail someone outside of the US or Canada a registration code? Thanks for any help. Mark Rosen FireSoft - http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/2690 Mark Eats AOL - http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/6660 From wb8foz at wauug.erols.com Wed Jan 29 07:10:59 1997 From: wb8foz at wauug.erols.com (David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:10:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: <199701291510.HAA03613@toad.com> Phil Karn sez: > > This seems clear enough. If it's printed on paper, it's kosher for > export. But if we're really overt about it, we may goad the government > into attempting to control printed source code as well. That could > prove most interesting. I wonder where the ADA-approved Large Print for the vision-impaired edition falls. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz at nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433 From shamrock at netcom.com Wed Jan 29 07:11:14 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:11:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Message-ID: <199701291511.HAA03669@toad.com> At 07:10 PM 1/28/97 -0800, stewarts at ix.netcom.com wrote: >At 08:31 PM 1/27/97 -0800, Phil Karn wrote: >>And lacking that, the author can always print it out on paper and >>physically mail it out of the country; this is specifically allowed by >>the new Commerce rules as I understand them. And who's to say that the >>overseas FTP copies weren't scanned from such a paper copy? :-) > >At least one PGP site overseas did that - some German university >scanned in a copy of the MIT Press publication of PGP source. >The PGP 3.0 Pre-Alpha code is now available, on paper, from PGP Inc. Do you have an URL to the scanned source? -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 29 07:11:22 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (stewarts at ix.netcom.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:11:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Message-ID: <199701291511.HAA03680@toad.com> At 08:31 PM 1/27/97 -0800, Phil Karn wrote: >And lacking that, the author can always print it out on paper and >physically mail it out of the country; this is specifically allowed by >the new Commerce rules as I understand them. And who's to say that the >overseas FTP copies weren't scanned from such a paper copy? :-) At least one PGP site overseas did that - some German university scanned in a copy of the MIT Press publication of PGP source. The PGP 3.0 Pre-Alpha code is now available, on paper, from PGP Inc. Selling copies of PGP overseas, even if exported this way, might count as "providing a defense service", if that's still illegal now that crypto export laws have been moved to Commerce Dept. On the other hand, indemnifying people against copyright suits from your company _doesn't_ sound like it.... :-) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From harka at nycmetro.com Wed Jan 29 07:11:29 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:11:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP Key Preview... Message-ID: <199701291511.HAA03682@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, is there a way to preview the contents of a received public key, without adding it automatically to the public key ring? Thanks a lot in advance... Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMunrbjltEBIEF0MBAQEisgf+OBS8Q06g3pNfKgntaKQdCkHyLXZWHjI7 hOnVeF47C0qgsFjEEymnrQMl4b1l2zcRgqUKTY8jXhmaY6yeGcoRXc5hgo1679MY l+7BTNKIy2YTnzjhFk5bOKXk6V9DDWfq4chhCE2dpEVdUgRPVTfkfbm5VEN+zmn8 gaXyIf/bYv5GEs2F/FPc1kTmySx/NT5CvbvQRHaQdfEDk+QatnRjRLSsprln8cnt vxqZO9a6lveygA/wECPdx1gnHBhrscUeaLHIXz4YVVaSMrkEHJfLWOrzQHg2CGwQ o5OcKmuY0FcvzfpS2Yo0/lA8+/Ez83yUAdeEeY+yF7p2XgrLaOiFnw== =o/jO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From smb at research.att.com Wed Jan 29 07:11:31 1997 From: smb at research.att.com (Steven Bellovin) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:11:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701291511.HAA03683@toad.com> It is dangerously naive to label this success the ``last nail for US crypto export policy''. Everyone concerned with this issue, from the NSA to the FBI to anyone who wants to use crypto, understands this and accepts it. 40-bit keys are good for protection against casual snooping, and nothing more -- and no one is going to claim that you need supercomputers to crack them. In fact, I assert that the U.S. government is *happy* about these results -- because it's going to push folks towards wanting stronger crypto for export. The only problem, of course, is the terms under which such code can be exported... I'll go further -- in my opinion, the only reason the government doesn't want DES to fall just yet is that alternatives aren't ready. That is, the banks and financial institutions, and for that matter the government agencies, have not converted to 3DES or Clipper or what have you, and can't do so on short notice; the commercial products they need just aren't ready yet. No one wants to risk a loss of confidence in the financial system. Two years from now, though, when some key escrow products are ready, it may be a different story. From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 29 07:11:34 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:11:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: FC97: PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE PROGRAM Message-ID: <199701291511.HAA03684@toad.com> Financial Cryptography '97 February 24-28 1997, Anguilla, BWI PRELIMINARY PROGRAM General Information: Financial Cryptography '97 (FC97) is a new conference on the security of digital financial transactions. The first meeting will be held on the island of Anguilla in the British West Indies on February 24-28, 1997. FC97 aims to bring together persons involved in both the financial and data security fields to foster cooperation and exchange of ideas. Original papers were solicited on all aspects of financial data security and digital commerce in general. Program Committee: Matthew Franklin, AT&T Laboratories--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA Michael Froomkin, U. Miami School of Law, Coral Gables, FL, USA Rafael Hirschfeld (Program Chair), CWI, Amsterdam, The Netherlands Arjen Lenstra, Citibank, New York, NY, USA Mark Manasse, Digital Equipment Corporation, Palo Alto, CA, USA Kevin McCurley, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA Charles Merrill, McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, USA Clifford Neuman, Information Sciences Institute, Marina del Rey, CA, USA Sholom Rosen, Citibank, New York, NY, USA Israel Sendrovic, Federal Reserve Bank of New York, New York, NY, USA Preliminary Conference Program for FC97: Monday 24 February 1997 830 -- 905 Anonymity Control in E-Cash Systems George Davida (University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA), Yair Frankel (Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM, USA), Yiannis Tsiounis (Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA), Moti Yung (CertCo, New York, NY, USA) 905 -- 940 How to Make Personalized Web Browsing Simple, Secure, and Anonymous Eran Gabber, Phil Gibbons, Yossi Matias, Alain Mayer (Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies) 940 -- 1015 An Anonymous Networking Infrastructure and Virtual Intranets Jim McCoy (Electric Communities, Cupertino, CA, USA) 1015 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 Unlinkable Serial Transactions Paul F. Syverson (Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, USA), Stuart G. Stubblebine (AT&T Labs--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA), David M. Goldschlag (Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, DC, USA) 1120 -- 1155 Efficient Electronic Cash with Restricted Privacy Cristian Radu, Rene Govaerts, Joos Vandewalle (Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium) 1155 -- 1230 The SPEED Cipher Yuliang Zheng (Monash University, Melbourne, Australia) Tuesday 25 February 1997 830 -- 930 Invited Speaker To Be Announced 930 -- 1005 Smart Cards and Superhighways The technology-driven denationalisation of money David G.W. Birch, Neil A. McEvoy (Hyperion, Surrey, England) 1005 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 Fault Induction Attacks, Tamper Resistance, and Hostile Reverse Engineering in Perspective David P. Maher (AT&T Labs--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA) 1120 -- 1155 Some Critical Remarks on "Dynamic Data Authentication" as specified in EMV '96 Louis C. Guillou (CCETT, Cesson-Sevigne, France) 1155 -- 1230 Single-chip implementation of a cryptosystem for financial applications Nikolaus Lange (SICAN Braunschweig GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany) Wednesday 26 February 1997 830 -- 930 Invited Speaker Ronald Rivest (MIT Lab for Computer Science, Cambridge, MA, USA) 930 -- 1005 Cyberbanking and Privacy: The Contracts Model Peter P. Swire (Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA) 1005 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 SVP: a Flexible Micropayment Scheme Jacques Stern, Serge Vaudenay (Ecole Normale Superieure, Paris, France) 1120 -- 1155 An efficient micropayment system based on probabilistic polling Stanislaw Jarecki (MIT Lab for Computer Science, Cambridge, MA, USA), Andrew Odlyzko (AT&T Labs--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA) 1155 -- 1230 On the continuum between on-line and off-line e-cash systems - I Yacov Yacobi (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) Thursday 27 February 1997 830 -- 905 Auditable Metering with Lightweight Security Matthew K. Franklin, Dahlia Malkhi (AT&T Labs--Research, Murray Hill, NJ, USA) 905 -- 940 Applying Anti-Trust Policies to Increase Trust in a Versatile E-Money System Markus Jakobsson (UCSD, La Jolla, CA, USA), Moti Yung (BTEC/CertCo, New York, NY, USA) 940 -- 1015 Towards Multiple-payment Schemes for Digital Money H. Pagnia, R. Jansen (University of Darmstadt, Darmstadt, Germany) 1015 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 Legal Issues in Cryptography Edward J. Radlo (Fenwick & West LLP, Palo Alto, CA, USA) 1120 -- 1230 Panel Discussion Legal Issues of Digital Signatures Michael Froomkin (University of Miami School of Law, Miami, FL, USA), Charles Merrill (McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, USA), Benjamin Wright (Dallas, TX, USA) Friday 28 February 1997 830 -- 930 Invited Speaker To Be Announced 930 -- 1005 The Gateway Security Model in the Java Electronic Commerce Framework Theodore Goldstein (Sun Microsystems Laboratories/Javasoft) 1005 -- 1045 Coffee Break 1045 -- 1120 Highly Scalable On-line Payments Via Task Decoupling David William Kravitz (CertCo LLC, Albuquerque, NM, USA) 1120 -- 1155 GUMP; Grand Unified Meta-Protocols Recipes for Simple, Standards-based Financial Cryptography Barbara Fox, Brian Beckman (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) 1155 -- 1230 Secure Network Communications and Secure Store & Forward Mechanisms with SAP R/3 Bernhard Esslinger (SAP AG, Walldorf, Germany) The conference will run from 8:30 AM to 12:30 PM, for five days, February 24-28 1997. Breakfast provided at the conference. The conference organizers have left the afternoon and evenings open for corporate sponsored events, for networking, and for recreational activities on the resort island of Anguilla. Participants are encouraged to bring their families. Workshop: A 40-hour workshop, intended for anyone with commercial software development experience who wants hands-on familiarity with the issues and technology of financial cryptography, is planned in conjunction with FC97, to be held during the week preceding the conference. For more information on the workshop, please see the URL http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~iang/fc97/workshop.html . For workshop registration, see the URL http://www.offshore.com.ai/fc97/ . Venue: The InterIsland Hotel is a small 14-room guesthouse and a large, comfortable 150 seat conference facility with additional space for a small 10-booth exhibition. The Inter-Island is on Road Bay, near Sandy Ground Village, in the South Hill section of Anguilla. The conference, workshop, and exhibition will have TCP/IP internet access. The rooms at the InterIsland itself have sold out, but there are many other hotels and guesthouses on Anguilla, and shuttle service to the conference will be available. Air Transportation and Hotels: Air travel to Anguilla is typically done through either San Juan or St. Thomas for US flights, or St. Maarten/Martin for flights from Europe and the US. Anguillan import duties are not imposed on hardware or software which will leave the island again. There are no other taxes -- or cryptography import/export restrictions -- on Anguilla. Hotels range from spartan to luxurious, and more information about hotels on Anquilla can be obtained from your travel agent, or at the URL http://www.offshore.com.ai/fc97/ . General Chairs: Robert Hettinga, Shipwright/e$, Boston, MA, USA; rah at shipwright.com Vincent Cate, Offshore Information Services, Anguilla, BWI; vince at offshore.com.ai Conference, Exhibits, and Sponsorship Manager: Julie Rackliffe, Boston, MA, USA; rackliffe at tcm.org Workshop Leader: Ian Goldberg, Berkeley, CA, USA; iang at cs.berkeley.edu Registration: You can register and pay for conference admission on the World Wide Web at the URL http://www.offshore.com.ai/fc97/ . The cost of the FC97 Conference is US$1,000. Booths for the exhibition start at US$5,000 and include two conference tickets. For more information about exhibit space, contact Julie Rackliffe, rackliffe at tcm.org . Sponsorship opportunities for FC97 are still available. The cost of the workshop is US$5000, and includes meals but not lodging. You can register for the workshop, which runs the week prior to the conference, at the URL Financial Cryptography '97 is held in cooperation with the International Association for Cryptologic Research. It is sponsored by: The Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce Offshore Information Services e$ C2NET See Your Name Here ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 29 07:11:36 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:11:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Call for Participants: The Financial Cryptography 1997 Workshop for Senior Managers and IS Professionals Message-ID: <199701291511.HAA03685@toad.com> CALL FOR PARTICIPANTS The Financial Cryptography 1997 (FC97) Workshop for Senior Managers and IS Professionals February 17-21, 1997 The InterIsland Hotel Anguilla, BWI Workshop Update: January 29, 1997 FC97 is sponsored by: The Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce Offshore Information Services e$ C2NET See Your Name Here! FC97 Workshop for Senior Managers and IS Professionals February 17-21, 1997 FC97 Conference and Exhibition, February 24-28, 1997 The Inter-Island Hotel Anguilla, BWI Workshop and Conference Reservations: The world's first intensive financial cryptography workshop for senior managers and IS professionals will be held Monday through Friday, February 17-21 1997, from 9:00am to 6:00pm, at the Inter-Island Hotel on the Carribbean island of Anguilla. This workshop will be the prelude to the world's first peer-reviewed financial cryptography conference and commercial exhibition, Financial Cryptography 1997 (FC97), which will be held the following week, February 24-28, 1997. The goals of the combined workshop, conference and exhibition are: -- to give senior managers and IS professionals a solid understanding of the fundamentals of strong cryptgraphy as applied to financial operations on public networks, -- to provide a peer-reviewed forum for important research in financial cryptography and the effects it will have on society, and, -- to showcase the newest products in financial cryptography. Workshop and Conference participants are encouraged to bring their families, though Workshop participants should expect to be busy the first week. :-). The Workshop Ian Goldberg, the Workshop chair, has picked an outstanding team of instructors in financial cryptography and internet financial system security to teach the courses in this workshop. The Workshop will consist of 40 hours of intensive instruction and lab time over 5 days. Each student will have their own internet workstation, and the lab will be open 24 hours. The SSL internet commerce server used in the workshop will be Stronghold, developed by C2NET, of Berkeley, California. For information on Stronghold, please see . Thanks to C2NET for their gracious donation of this outstanding software to the FC97 Workshop. Who Should Attend The Workshop is intended for senior IS managers and technical professionals who want to get completely up to speed on the design, development, and implementation of financial cryptography systems, the core technology of internet commerce. After the workshop, senior managers will have a hands-on understanding the strengths and liabilities of currently available financial cryptography and internet transaction security software and hardware, and thus be able to make better asset allocation decisions in this area of explosive technology growth. Senior technical professionals with strong IS experience will be able to implement those technologies and to pass on what they've learned to their clients and colleagues when they return home. The Workshop will be held in a casual but intensive atmosphere at the very cutting edge of financial technology on the internet. Someone has likened the experience to a financial cryptography bootcamp. At the end, Workshop attendees will be utterly conversant in cryptography as it applies to finance, and will be quite prepared for the technical papers in the FC97 conference the following week. Workshop participants will not only know what everyone else is doing now in internet commerce, but, more important, because they understand the implications of strong financial cryptography on ubiquitous public networks, they will be able to know what to do *next*. The Workshop Leader Ian Goldberg is a Ph.D. student in security and cryptography at the University of California, Berkeley. Just last night, he cracked RSA Data Security Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher in just under 3.5 hours. In late 1995, he discovered what became a much-publicized flaw in Netscape's implementation of SSL. He is a recognized expert in electronic payment systems, and in DigiCash's ecash digital bearer certificate protocol in particular. He has produced several ecash clients for Unix and Windows, as well as an ecash module for the Stronghold web server, which has extended the existing ecash system for better security, privacy, and ease-of-use. The Principal Instructors Gary Howland worked on digital cash systems for DigiCash, and then moved to Systemics, where he developed the SOX protocol, a flexible payments system currently in use in a bond trading environment, soon to be available to the public. He also developed the Cryptix and PGP libraries in Perl, and assisted on the Cryptix and PGP library implementations in Java. Adam Shostack is a security consultant based in the Boston area. He has extensive background in designing, implementing and testing secure systems for clients in the medical, computer, and financial industries. His recent public work includes 'Apparent Weaknesses in the Security Dynamics Client Server Protocol,' 'Source Code Review Guidelines,' and comparisons of freely available cryptographic libraries. His clients include Fidelity Investments and the Brigham and Women's Hospital, in Boston. Additional Instructors The Workshop will have student-to-instructor ratio of 5 to 1, not including the Workshop leader. The Workshop will have an initial enrollment of 10 students, and an additional instructor will be added for each 5 students up to a 25 student maximum enrollment. Workshop Topics The following is the complete list of topics that the workshop will cover: Security on the Internet Internet Protocols: IP, TCP, UDP Higher-level Protocols: Telnet, FTP, HTTP, SSL Solid Foundations for Cryptographic Systems A History of Internet Attacks Building Internet Firewalls Building a Bastion Host Turning your Bastion Host into a Web Server Non-internet Internet Security Cryptography The Need for Cryptography History of Cryptography Classical Methods Modern Methods Private and Public Key Cryptography Authentication vs. Security Certification and Public Key Infrastructures Cryptographic Protocols Engineering a Cryptographically Secure System Why Cryptography is Harder than it Looks Security Through Obscurity and How to Recognize Snake Oil Internet Payment Systems Payment models: coin-based, cheque-based, account-based Security Issues Privacy and Anonymity Issues Smartcards vs. Software Existing Payment Schemes Credit Cards First Virtual CyberCash DigiCash Forthcoming Payment Schemes SET Mondex Millicent micropayments Setting Up an ecash-Enabled Web Server Setting up the Web Server Signing up for ecash Installing the ecash Module Setting Prices Logging Advanced Methods ecashiers moneychangers The workshop has been covered by Wired Magazine, and FC97 was the featured conference in the January 1997 "Deductible Junkets" section. So, if you have already decided to come to the FC97 Workshop and Conference, please register and make your plane and hotel reservations as soon as possible. Workshop space is extremely limited. The price of the workshop is $5,000 U.S. You can pay for your FC97 workshop ticket with Visa or MasterCard, with ecash, or with any of a number of other internet commerce payment protocols, at the regstriation site: . The workshop price includes meals (but not lodging) at the InterIsland Hotel and lab space, plus the delivery and installation of hardware, network access, internet commerce software, all to a location like Anguilla. And, of course, 40 hours of instruction and structured lab activity. We have priced the workshop to be competitive with other comprehensive business and professional technology workshops of similar total session length. In addition, the first 10 FC97 workshop participants will receive a 50% reduction in their FC97 Conference and Exhibition fee, for a savings of $500 off the $1,000 conference admission. You can register, and pay for, your workshop ticket at: Air Transportation and Hotels Air travel to Anguilla is typically done through San Juan, St. Thomas or St. Maarten/Martin. There are several non-stop flights a day from various US and European locations. Connection through to Anguilla can be made through American Eagle, or through LIAT, or in the case of St. Maarten, with a short ferry ride to Anguilla. See your travel agent for details. Anguilla's runway is 3600 feet, with a displaced threshold of 600 feet, and can accomodate business jets. Obviously, you should talk to your aviation staff for details about your own aircraft's capabilities in this regard. Anguilla import duties are not imposed on hardware or software which will leave the island again, so, as long as you take it with you when you leave, you won't pay import duties. PLEASE NOTE: Your FC97 Workshop fee only covers *meals* at the InterIsland Hotel. The InterIsland is actually a small guesthouse attached to a large conference facility, and so rooms there are in short supply. Fortunately, there are lots of small hotels and guesthouses nearby. For more information on these hotels, please see for more information. Other hotels on Anguilla range from spartan to luxurious, all within easy walking or driving distance of the Workshop at the InterIsland. More information about Anguillan hotels can be obtained from your travel agent, or at . Registration and Information for Other FC97 Events To register and pay for your ticket to the FC97 conference itself, see: For information the selection of papers for the FC97 conference see: If you're interested in Exhibition space, please contact Julie Rackliffe: If you're interested in sponsoring FC97, also contact Julie Rackliffe: Financial Cryptography '97 is held in cooperation with the International Association for Cryptologic Research. The conference proceedings will be published on the web by the Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce. . The FC97 Organizing Committee: Vince Cate and Bob Hettinga, General Chairs Ray Hirschfeld, Conference Chair Ian Goldberg, Workshop Chair Julie Rackliffe, Conference, Exhibit, and Sponsorship Manager And our sponsors... The Journal for Internet Banking and Commerce Offshore Information Services e$ C2NET See Your Name Here ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 29 07:13:11 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (stewarts at ix.netcom.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:13:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved Message-ID: <199701291513.HAA03689@toad.com> Any bets on whether the $5000 RC5-12/32/6 contest will be solved before the www.rsa.com contest status web page is updated? :-) Or how long before someone in the government starts talking about how 56 bits takes 65,000 times as long to solve as 40 bits, which is 26 years for a whole building full of computers, and even 48 bits ought to take a month and a half for a whole building full of computers (or supercomputers, if they hype it up....)? At 09:55 PM 1/28/97 +0100, Germano Caronni wrote: >challenge: RC5-32/12/5 >time: from start of contest until Tue Jan 28 21:54:58 1997 >method: massive distributed coordinated keysearch, details later which was a bit slower than Ian Goldberg's crack, but pretty close. How many machines were you using, on average? # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Jan 29 07:13:11 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:13:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... Message-ID: <199701291513.HAA03690@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Robert Hettinga writes: > --- begin forwarded text > > > Sender: e$@thumper.vmeng.com > Reply-To: Russell Stuart > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Precedence: Bulk > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:07:27 +1000 > From: Russell Stuart > However, the doubleclick.net ads appear to bear no relationship to the > keywords being searched, and they appear not only in the URL for the > hyperlink to follow, but also in the IMG SRC URL. This means that in > order > to avoid disclosing my keyword lists to doubleclick.net, I have to > disable > automatic loading of inline images when using AltaVista! Actually, the ads *do* relate to the keywords. Try doing a search for "flowers" and a search for "sex." http://www.anonymizer.com/ Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMu9TH8kz/YzIV3P5AQEL8AL/Tj6fj0hRMYZVK1ppuh/DSxtB89urgSDy DDmA6ycn0DmmUg1TL7w8k2vkN/srUfvddA6pu3vZGU8Pa3unA4LSAe3ipCygzuGK d1s0BW+Cy15HDjdTdFe9I0tYfjdNQo2B =26sJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Jan 29 07:14:52 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:14:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701291514.HAA03700@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Matthew Toth writes: > MIT is one the best schools in the country for C.S. > Close behind is Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh, > PA. (the folks who put out CERT.) Not sure how much Crypto they do, though. I think there's one class on crypto (explicitly), but there's some talent here. One who was interested could get an independant study or a research job without too much trouble. After all, MIT isn't the only place that writes kerberos, AFS, and the like. (In case you're wondering, the "A" in AFS stands for "Andrew," of Andrew Carnegie.) Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMu9V+skz/YzIV3P5AQH/XgL/VFA/4M1XTD8xl86Y6GrtU46YGpmGnhn6 lDKSA/xaxAzUToPTXQdyNqY5xg5CpfwYraVEiyLIvWKsIvOWtJgG3cZzF+xqlx39 sgbM0L6aMXrXkGqLdosZMjrr9Rqc6KE5 =FTU1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 29 07:16:35 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:16:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy Loses His Gold Star In-Reply-To: <32EF54AD.7C0A@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Why is a mere "I see" classified as cypherpunks-flames??? > > > Stop picking on girls, Sandy. > > > It wasn't and I wasn't. > > It was and you did. No, I classified it as "spam" and sent it to the list set aside for that, cypherpunks-flames. Several such spams--from members of both sexes--have been treated the same way, so girls were net especially picked on. In any event, no one was "picked on" by that decision. The people in question self-selected themselves by posting spam. Why "spam"? Because of the childish inclusion of pages of no-longer-relevant previous comments. Whether intentional or merely negligent, the net effect is to spam the list. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From das at razor.engr.sgi.com Wed Jan 29 07:18:20 1997 From: das at razor.engr.sgi.com (Anil Das) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:18:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7 Message-ID: <199701291518.HAA03774@toad.com> On Jan 25, 10:49am, James Robertson wrote: > > Are there any efforts being made to develop a version of the > software that can be used by us non-US residents? > > I would certainly like to participate in the Challenge. I'm > sure there are many other interested people out there, in the > big wide world ... No such development outside the US has been publicized. However, it is easy enough to roll your own. What you need: 1) Eric Young's libdes. ftp://ftp.psy.uq.oz.au/pub/Crypto/DES 2) Svend Olaf Mikkelsen's fast replacement for the core DES routine. http://inet.uni-c.dk/~svolaf/des.htm The latest libdes is supposed to have this faster routine incorporated already, so you may not need it. 3) Peter Trei's article on "Optimizing DES Key Recovery in Software". It is available at HKS's news server. news://nntp.hks.net/<199610171918.MAA23054 at toad.com> For a first pass, you can just implement the Gray Code technique. That gives most of the speedup. 4) Some information on how to implement Gray Codes. "The Gray Code" by Robert W. Doran. Tech Report 131 from http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~techrep/1996.html Given these resources, it shouldn't take long for a good programmer to implement a DES key search program that is in the same ballpark of performance as Peter Trei's implementation. -- Anil Das From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 29 07:27:58 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:27:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy Loses His Gold Star In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EF6C5C.5A7E@gte.net> Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > > Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > > On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > > Why is a mere "I see" classified as cypherpunks-flames??? > > > > Stop picking on girls, Sandy. > No, I classified it as "spam" and sent it to the list set aside > for that, cypherpunks-flames. Several such spams--from members > of both sexes--have been treated the same way, so girls were net > especially picked on. In any event, no one was "picked on" by > that decision. The people in question self-selected themselves > by posting spam. > Why "spam"? Because of the childish inclusion of pages of > no-longer-relevant previous comments. Whether intentional or > merely negligent, the net effect is to spam the list. I hope to God you're paying attention, Toto. You just got a new rule: inclusion of no-longer-relevant comments. Now if you pay close attention from now on, and write these things down, you won't forget. (until there's a new rule, but that's the way these things work). From wclerke at emirates.net.ae Wed Jan 29 07:30:41 1997 From: wclerke at emirates.net.ae (Wayne Clerke) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:30:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html (UAE censoring Internet) Message-ID: <199701291529.TAA02374@ns2.emirates.net.ae> I've checked the filtering out already ... it's pretty extensive. Far, far more than Singapore's 'hundred' or so pages. The granularity is such that things like http://www.domain/~user/main may be passed, while a link from that page to a subpage may be blocked. I guess they can afford to do this with so few users and little traffic. Never thought I'd be real interested in how Net Nanny worked ... but I am now. I'd be happy to hear from anyone with good ideas (or (accessible) pointers) about how to minimize the effects of this stupidity ... :-( Regards, Mail: Wayne Clerke PGP key ID: AEB2546D FP: D663D11E DA19D74F 5032DC7E E001B702 PGP mail welcome. Voice: +971 506 43 48 53 If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space. ---------- > From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: uae_1.html > Date: Tuesday, 28 January 1997 12:26 > > > Reuters New Media > > > [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] > > > [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | > Entertain | Health ] > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Previous Story: UK Bill To Fight Millennium Computer Bug Moves On > Next Story: Intel to Europe: Get Online Or Fall Behind > _________________________________________________________________ > > Monday January 27 9:50 AM EST > > UAE Launches Service To Censor Internet > > DUBAI - The United Arab Emirates's monopoly Internet provider launched > a service Saturday to censor sites in cyberspace that breached local > moral values and traditions. > > Officials from state telecommunications company Etisalat said the new > Proxy Service would be compulsory for the UAE's 9,669 subscribers, who > will have to configure their web browsers that navigate the net by > February 2. > > "The service was launched today as part of our efforts to improve the > Internet service to our subscribers after lengthy study and research," > said one official at Etisalat. > > "We were working on it before some official statements were made on > the need to control access to some sites on the service," he told > Reuters. > > The move follows repeated calls to regulate access to the Internet in > the conservative Gulf region, where most women are veiled, magazine > pictures revealing cleavage or bare legs are blacked out and > questioning the existence of god can be punishable by death. > > Some are worried about the spread of pornography as well as religious > and political material through the worldwide network of interlinked > computers. > > Last year, Dubai Police chief Major General Dhahi Khalfan Tamim > created a rare public row in the UAE saying the information ministry > and the police, rather that Etisalat, should be authorized to issue > Internet licenses as it was their job to monitor data coming into the > UAE and maintain security. > > Telecommunications experts say the Proxy Service will not be "fully > water-tight," but would help block access to known and unwanted sites > -- a list of which could be constantly updated. > > The proxy server will be pre-fed with Internet addresses where access > is blocked off, industry sources said. But the server will be unable > to block access if addresses of prohibited sites are changed, as > frequently happens. > > Etisalat says it will disconnect any customer who abused its Internet > services and violated "order and clear laws." > > "Singapore has succeeded to a great extent in its drive to control > harm done by the Internet," said another Etisalat official. "Why > cannot we?" > > Singapore government measures to regulate political and religious > content on the Internet and keep it free of pornography became > effective in July last year. They require all Internet service > operators and local content providers to be registered with the > Singapore Broadcasting Authority. > > Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2i mQDNAy/T4WIAAAEGAMoa0wYpHlGTFe7fEJeKoDs9xaiSt0/lSjN8u8APrqRg1S+v Z9AXoZ9jnDWzEE8t75PieCPNx8PlX5Z1rnwXfYjpEGR4JiYFBC4ThO8zHE+3V4vv 3JihVe8RpI6Cl+6lLspxh5xVlC6Ode5s+CGvUG1aKqNG5PcI9KSzmnUgyC7UFV66 63ySxOiG2I8KPF3Dx9svk2B76JV/f+9LmuHcJuargmlZSZ3+LXdAOIHJoXKH4uPA fkpiJUvUX8gorrJUbQAFEbQmV2F5bmUgQ2xlcmtlIDx3Y2xlcmtlQGVtaXJhdGVz Lm5ldC5hZT6JAJUDBRAw418r3ic1/dqHwMcBAdZxA/9KFTdRSV12mvi9PogHZ+Vp qXwwxfi7PufQsnZ+QJyXcZ9AXlZg4KGok6/EHCrRmolGyNvmn48nY46BTF/ztS// KpK14TQPnBytKg3cz+bqq9yVVKga5ryF56PYK5SSp3doouNG8yOQkLK6NppbPc7O wjyfHWkgZzKuVDpf/w/Hf7QpV2F5bmUgQ2xlcmtlIDx3Y2xlcmtlQGV4dHJvLnVj Yy5zdS5vei5hdT6JAJUDBRAw42AT3ic1/dqHwMcBAaYUA/9+H96ZnKQpQ2igwRkb hCy1MrvoOddvfSyL5g+V2PdhraLQDE753hJNtC+rRnZYRI9DdrIh3Pio8hqlCoqF cWo2GRaaxh4nqe+UXcTCOKFZ8sX6S8Jfvz2NeYjdkDsuza7r4vI3w9fxWjFG/Q6A +UAuDLfuIF54oA7fXap4r98eS4kA1QMFEC/T5sDUX8gorrJUbQEBbcEF/1x4XLSo UheynBv9lZtVDYdzg5qBQRUKMlHeKHvuDvLHHhCnxy0EqID4sloQAW3hAIf33sCE Os08LWB+VsNtE3nqkrfs54vEdm+OnCiBTwT2o9bcjMXjwSUhEBT0/1dsDGP4boGg gsR6fgaks8kIjuTiLeCJ0aSlVz7VVNgBr8klj1Vi8vMrTrs5jpx9Rh4/DLa8HvXl isr4RHDx290J5yd66U5dwPtwL5PcSGqFWtGfyFUpFjrB92sIzU4cE9+WzokAVQMF EC/T5pxJuCRZ+BFKkwEBHtoCAI/0vtRlvDE4+IMWTfOmU/TuJM80ltVZl9+MOdn3 4EGSf5TO5MIGu9sLIO+mTTTZXZNbFNo0AMyUZAEVDh+JEGQ= =fHhI -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- From geer at OpenMarket.com Wed Jan 29 07:45:51 1997 From: geer at OpenMarket.com (Dan Geer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:45:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <199701291411.JAA01361@raptor.research.att.com> Message-ID: <199701291545.KAA02713@waterville.openmarket.com> Steve Bellovin writes: It is dangerously naive to label this success the ``last nail for US crypto export policy''. Everyone concerned with this issue, from the NSA to the FBI to anyone who wants to use crypto, understands this and accepts it. 40-bit keys are good for protection against casual snooping, and nothing more -- and no one is going to claim that you need supercomputers to crack them. In fact, I assert that the U.S. government is *happy* about these results -- because it's going to push folks towards wanting stronger crypto for export. The only problem, of course, is the terms under which such code can be exported... I'll go further -- in my opinion, the only reason the government doesn't want DES to fall just yet is that alternatives aren't ready. That is, the banks and financial institutions, and for that matter the government agencies, have not converted to 3DES or Clipper or what have you, and can't do so on short notice; the commercial products they need just aren't ready yet. No one wants to risk a loss of confidence in the financial system. Two years from now, though, when some key escrow products are ready, it may be a different story. Steve is absolutely right on the money, particularly about the likely happiness on the government side. The true explanation of the current effort is a testimony to the strategic skill of the regulators, but it is not as represented aloud. Export controls are meaningless without domestic use restrictions and domestic use restrictions will never pass the test of the First Amendment. Therefore, in an effort to obtain what cannot be obtained politically, this administration makes the following ploy: (1) Withhold from American companies the wherewithal to compete internationally by crippling the products they may export; (2) Offer to those companies that will include the functional equivalent of domestic use restrictions in their products a competitive advantage that could never otherwise withstand any fairness test; (3) Declare the resulting imposition of domestic use controls to be the "voice of the marketplace" and "voluntary." This is as shameful as saying that a rape victim was "asking for it." --dan From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jan 29 07:48:32 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:48:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment In-Reply-To: <199701290611.WAA20631@toad.com> Message-ID: A couple points: * The 1st Amendment does protect some lies. If I say "Jim Choate is a Venusian albatross," the statement is probably (?) a lie, but I doubt you'll prevail in a libel suit. What damages do you have? That's the key, I believe -- the statement has to lower you in the opinion of others. * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of libel. It is, they say, a rich man's game -- if I'm libeled by the NYT, I'm probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump can. Moreover, if I don't have the resources to sue but the statement is libelous, it creates a *presumption* in the minds of the readers that the article is certainly true. (If it were not, I would have sued, right?) * The concept you may be searching for is consensual speech, which I believe a society should tolerate. Libelous speech isn't consensual, though obscenity is. -Declan On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > Hi, > > It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects > libelous or other defamatory speech. > > This is hokem. The 1st most certainly does not protect lies in any form. It > protects opinion, this is distinctly different then stating a untruth about > some party or distribution of material with the attributation to them > without their permission. > > No civilized society can exist that permits lies and other defamations of > character and expect to survive for any length of time. Simply for no other > reason than contracts and other such instruments would not be worth the > paper they were printed on. Let alone any laws or other issuances from the > government itself. > > > ARTICLE I. > > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, > or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of > speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, > and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. > > > Where in there do you see a right to lie, cheat, or steal? If it did, it > would be a lie because it would not protect the very freedom it says it is. > > > Jim Choate > CyberTects > ravage at ssz.com > > > From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jan 29 07:55:26 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 07:55:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701290628.WAA20945@toad.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997 stewarts at ix.netcom.com wrote: > (ObCypherpunksContent: if substantial amounts of tax money starts > escaping into Cypherspace, it's not easy to maintain a modern > CorporatistWelfare-for-Bureaucrats state either.....) I disagree. Where does this money "escape" to? Do you spend it on rent, pizza, a new stereo? Hmm... These are all meatspace transactions and can be taxed. I met last week with a senior Clinton administration official for an article I'm working on and posed this question to him, asking how we can tax anonymous online transactions. He replied: "Well, we have this corporate income tax..." -Declan From aga at dhp.com Wed Jan 29 08:20:53 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:20:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? In-Reply-To: <199701290344.TAA03473@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: > At 07:33 AM 1/28/97 -0500, aga wrote: > >On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: > > > >> At 01:14 AM 1/27/97 -0600, ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > >> >These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel > >> >is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government > >> >cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured > >> >(libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. > >> > >> On the contrary, in some jurisdictions libel is indeed a crime. However, > >> that doesn't mean that prosecutions happen anymore, but the laws are (in > >> some places) still on the books. > > > > >Jim, either you are full of shit or that Law is VERY > >unconstitutional. The first amendment prohibits any Criminal Laws > >from being made against libel. > > You'd think that, wouldn't you? Yes, I agree that those laws are > unconstitutional, but so is about 90+% of what the Federal government does > today. Sigh. > > Criminal libel statutes are apparently (in the US, at least) a holdover from > an earlier era in which government took the place of King George, and wanted > the power to punish people who were too outspoken. The fact that they are > "never" (?) used anymore is presumably a reflection of their > unconstitutionality. Criminal libel statues should also be considered > unconstitutional because they give way too much leeway to the prosecutor to > decide whom to prosecute. His friends will never be charged, but his > enemies will. > > One obvious problem with the LACK of a criminal libel statute, from the > standpoint of the "government-controlling-class," or "the bigshots," is that > it's impossible to sue (and collect from) a (comparatively) poor person for > defaming him...but it's still possible to put him in jail. Civil libel is, > therefore, essentially useless to a government agent as a means of keeping > the masses in line. > > > Myself, I believe that libel should be eliminated as a cause of action in > civil cases as well as it has, de facto, in the criminal area. If anything, > the ability to sue for libel makes things worse: There is an illusion that > this is easy and straightforward, if not economical. It is neither. The > result is that people are actually MORE likely to believe a printed > falsehood because they incorrectly assume that if it wasn't true, it > couldn't be printed. > > > > > Jim Bell > jimbell at pacifier.com > Interesting analysis here, but remember; libel is just one kind of "defamation" and an action for defamation will always be actionable. The constitution gives us the right to call the President a motherfucker any time we want to, and it also gives the motherfucker the right to sue. Sueing is better than fighting in the streets. This is the SLOWEST I have ever seen Telnet, today. From aga at dhp.com Wed Jan 29 08:25:05 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:25:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment In-Reply-To: <199701290507.XAA02510@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > [Cc to Dr. John Martin Grubor, Law Systems Institute] > > Jim Choate wrote: > > > > It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects > > libelous or other defamatory speech. > > [I would appreciate if people with better knowledge of law correct me] > > I doubt that anyone made this assertion. What Greg Broiles and Dr. > Grubor asserted was that because of the first amendment, the government > can not initiate an action in a libel case. Which means that libel is > not a crime. There may be some old statutes that declare libel a crime, > as Greg noted, but they are not enforceable because of the first amendment. > > Suits can be brought by private individuals though. > > The government, even if it is defamed, cannot sue a private person > for libel. For example, I can say that Congress regularly molests > small children, and they will not be able to do anything about me. > > > This is hokem. The 1st most certainly does not protect lies in any form. It > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > > protects opinion, this is distinctly different then stating a untruth about > > some party or distribution of material with the attributation to them > > without their permission. > > Not exactly. > > I can lie as much as I want about the government. No one would be > able to prosecute me. These particular lies are protected, contrary > to what you state. > > The law does not protect ALL opinions, as well. > > > No civilized society can exist that permits lies and other defamations of > > character and expect to survive for any length of time. Simply for no other > > reason than contracts and other such instruments would not be worth the > > paper they were printed on. Let alone any laws or other issuances from the > > government itself. > > You are mixing in totally unrelated things, Jim. Enforcement of contracts > has nothing to do with freedom of speech. For example, if you borrow $100 > from me and fail to return your debt in time, this is an issue of contract > law and not of free speech. > > Contract law is not about speech, it is about promises. > > > ARTICLE I. > > > > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, > > or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of > > speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, > > and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. > > > > > > Where in there do you see a right to lie, cheat, or steal? If it did, it > > would be a lie because it would not protect the very freedom it says it is. > > Do you think that all rights should be found in the first amendment? > What does the right to steal have to do with what we are talking about? > > I suggest reading "The Fourth Estate and the Constitution: Freedom > of the Press in America", by Lucas a Powe, Jr. > > As for stealing and cheating in contracts, read any textbook on business > law for business students. It is very useful to read this stuff, by the > way. > > Not that these books give one a complete picture on law, but they > are very informative. > > - Igor. > Most business Law is covered by the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) And business Law really has nothing to do with libel, which is just a tort. From aga at dhp.com Wed Jan 29 08:31:35 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:31:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <32EEDAB6.51A6@gte.net> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > aga wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > aga wrote: > > > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > > > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > > > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > > > > suffice to be immediately terminated. > > > > No trial, huh? > > Good question. The law we have right now already assumes that there > are situations where a criminal will not go peacefully, if at all. > In some countries (years ago?) such as England, bobbies were known > to not carry firearms for ordinary street duty. Am I right? But > here in the USA, that would be unthinkable. > > So my proposal doesn't eliminate the responsibility portion of law > enforcement. I'd say, if a target were eliminated thru negligence, > malfeasance, or other wrongdoing under "color of law" or whatever, > let the courts handle that as they do now. > Just who is doing the eliminating? > My suggestion would give the law enforcers the ability to dispense > the first level of justice expeditiously, which they cannot accomplish > now due to all of the red tape and the corrupt legal system (lawyers > specialize in getting chronic offenders off, particularly "traffic" > offenses). By transferring a major portion of the bureaucracy to > the pencil pushers, we can free up the street cops to do what they > do best, namely bust or eliminate criminals. > Cops can never be trusted to "dispense justice," and half of the cops are themselves criminals in what they do. Most cops steal evidence and lie like crazy in Court. All they want is a conviction, and it mattters not how it is obtained. > I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the > virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get > out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those > holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to > provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, > given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter > aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, > well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better > off when we do. > I would trust robots more than humanoids. From smb at research.att.com Wed Jan 29 08:31:52 1997 From: smb at research.att.com (Steven Bellovin) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:31:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701291631.IAA04966@toad.com> It is dangerously naive to label this success the ``last nail for US crypto export policy''. Everyone concerned with this issue, from the NSA to the FBI to anyone who wants to use crypto, understands this and accepts it. 40-bit keys are good for protection against casual snooping, and nothing more -- and no one is going to claim that you need supercomputers to crack them. In fact, I assert that the U.S. government is *happy* about these results -- because it's going to push folks towards wanting stronger crypto for export. The only problem, of course, is the terms under which such code can be exported... I'll go further -- in my opinion, the only reason the government doesn't want DES to fall just yet is that alternatives aren't ready. That is, the banks and financial institutions, and for that matter the government agencies, have not converted to 3DES or Clipper or what have you, and can't do so on short notice; the commercial products they need just aren't ready yet. No one wants to risk a loss of confidence in the financial system. Two years from now, though, when some key escrow products are ready, it may be a different story. From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Wed Jan 29 08:36:31 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:36:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970129113544.00999840@gateway.grumman.com> At 06:45 AM 1/29/97 +0100, Anonymous (Xanthar) wrote: >Most intelligent people apply to several schools, knowing that >admissions practices are subject to the vagaries of reality. If you are implying that I was not intelligent enough to apply to more than one school, then you are mistaken. MIT was the *only* school out of the six I applied to (including CMU, CalTech, GaTech) that turned me down. >My guess is that "other factors" were involved. I'm sure that was probably true. I'm just saying that I doubt the admissions process is as Financial-Aid-blind as they would have us believe. >MIT offered me a substantial economic aid package, in the form of loans, >grants, and various campus jobs. What does this tell you? It tells me that you're a better man than I, I guess. I'm sorry if I sound bitter, but one does not work for a goal for over a decade of his life, get rejected for it, and then just "forget it". Anyone who tells you otherwise needs to see a therapist. _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ Don't have awk? Use this simple sh emulation: #!/bin/sh echo 'Awk bailing out!' >&2 exit 2 From adam at homeport.org Wed Jan 29 08:40:50 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:40:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI=LIE Message-ID: <199701291637.LAA07929@homeport.org> http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/fbi-lab.html Login cypherpunks, password cypherpunks. WASHINGTON -- For decades the FBI's reputation as a crime-fighting agency has rested heavily on its high-tech forensic laboratory, which could solve baffling crimes from a speck of blood, a sliver of paint or the thinnest filament of human hair. But an investigation by the Justice Department's inspector general has put the FBI laboratory, and the way the agency has used it, under the glare of public scrutiny. The findings, which were turned over to FBI officials last week, are threatening to shatter the image of an agency on the cutting edge of scientific sleuthing. [...] -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jan 29 08:42:23 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:42:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701291642.IAA05043@toad.com> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997 stewarts at ix.netcom.com wrote: > (ObCypherpunksContent: if substantial amounts of tax money starts > escaping into Cypherspace, it's not easy to maintain a modern > CorporatistWelfare-for-Bureaucrats state either.....) I disagree. Where does this money "escape" to? Do you spend it on rent, pizza, a new stereo? Hmm... These are all meatspace transactions and can be taxed. I met last week with a senior Clinton administration official for an article I'm working on and posed this question to him, asking how we can tax anonymous online transactions. He replied: "Well, we have this corporate income tax..." -Declan From geer at OpenMarket.com Wed Jan 29 08:42:50 1997 From: geer at OpenMarket.com (Dan Geer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:42:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701291642.IAA05064@toad.com> Steve Bellovin writes: It is dangerously naive to label this success the ``last nail for US crypto export policy''. Everyone concerned with this issue, from the NSA to the FBI to anyone who wants to use crypto, understands this and accepts it. 40-bit keys are good for protection against casual snooping, and nothing more -- and no one is going to claim that you need supercomputers to crack them. In fact, I assert that the U.S. government is *happy* about these results -- because it's going to push folks towards wanting stronger crypto for export. The only problem, of course, is the terms under which such code can be exported... I'll go further -- in my opinion, the only reason the government doesn't want DES to fall just yet is that alternatives aren't ready. That is, the banks and financial institutions, and for that matter the government agencies, have not converted to 3DES or Clipper or what have you, and can't do so on short notice; the commercial products they need just aren't ready yet. No one wants to risk a loss of confidence in the financial system. Two years from now, though, when some key escrow products are ready, it may be a different story. Steve is absolutely right on the money, particularly about the likely happiness on the government side. The true explanation of the current effort is a testimony to the strategic skill of the regulators, but it is not as represented aloud. Export controls are meaningless without domestic use restrictions and domestic use restrictions will never pass the test of the First Amendment. Therefore, in an effort to obtain what cannot be obtained politically, this administration makes the following ploy: (1) Withhold from American companies the wherewithal to compete internationally by crippling the products they may export; (2) Offer to those companies that will include the functional equivalent of domestic use restrictions in their products a competitive advantage that could never otherwise withstand any fairness test; (3) Declare the resulting imposition of domestic use controls to be the "voice of the marketplace" and "voluntary." This is as shameful as saying that a rape victim was "asking for it." --dan From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jan 29 08:42:58 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:42:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701291642.IAA05072@toad.com> A couple points: * The 1st Amendment does protect some lies. If I say "Jim Choate is a Venusian albatross," the statement is probably (?) a lie, but I doubt you'll prevail in a libel suit. What damages do you have? That's the key, I believe -- the statement has to lower you in the opinion of others. * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of libel. It is, they say, a rich man's game -- if I'm libeled by the NYT, I'm probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump can. Moreover, if I don't have the resources to sue but the statement is libelous, it creates a *presumption* in the minds of the readers that the article is certainly true. (If it were not, I would have sued, right?) * The concept you may be searching for is consensual speech, which I believe a society should tolerate. Libelous speech isn't consensual, though obscenity is. -Declan On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > Hi, > > It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects > libelous or other defamatory speech. > > This is hokem. The 1st most certainly does not protect lies in any form. It > protects opinion, this is distinctly different then stating a untruth about > some party or distribution of material with the attributation to them > without their permission. > > No civilized society can exist that permits lies and other defamations of > character and expect to survive for any length of time. Simply for no other > reason than contracts and other such instruments would not be worth the > paper they were printed on. Let alone any laws or other issuances from the > government itself. > > > ARTICLE I. > > Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, > or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of > speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, > and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. > > > Where in there do you see a right to lie, cheat, or steal? If it did, it > would be a lie because it would not protect the very freedom it says it is. > > > Jim Choate > CyberTects > ravage at ssz.com > > > From aga at dhp.com Wed Jan 29 08:43:09 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:43:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701291643.IAA05102@toad.com> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: > At 07:33 AM 1/28/97 -0500, aga wrote: > >On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: > > > >> At 01:14 AM 1/27/97 -0600, ichudov at algebra.com wrote: > > >> >These postings do not prove that libel is a crime. It is because libel > >> >is not a crime. Libel is a tort, and unlike with crime, the government > >> >cannot initiate a legal action against someone for libel. Only injured > >> >(libeled) individuals and not the government can sue in a libel case. > >> > >> On the contrary, in some jurisdictions libel is indeed a crime. However, > >> that doesn't mean that prosecutions happen anymore, but the laws are (in > >> some places) still on the books. > > > > >Jim, either you are full of shit or that Law is VERY > >unconstitutional. The first amendment prohibits any Criminal Laws > >from being made against libel. > > You'd think that, wouldn't you? Yes, I agree that those laws are > unconstitutional, but so is about 90+% of what the Federal government does > today. Sigh. > > Criminal libel statutes are apparently (in the US, at least) a holdover from > an earlier era in which government took the place of King George, and wanted > the power to punish people who were too outspoken. The fact that they are > "never" (?) used anymore is presumably a reflection of their > unconstitutionality. Criminal libel statues should also be considered > unconstitutional because they give way too much leeway to the prosecutor to > decide whom to prosecute. His friends will never be charged, but his > enemies will. > > One obvious problem with the LACK of a criminal libel statute, from the > standpoint of the "government-controlling-class," or "the bigshots," is that > it's impossible to sue (and collect from) a (comparatively) poor person for > defaming him...but it's still possible to put him in jail. Civil libel is, > therefore, essentially useless to a government agent as a means of keeping > the masses in line. > > > Myself, I believe that libel should be eliminated as a cause of action in > civil cases as well as it has, de facto, in the criminal area. If anything, > the ability to sue for libel makes things worse: There is an illusion that > this is easy and straightforward, if not economical. It is neither. The > result is that people are actually MORE likely to believe a printed > falsehood because they incorrectly assume that if it wasn't true, it > couldn't be printed. > > > > > Jim Bell > jimbell at pacifier.com > Interesting analysis here, but remember; libel is just one kind of "defamation" and an action for defamation will always be actionable. The constitution gives us the right to call the President a motherfucker any time we want to, and it also gives the motherfucker the right to sue. Sueing is better than fighting in the streets. This is the SLOWEST I have ever seen Telnet, today. From wclerke at emirates.net.ae Wed Jan 29 08:53:52 1997 From: wclerke at emirates.net.ae (Wayne Clerke) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:53:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html (UAE censoring Internet) Message-ID: <199701291653.IAA05222@toad.com> I've checked the filtering out already ... it's pretty extensive. Far, far more than Singapore's 'hundred' or so pages. The granularity is such that things like http://www.domain/~user/main may be passed, while a link from that page to a subpage may be blocked. I guess they can afford to do this with so few users and little traffic. Never thought I'd be real interested in how Net Nanny worked ... but I am now. I'd be happy to hear from anyone with good ideas (or (accessible) pointers) about how to minimize the effects of this stupidity ... :-( Regards, Mail: Wayne Clerke PGP key ID: AEB2546D FP: D663D11E DA19D74F 5032DC7E E001B702 PGP mail welcome. Voice: +971 506 43 48 53 If you're not living on the edge, you're taking up too much space. ---------- > From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com > To: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: uae_1.html > Date: Tuesday, 28 January 1997 12:26 > > > Reuters New Media > > > [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] > > > [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | > Entertain | Health ] > > _________________________________________________________________ > > Previous Story: UK Bill To Fight Millennium Computer Bug Moves On > Next Story: Intel to Europe: Get Online Or Fall Behind > _________________________________________________________________ > > Monday January 27 9:50 AM EST > > UAE Launches Service To Censor Internet > > DUBAI - The United Arab Emirates's monopoly Internet provider launched > a service Saturday to censor sites in cyberspace that breached local > moral values and traditions. > > Officials from state telecommunications company Etisalat said the new > Proxy Service would be compulsory for the UAE's 9,669 subscribers, who > will have to configure their web browsers that navigate the net by > February 2. > > "The service was launched today as part of our efforts to improve the > Internet service to our subscribers after lengthy study and research," > said one official at Etisalat. > > "We were working on it before some official statements were made on > the need to control access to some sites on the service," he told > Reuters. > > The move follows repeated calls to regulate access to the Internet in > the conservative Gulf region, where most women are veiled, magazine > pictures revealing cleavage or bare legs are blacked out and > questioning the existence of god can be punishable by death. > > Some are worried about the spread of pornography as well as religious > and political material through the worldwide network of interlinked > computers. > > Last year, Dubai Police chief Major General Dhahi Khalfan Tamim > created a rare public row in the UAE saying the information ministry > and the police, rather that Etisalat, should be authorized to issue > Internet licenses as it was their job to monitor data coming into the > UAE and maintain security. > > Telecommunications experts say the Proxy Service will not be "fully > water-tight," but would help block access to known and unwanted sites > -- a list of which could be constantly updated. > > The proxy server will be pre-fed with Internet addresses where access > is blocked off, industry sources said. But the server will be unable > to block access if addresses of prohibited sites are changed, as > frequently happens. > > Etisalat says it will disconnect any customer who abused its Internet > services and violated "order and clear laws." > > "Singapore has succeeded to a great extent in its drive to control > harm done by the Internet," said another Etisalat official. "Why > cannot we?" > > Singapore government measures to regulate political and religious > content on the Internet and keep it free of pornography became > effective in July last year. They require all Internet service > operators and local content providers to be registered with the > Singapore Broadcasting Authority. > > Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2i mQDNAy/T4WIAAAEGAMoa0wYpHlGTFe7fEJeKoDs9xaiSt0/lSjN8u8APrqRg1S+v Z9AXoZ9jnDWzEE8t75PieCPNx8PlX5Z1rnwXfYjpEGR4JiYFBC4ThO8zHE+3V4vv 3JihVe8RpI6Cl+6lLspxh5xVlC6Ode5s+CGvUG1aKqNG5PcI9KSzmnUgyC7UFV66 63ySxOiG2I8KPF3Dx9svk2B76JV/f+9LmuHcJuargmlZSZ3+LXdAOIHJoXKH4uPA fkpiJUvUX8gorrJUbQAFEbQmV2F5bmUgQ2xlcmtlIDx3Y2xlcmtlQGVtaXJhdGVz Lm5ldC5hZT6JAJUDBRAw418r3ic1/dqHwMcBAdZxA/9KFTdRSV12mvi9PogHZ+Vp qXwwxfi7PufQsnZ+QJyXcZ9AXlZg4KGok6/EHCrRmolGyNvmn48nY46BTF/ztS// KpK14TQPnBytKg3cz+bqq9yVVKga5ryF56PYK5SSp3doouNG8yOQkLK6NppbPc7O wjyfHWkgZzKuVDpf/w/Hf7QpV2F5bmUgQ2xlcmtlIDx3Y2xlcmtlQGV4dHJvLnVj Yy5zdS5vei5hdT6JAJUDBRAw42AT3ic1/dqHwMcBAaYUA/9+H96ZnKQpQ2igwRkb hCy1MrvoOddvfSyL5g+V2PdhraLQDE753hJNtC+rRnZYRI9DdrIh3Pio8hqlCoqF cWo2GRaaxh4nqe+UXcTCOKFZ8sX6S8Jfvz2NeYjdkDsuza7r4vI3w9fxWjFG/Q6A +UAuDLfuIF54oA7fXap4r98eS4kA1QMFEC/T5sDUX8gorrJUbQEBbcEF/1x4XLSo UheynBv9lZtVDYdzg5qBQRUKMlHeKHvuDvLHHhCnxy0EqID4sloQAW3hAIf33sCE Os08LWB+VsNtE3nqkrfs54vEdm+OnCiBTwT2o9bcjMXjwSUhEBT0/1dsDGP4boGg gsR6fgaks8kIjuTiLeCJ0aSlVz7VVNgBr8klj1Vi8vMrTrs5jpx9Rh4/DLa8HvXl isr4RHDx290J5yd66U5dwPtwL5PcSGqFWtGfyFUpFjrB92sIzU4cE9+WzokAVQMF EC/T5pxJuCRZ+BFKkwEBHtoCAI/0vtRlvDE4+IMWTfOmU/TuJM80ltVZl9+MOdn3 4EGSf5TO5MIGu9sLIO+mTTTZXZNbFNo0AMyUZAEVDh+JEGQ= =fHhI -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- From frissell at panix.com Wed Jan 29 08:56:49 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 08:56:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970129120149.0196e448@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "In an interview Tuesday, [David L.] Aaron [the Feds' Crypto Ambassador] disputed the industry's view that the U.S. efforts to control cryptographic technology are being outstripped by the pace of the technology. "When I talk to other governments," he said, "they still don't feel that the cat is out of the bag." What the fuck do *they* know? DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMu+CdoVO4r4sgSPhAQHMqgQAhLoHArHx76zdXu8yM7WrThPi0pn8U5wG IQQItZFQAK84MnnbKDEDsW4SW5e9pM7JaFWbFqUg4VooAnKRd/2oITSijEW57jsR SQrhdqztR5fX82Wi9kBNsx92+McywzaeJBI6t+oTEYqqUlhQhzCoJiUpjMu9Q9FR 2gg8Mc01l4E= =MgUH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 29 09:02:29 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:02:29 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sandy Loses His Gold Star In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32EF9488.5C61@sk.sympatico.ca> Dale Thorn wrote: > I hope to God you're paying attention, Toto. You just got a new > rule: inclusion of no-longer-relevant comments. Now if you pay close > attention from now on, and write these things down, you won't forget. > (until there's a new rule, but that's the way these things work). Of course I'm paying attention. That's why Sandy had to 'double-talk' to explain how his denial that the post was sent to the 'flames' list really meant that it was sent to the 'spam' list, which just happens to be the 'flames' list, except on Thursdays between 2 p.m. and 4 p.m., when it is called the 'shit' list. Toto From syntelsi at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 29 09:15:47 1997 From: syntelsi at ix.netcom.com (Syntel) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:15:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: exporting stego Message-ID: <32EF84A5.2211@ix.netcom.com> Just a quickie, Does the present ITAR / DoC regulations cover the export of Steganography programs? thanks Steveo From frissell at panix.com Wed Jan 29 09:19:46 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:19:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701291642.IAA05043@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970129122157.019fefe8@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 10:53 AM 1/29/97 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >I disagree. Where does this money "escape" to? Do you spend it on rent, >pizza, a new stereo? Hmm... These are all meatspace transactions and can >be taxed. Money that escapes into Cyberspace just remains there in much the same way that money that escapes offshore today just stays there. It is not usually repatriated. Offshore funds accumulate offshore and earn interest and dividends there. If the onshore owners need their offshore money they do not, repeat do not, repatriate it. They borrow it instead and pay it back with (deductible) interest expatriating more money. The same practice can be followed in cyberspace. Stateless funds (whether Offshore or in Cyberspace) can be used to: 1) Pay salaries 2) Make loans 3) Buy digital goods and services (telecoms, entertainment, etc.) 4) Pay school fees 5) Pay for travel 6) Pay for mail order goods (customs duties will fade) Individuals can also easily support their lifestyles with Offshore or Cyberspace funds by using stateless credit cards and taking cash from ATM machines using stateless ATM cards. You can certainly use offshore or cyberspacial funds to pay the rent on your flat in Montreux overlooking Lake Geneva and not too many taxes will be applied to that transaction. Accumulating vast wealth (even if it is only represented as bits) can be very fun as well. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMu+HMIVO4r4sgSPhAQGf4wQA3V8f21i8fYK7S4BkhGyFE2/5hWgPgpSH mShQ3tDu8aK9O6OV4e3OdXdl3+Ack9cGWKBEeS8sL9UscYJ96NmURgsZp5rx/nJS S51C05IS/mxFlW1BusS2UvyZBBI321/gwyLysexWcxaLjpieKTfW3eZe9cm+1Kb7 n9cXvTMlF8A= =mnFh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From falk at Eng.Sun.COM Wed Jan 29 09:39:52 1997 From: falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:39:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP Key Preview... Message-ID: <199701291738.JAA23721@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > is there a way to preview the contents of a received public key, > without adding it automatically to the public key ring? Trivial. Just have pgp look at the file without giving it any commands. I.e. instead of pgp -ka do pgp Pgp will examine the file, tell you it contains keys, show them to you and then ask if you want to add them to your keyring. This is the way I normally add keys, just because I like to look at *any* file before I add it to any system. From falk at Eng.Sun.COM Wed Jan 29 09:41:52 1997 From: falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 09:41:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701291740.JAA23726@peregrine.eng.sun.com> > I just ran out of asswipe. > Does anyone have any RSA Data Security, Inc. stock they'd like to > sell? Now, now. I don't think RSADSI had any illusions of 40-bit keys being secure; they just wanted to find out just *how* insecure they were. I suspect that this crack will *benefit* RSADSI, and the rest of the crypto community, by helping to convince the feds to ease up. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Wed Jan 29 10:05:31 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:05:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701291805.KAA29363@mailmasher.com> At 10:46 AM 1/29/1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of > libel. It is, they say, a rich man's game -- if I'm libeled by the > NYT, I'm probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump > can. Moreover, if I don't have the resources to sue but the > statement is libelous, it creates a *presumption* in the minds of > the readers that the article is certainly true. (If it were not, I > would have sued, right?) The wealthy also use libel suits to suppress dissent. Greg's point that poor people aren't worth suing is only true if the motivation is financial. Often it is not. Conveniently, many of those whose silence is desired are among the petty bourgeouis and have a net worth of roughly $50,000. Enough to make the suit appear legitimate, but not enough to allow the target to brush off the legal fees, if they win the case. Consider also the artificial distinction between private and public figures. It is easier for a private figure to sue for libel. Yet, the most influential people in the country are private figures. Reporters must tread very carefully when covering the activities of these people. Thus, we hear little of them. It would be interesting to know when libel law was first introduced to the United States. Does anybody know? John Peter Zenger From pjm at spe.com Wed Jan 29 10:17:05 1997 From: pjm at spe.com (Patrick May) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:17:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <199701290256.SAA14915@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701291801.KAA01112@gulch.spe.com> Rick Osborne writes: > At 12:32 PM 1/28/97 -0500, Derek Atkins wrote: > >This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be > >admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and > >1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. > > I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT > even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests > with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I > was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in > Drama, and played Tennis. I have a degree from MIT and got in with marks only slightly higher than these. My verbal SAT was actually higher than my math. > The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I > made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need > full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the > Russian front!" This is an incorrect conclusion. I'm replying publicly to your message because I would hate for a kid with ability and little or no money to give up on getting into MIT without trying. I grew up on a small farm in Maine and got zero financial help for college from my folks. The financial aid people at Tech assured me that, if I were admitted, they would come up with a package of grants, scholarships, and loans to make the nut. With me working through school, they did. I've just finished retiring the $45k+ debt. > MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most > part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty > assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) I've been accused of being an asshole on more than one occasion (although never snooty). I think it's more a matter of temperament than anything Tech did to me, though. Regards, pjm From mikej2 at Exabyte.COM Wed Jan 29 10:18:38 1997 From: mikej2 at Exabyte.COM (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:18:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Complying with the EAR [was: More Circumventing the ITAR] In-Reply-To: <199701290307.WAA13939@mercury.peganet.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Mark Rosen wrote: > I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically > about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for You should check the exact text yourself, but the way I read the EAR, you are not "exporting" strong cryptographic software without a license (exept to Canada, which needs no license) if you do things "such as" (1) have the guests to your site acknowledge that the EAR restricts export, (2) have the guests affirm that they can legally get the software (proper citizenship or residency & location), and (3) "check the address of the destination computer to see if it is in the USA" or Canada. The last one, I interpret rather loosely to mean that if the guest's email address domain isn't one commonly used in the USA or Canada, then I deny access. We all know that not all .com addresses are North American, but chances are really good that if the address ends in .ru, then the destination machine is probably not in North America. This is not a perfect way to prevent export, of course, but it is what the regulations say, as I read them. For a pointer to the regulations and to my access request form and crypto site, see http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and most lawyers don't even understand this stuff, so you read and act on it at your own risk. This is just my best effort to comply with the law without sacrificing my right to publish. > download at the web page below. On my web page, I have some stuff in bold > print that informs about the ITAR and tells people to go away if they're > not from the US or Canada. Does this count as an unrestricted FTP site? Is there any reason why people have to look at your warning before reading your warning? At my site, the ftp site itself is in a hidden directory that changes names often enough that people can't successfully link to the restricted files for very long without going through my warning page. Indeed, my site can't be navigated and indexed properly by web search robots. At your site, it is extremely likely that someone would find your software without ever seeing your warning. Indeed, your software is on another server with another interface. I think that your site counts as unrestricted. > Also, back to the question of registration numbers. A registration number > is just a string of letters and numbers, and is essentially the same as a > friendly letter; it contains no cryptographic code. For all anyone knows, I > could just be charging for pseudo-random numbers, again, nothing of > cryptographic significance. Is it illegal for me to mail someone outside of > the US or Canada a registration code? Thanks for any help. The registration code is legally equivalent to the registered software that it unlocks. Sending the registration code to France, for example, would be likely to be considered the same as sending the registered software to France (in violation of the laws of both countries). Now if the "unregistered" software is weak (i. e. crippled key length) without the registration code, you need not worry about posting it publicly and without restriction, as long as you don't export the registration code (except to Canada) without a license. I do this with Quicrypt (ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/qcrypt11.zip). BTW, I posted krem104.zip at my site. Please let me know if I mangled it in the process... http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm Michael Paul Johnson Opinions herein are not necessarily Exabyte's. Work: mpj at exabyte.com http://www.exabyte.com Personal: mpj at csn.net http://www.csn.net/~mpj BBS 303-772-1062 From nobody at REPLAY.COM Wed Jan 29 10:27:01 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:27:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Physician, Heal Thyself! Message-ID: <199701291826.TAA02571@basement.replay.com> If I say I doubt this message will make into the "Approved By Sandy" list, it perhaps will, but my very mention of this may mean Fearless Leader will then chuck it into his Reject pile, but then.... Our Founder wrote: #Silly things happen when one responds literally to an obvious #metaphor. (see, "analogy.") See "sarcasm." Once again, Sandy flames, but calls it erudition. He uses sophistry to explain why *his* flames are actually just "corrections". #Nonsense. Richard may have read my response on the Unedited list #and Paul post on the Moderated list, but I sent my response to #Nope, wrong again. I referenced sophistry and hypocracy. I #leave the significance of the difference as an exercise to the #student. (Hint: one is an argument to the man, the other isn't.) More pointless sarcasm. This is the stuff Sandy would presumably dump into his "not fit for True Cypherpunks" pile, except that he wrote it, and so it is by definition approved. Utter hypocrisy. #And wrong yet again. Not a personal attack but commentary on #wooly thinking. Remember children, "If it comes from Sandy and appears to be a flame, it really isn't. It is just a comment on "woolly thinking."" #> One might wonder just what the rules of proper decorum are. #One might read my posts on this point and pay attention. And I urge our Enlightened Leader to take his own medicine. Stop flaming the list and calling it mere commentary. Xanthar -- -- From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Wed Jan 29 10:29:04 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:29:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI=LIE Message-ID: <19970129175212.32434.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> >From http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/fbi-lab.html: > The World Trade Center bomb was made of urea-nitrate, a compound > that can be confused with non-explosive mixtures of the same > ingredients. In an informal internal check of lab procedures, some > senior FBI lab workers mixed human urine with fertilizer and added > samples of that non-explosive mixture to the flow of material being > tested by the chemistry unit. A manager in the chemistry lab > identified the urine-fertilizer mixture as an explosive. Just coincidentally, these errors imprison the innocent instead of freeing the guilty. > Still, Joseph E. DiGenova, a former U.S. attorney in Washington, > said the issues raised in the report would allow defendants to > contest lab findings against them and would permit people convicted > of crimes to attempt to reopen their cases, based on the possibility > of flawed forensic evidence. > "It's going to be a royal pain in the neck for federal judges and > prosecutors and a godsend for defense attorneys looking for a means > of getting their clients off," he said Why not "proving their innocence"? A prosecutor - and one who does not respect our legal tradition of presumed innocence - is not a good choice for a quote here. Nowhere in the entire article is there evidence that the reporters talked to anyone outside the FBI/Justice Department milieu. > Scientists at the lab said they were often stifled in a lab run by > non-technical field agents who had little knowledge of science and > who regularly altered reports to help prosecutors. But law > enforcement officials said there was little evidence that anyone had > been wrongly convicted based on improper lab work. Why isn't this the story? FBI agents regularly committed perjury, and we see a story about lab errors. Elliot Ness From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 29 10:30:17 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:30:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <199701291740.JAA23726@peregrine.eng.sun.com> Message-ID: <32EFB24D.46C2@sk.sympatico.ca> Ed Falk wrote: > Toto wrote: > > I just ran out of asswipe. > I suspect that this crack will *benefit* RSADSI, and the rest of the > crypto community Ed, You're not 'outing' me, are you? Toto From f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca Wed Jan 29 10:38:00 1997 From: f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca (f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:38:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <199701291545.KAA02713@waterville.openmarket.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Dan Geer wrote: > Export controls are meaningless without domestic use restrictions and > domestic use restrictions will never pass the test of the First > Amendment. Just because something is unconstitutional doesn't mean that learned judicial appointees will find it unconstitutional. When domestic GAK is passed, it will be structured to fit into the judicial philosophy of the day. This is under the same philosophy that says television shows are not speech, but rather a commercial enterprise. If the courts were first amendments absolutists, like the persons on these two lists, there would be no problem seeing porn on primetime TV. There would also be no V-chip law. When they manage to get the political conscensus, they will pass it. Incidentally, I remind you of the results of the moot court that was held at one of the CFP conferences, where a GAK case was tried in front of real federal judges by real lawyers. Our side lost. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 29 10:41:28 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:41:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701291841.KAA06953@toad.com> At 09:40 PM 1/27/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > >jim bell wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > >> Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >> prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >> any recognition of this fact. > >Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility >or consistency. > >If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out >on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be >dead as a doornail in a week. > So you're saying that the system would work. Mr. bell would be targeted, a price on his head, for starting that very system. Mr. Bell would be a martyr, his system being proven by his own death. It would be some varient of his idea that would be used to kill him, a bounty. I think that the system would work, I also think that it would be easiest to use by those already in possession of the money. It would take care of part of our overpopulation problem though... From adam at homeport.org Wed Jan 29 10:56:16 1997 From: adam at homeport.org (Adam Shostack) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:56:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI=LIE Message-ID: <199701291856.KAA07394@toad.com> http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/fbi-lab.html Login cypherpunks, password cypherpunks. WASHINGTON -- For decades the FBI's reputation as a crime-fighting agency has rested heavily on its high-tech forensic laboratory, which could solve baffling crimes from a speck of blood, a sliver of paint or the thinnest filament of human hair. But an investigation by the Justice Department's inspector general has put the FBI laboratory, and the way the agency has used it, under the glare of public scrutiny. The findings, which were turned over to FBI officials last week, are threatening to shatter the image of an agency on the cutting edge of scientific sleuthing. [...] -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume From frissell at panix.com Wed Jan 29 10:56:16 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:56:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701291856.KAA07395@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "In an interview Tuesday, [David L.] Aaron [the Feds' Crypto Ambassador] disputed the industry's view that the U.S. efforts to control cryptographic technology are being outstripped by the pace of the technology. "When I talk to other governments," he said, "they still don't feel that the cat is out of the bag." What the fuck do *they* know? DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMu+CdoVO4r4sgSPhAQHMqgQAhLoHArHx76zdXu8yM7WrThPi0pn8U5wG IQQItZFQAK84MnnbKDEDsW4SW5e9pM7JaFWbFqUg4VooAnKRd/2oITSijEW57jsR SQrhdqztR5fX82Wi9kBNsx92+McywzaeJBI6t+oTEYqqUlhQhzCoJiUpjMu9Q9FR 2gg8Mc01l4E= =MgUH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From Robalini at aol.com Wed Jan 29 10:56:18 1997 From: Robalini at aol.com (Robalini at aol.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:56:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI Suspends Lab Whistleblower Message-ID: <199701291856.KAA07398@toad.com> Thanks to Paul Watson for forwarding this to me. >From eplurib at megalinx.net Mon Jan 27 20:16:54 1997 01/27/1997 20:06 EST FBI Suspends Lab Whistleblower By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN Associated Press Writer WASHINGTON (AP) -- The FBI has suspended a scientist-agent whose charges led to a still-secret Justice Department report critical of some FBI crime lab workers. A Republican senator said Monday the suspension ``appears to be a reprisal.'' The FBI also took action regarding other employees criticized in the secret report, said officials who spoke on condition of anonymity. Three or four employees were transferred out of the FBI lab but not suspended, these officials said. The agent, Frederic Whitehurst, once an FBI crime lab supervisor, was put on administrative leave with pay Friday afternoon and barred from entering any FBI building, even as a guest, according to a letter from Acting Lab Director Donald W. Thompson Jr. The FBI took Whitehurst's badge and gun, said Whitehurst's lawyer, Stephen Kohn. The action came just days after FBI Director Louis J. Freeh received a report from the Justice Department's inspector general that officials said criticizes the work of some FBI lab employees and a report from a special investigative counsel who looked into an alleged press leak by Whitehurst. Thompson's letter said only that Whitehurst was suspended ``pending our review of information in the possession of the Department of Justice'' and added that the move ``does not indicate that you have engaged in any inappropriate conduct.'' FBI spokesman Bill Carter said the bureau would have a statement on the matter later. Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of a Judiciary subcommittee on administrative oversight, wrote Freeh on Monday to demand that FBI officials appear Tuesday in his office to justify the action against Whitehurst. ``Recently, a Department of Justice official knowledgeable about the IG's investigation told me privately that Dr. Whitehurst had done a service for his country in bringing forth his information,'' Grassley wrote. ``The action taken by the FBI implies that he is being punished for `committing truth.' It appears to be a reprisal for his disclosures,'' Grassley wrote. Kohn said that after Whitehurst's allegation about lab misconduct became known ``he became a lighting rod for other employees to funnel information to the inspector general.'' Kohn said FBI officials became ``very, very angry'' when they received the inspector general's report and learned that ``Whitehurst funneled information directly from other FBI employees to the inspector general and the investigation mushroomed beyond what they had expected.'' Kohn said that was why Whitehurst, once rated by the FBI as its top expert on bomb residues, was barred from entering FBI buildings and from getting information from other employees. The still-secret inspector general's report is being reviewed by FBI officials to determine whether any lab employees will be disciplined. The inspector general hired a panel of outside scientists to evaluate the work of the lab after Whitehurst alleged in late 1995 that a pro- prosecution bias and mishandling of evidence may have tainted crime lab work or testimony on several high-profile federal cases. These include the World Trade Center bombing, the mail-bomb killing of a federal judge and a civil rights lawyer, and the Oklahoma City federal building bombing. Prosecutors have decided not to use at least one lab employee as a witness in the Oklahoma City bombing case and in a bank robbery case in Ohio, sources said Monday, apparently to prevent defense attorneys from using the inspector general report to undermine any testimony by the employee. Stephen Jones, counsel for Timothy McVeigh, who is charged in the Oklahoma City case, has deposed Whitehurst and indicated he may be called as a defense witness. Nearly a year ago, Whitehurst was called to an interview by Special Investigative Counsel Joseph C. Hutchison, who was brought here from the Connecticut U.S. attorney's office to conduct the leak investigation. Hutchison wrote Whitehurst's lawyers that ``there is substantial reason to believe that your client ... is responsible for the unauthorized release of work-related information to Jeff Stein,'' a freelance writer who produced an article intended for publication in Playboy magazine. At that time, Carl Stern, then Justice Department spokesman, said Playboy wrote the department to check the article's facts, which allowed officials to learn that the article would contain information and allegations about FBI employees that are protected from public release by the Privacy Act. Stern said, ``There is no criminal investigation looking into the conduct of Frederic Whitehurst. There's an administrative inquiry in connection with the leak of Whitehurst's communications with the department to a writer from Playboy magazine.'' =========================================================== E Pluribus Unum - http://home.megalinx.net/~eplurib/home.html P.O. Box 477; Stockport, OH 43787 Voice (614) 836-7650 Fax (614) 836-7651 "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge" Hosea 4:6 From aga at dhp.com Wed Jan 29 10:58:00 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:58:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701291858.KAA07442@toad.com> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > aga wrote: > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > aga wrote: > > > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > > > > Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > > > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > > > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > > > > suffice to be immediately terminated. > > > > No trial, huh? > > Good question. The law we have right now already assumes that there > are situations where a criminal will not go peacefully, if at all. > In some countries (years ago?) such as England, bobbies were known > to not carry firearms for ordinary street duty. Am I right? But > here in the USA, that would be unthinkable. > > So my proposal doesn't eliminate the responsibility portion of law > enforcement. I'd say, if a target were eliminated thru negligence, > malfeasance, or other wrongdoing under "color of law" or whatever, > let the courts handle that as they do now. > Just who is doing the eliminating? > My suggestion would give the law enforcers the ability to dispense > the first level of justice expeditiously, which they cannot accomplish > now due to all of the red tape and the corrupt legal system (lawyers > specialize in getting chronic offenders off, particularly "traffic" > offenses). By transferring a major portion of the bureaucracy to > the pencil pushers, we can free up the street cops to do what they > do best, namely bust or eliminate criminals. > Cops can never be trusted to "dispense justice," and half of the cops are themselves criminals in what they do. Most cops steal evidence and lie like crazy in Court. All they want is a conviction, and it mattters not how it is obtained. > I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the > virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get > out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those > holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to > provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, > given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter > aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, > well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better > off when we do. > I would trust robots more than humanoids. From osborne at gateway.grumman.com Wed Jan 29 10:59:48 1997 From: osborne at gateway.grumman.com (Rick Osborne) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:59:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible Message-ID: <199701291859.KAA07480@toad.com> At 06:45 AM 1/29/97 +0100, Anonymous (Xanthar) wrote: >Most intelligent people apply to several schools, knowing that >admissions practices are subject to the vagaries of reality. If you are implying that I was not intelligent enough to apply to more than one school, then you are mistaken. MIT was the *only* school out of the six I applied to (including CMU, CalTech, GaTech) that turned me down. >My guess is that "other factors" were involved. I'm sure that was probably true. I'm just saying that I doubt the admissions process is as Financial-Aid-blind as they would have us believe. >MIT offered me a substantial economic aid package, in the form of loans, >grants, and various campus jobs. What does this tell you? It tells me that you're a better man than I, I guess. I'm sorry if I sound bitter, but one does not work for a goal for over a decade of his life, get rejected for it, and then just "forget it". Anyone who tells you otherwise needs to see a therapist. _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ Don't have awk? Use this simple sh emulation: #!/bin/sh echo 'Awk bailing out!' >&2 exit 2 From syntelsi at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 29 11:10:47 1997 From: syntelsi at ix.netcom.com (Syntel) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:10:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: exporting stego Message-ID: <199701291910.LAA07699@toad.com> Just a quickie, Does the present ITAR / DoC regulations cover the export of Steganography programs? thanks Steveo From falk at Eng.Sun.COM Wed Jan 29 11:11:10 1997 From: falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:11:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP Key Preview... Message-ID: <199701291911.LAA07734@toad.com> > is there a way to preview the contents of a received public key, > without adding it automatically to the public key ring? Trivial. Just have pgp look at the file without giving it any commands. I.e. instead of pgp -ka do pgp Pgp will examine the file, tell you it contains keys, show them to you and then ask if you want to add them to your keyring. This is the way I normally add keys, just because I like to look at *any* file before I add it to any system. From falk at Eng.Sun.COM Wed Jan 29 11:11:14 1997 From: falk at Eng.Sun.COM (Ed Falk) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:11:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701291911.LAA07740@toad.com> > I just ran out of asswipe. > Does anyone have any RSA Data Security, Inc. stock they'd like to > sell? Now, now. I don't think RSADSI had any illusions of 40-bit keys being secure; they just wanted to find out just *how* insecure they were. I suspect that this crack will *benefit* RSADSI, and the rest of the crypto community, by helping to convince the feds to ease up. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Wed Jan 29 11:19:59 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:19:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701291919.LAA08035@toad.com> At 10:46 AM 1/29/1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of > libel. It is, they say, a rich man's game -- if I'm libeled by the > NYT, I'm probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump > can. Moreover, if I don't have the resources to sue but the > statement is libelous, it creates a *presumption* in the minds of > the readers that the article is certainly true. (If it were not, I > would have sued, right?) The wealthy also use libel suits to suppress dissent. Greg's point that poor people aren't worth suing is only true if the motivation is financial. Often it is not. Conveniently, many of those whose silence is desired are among the petty bourgeouis and have a net worth of roughly $50,000. Enough to make the suit appear legitimate, but not enough to allow the target to brush off the legal fees, if they win the case. Consider also the artificial distinction between private and public figures. It is easier for a private figure to sue for libel. Yet, the most influential people in the country are private figures. Reporters must tread very carefully when covering the activities of these people. Thus, we hear little of them. It would be interesting to know when libel law was first introduced to the United States. Does anybody know? John Peter Zenger From pjm at spe.com Wed Jan 29 11:20:12 1997 From: pjm at spe.com (Patrick May) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:20:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701291920.LAA08056@toad.com> Rick Osborne writes: > At 12:32 PM 1/28/97 -0500, Derek Atkins wrote: > >This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be > >admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and > >1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. > > I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT > even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests > with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I > was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in > Drama, and played Tennis. I have a degree from MIT and got in with marks only slightly higher than these. My verbal SAT was actually higher than my math. > The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I > made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need > full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the > Russian front!" This is an incorrect conclusion. I'm replying publicly to your message because I would hate for a kid with ability and little or no money to give up on getting into MIT without trying. I grew up on a small farm in Maine and got zero financial help for college from my folks. The financial aid people at Tech assured me that, if I were admitted, they would come up with a package of grants, scholarships, and loans to make the nut. With me working through school, they did. I've just finished retiring the $45k+ debt. > MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most > part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty > assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) I've been accused of being an asshole on more than one occasion (although never snooty). I think it's more a matter of temperament than anything Tech did to me, though. Regards, pjm From mikej2 at exabyte.com Wed Jan 29 11:21:28 1997 From: mikej2 at exabyte.com (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:21:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Complying with the EAR [was: More Circumventing the ITAR] Message-ID: <199701291921.LAA08121@toad.com> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Mark Rosen wrote: > I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically > about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for You should check the exact text yourself, but the way I read the EAR, you are not "exporting" strong cryptographic software without a license (exept to Canada, which needs no license) if you do things "such as" (1) have the guests to your site acknowledge that the EAR restricts export, (2) have the guests affirm that they can legally get the software (proper citizenship or residency & location), and (3) "check the address of the destination computer to see if it is in the USA" or Canada. The last one, I interpret rather loosely to mean that if the guest's email address domain isn't one commonly used in the USA or Canada, then I deny access. We all know that not all .com addresses are North American, but chances are really good that if the address ends in .ru, then the destination machine is probably not in North America. This is not a perfect way to prevent export, of course, but it is what the regulations say, as I read them. For a pointer to the regulations and to my access request form and crypto site, see http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and most lawyers don't even understand this stuff, so you read and act on it at your own risk. This is just my best effort to comply with the law without sacrificing my right to publish. > download at the web page below. On my web page, I have some stuff in bold > print that informs about the ITAR and tells people to go away if they're > not from the US or Canada. Does this count as an unrestricted FTP site? Is there any reason why people have to look at your warning before reading your warning? At my site, the ftp site itself is in a hidden directory that changes names often enough that people can't successfully link to the restricted files for very long without going through my warning page. Indeed, my site can't be navigated and indexed properly by web search robots. At your site, it is extremely likely that someone would find your software without ever seeing your warning. Indeed, your software is on another server with another interface. I think that your site counts as unrestricted. > Also, back to the question of registration numbers. A registration number > is just a string of letters and numbers, and is essentially the same as a > friendly letter; it contains no cryptographic code. For all anyone knows, I > could just be charging for pseudo-random numbers, again, nothing of > cryptographic significance. Is it illegal for me to mail someone outside of > the US or Canada a registration code? Thanks for any help. The registration code is legally equivalent to the registered software that it unlocks. Sending the registration code to France, for example, would be likely to be considered the same as sending the registered software to France (in violation of the laws of both countries). Now if the "unregistered" software is weak (i. e. crippled key length) without the registration code, you need not worry about posting it publicly and without restriction, as long as you don't export the registration code (except to Canada) without a license. I do this with Quicrypt (ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/qcrypt11.zip). BTW, I posted krem104.zip at my site. Please let me know if I mangled it in the process... http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm Michael Paul Johnson Opinions herein are not necessarily Exabyte's. Work: mpj at exabyte.com http://www.exabyte.com Personal: mpj at csn.net http://www.csn.net/~mpj BBS 303-772-1062 From frissell at panix.com Wed Jan 29 11:21:57 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:21:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701291921.LAA08135@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 10:53 AM 1/29/97 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >I disagree. Where does this money "escape" to? Do you spend it on rent, >pizza, a new stereo? Hmm... These are all meatspace transactions and can >be taxed. Money that escapes into Cyberspace just remains there in much the same way that money that escapes offshore today just stays there. It is not usually repatriated. Offshore funds accumulate offshore and earn interest and dividends there. If the onshore owners need their offshore money they do not, repeat do not, repatriate it. They borrow it instead and pay it back with (deductible) interest expatriating more money. The same practice can be followed in cyberspace. Stateless funds (whether Offshore or in Cyberspace) can be used to: 1) Pay salaries 2) Make loans 3) Buy digital goods and services (telecoms, entertainment, etc.) 4) Pay school fees 5) Pay for travel 6) Pay for mail order goods (customs duties will fade) Individuals can also easily support their lifestyles with Offshore or Cyberspace funds by using stateless credit cards and taking cash from ATM machines using stateless ATM cards. You can certainly use offshore or cyberspacial funds to pay the rent on your flat in Montreux overlooking Lake Geneva and not too many taxes will be applied to that transaction. Accumulating vast wealth (even if it is only represented as bits) can be very fun as well. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMu+HMIVO4r4sgSPhAQGf4wQA3V8f21i8fYK7S4BkhGyFE2/5hWgPgpSH mShQ3tDu8aK9O6OV4e3OdXdl3+Ack9cGWKBEeS8sL9UscYJ96NmURgsZp5rx/nJS S51C05IS/mxFlW1BusS2UvyZBBI321/gwyLysexWcxaLjpieKTfW3eZe9cm+1Kb7 n9cXvTMlF8A= =mnFh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 29 11:25:54 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:25:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701291925.LAA08306@toad.com> Ed Falk wrote: > Toto wrote: > > I just ran out of asswipe. > I suspect that this crack will *benefit* RSADSI, and the rest of the > crypto community Ed, You're not 'outing' me, are you? Toto From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 29 11:35:38 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:35:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701291935.LAA08623@toad.com> At 09:40 PM 1/27/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > >jim bell wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > >> Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >> prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >> any recognition of this fact. > >Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility >or consistency. > >If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out >on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be >dead as a doornail in a week. > So you're saying that the system would work. Mr. bell would be targeted, a price on his head, for starting that very system. Mr. Bell would be a martyr, his system being proven by his own death. It would be some varient of his idea that would be used to kill him, a bounty. I think that the system would work, I also think that it would be easiest to use by those already in possession of the money. It would take care of part of our overpopulation problem though... From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Wed Jan 29 11:36:40 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:36:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI=LIE Message-ID: <199701291936.LAA08662@toad.com> >From http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/fbi-lab.html: > The World Trade Center bomb was made of urea-nitrate, a compound > that can be confused with non-explosive mixtures of the same > ingredients. In an informal internal check of lab procedures, some > senior FBI lab workers mixed human urine with fertilizer and added > samples of that non-explosive mixture to the flow of material being > tested by the chemistry unit. A manager in the chemistry lab > identified the urine-fertilizer mixture as an explosive. Just coincidentally, these errors imprison the innocent instead of freeing the guilty. > Still, Joseph E. DiGenova, a former U.S. attorney in Washington, > said the issues raised in the report would allow defendants to > contest lab findings against them and would permit people convicted > of crimes to attempt to reopen their cases, based on the possibility > of flawed forensic evidence. > "It's going to be a royal pain in the neck for federal judges and > prosecutors and a godsend for defense attorneys looking for a means > of getting their clients off," he said Why not "proving their innocence"? A prosecutor - and one who does not respect our legal tradition of presumed innocence - is not a good choice for a quote here. Nowhere in the entire article is there evidence that the reporters talked to anyone outside the FBI/Justice Department milieu. > Scientists at the lab said they were often stifled in a lab run by > non-technical field agents who had little knowledge of science and > who regularly altered reports to help prosecutors. But law > enforcement officials said there was little evidence that anyone had > been wrongly convicted based on improper lab work. Why isn't this the story? FBI agents regularly committed perjury, and we see a story about lab errors. Elliot Ness From sandfort at crl.com Wed Jan 29 11:36:52 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:36:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Physician, Heal Thyself! In-Reply-To: <199701291826.TAA02571@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote: > This is the stuff Sandy would presumably dump into > his "not fit for True Cypherpunks" pile, except that he wrote it, and so it > is by definition approved. It was not approved for the moderated list. I sent my comments to the flames list where they belonged. (It went to the unedited list too, but that's fair game as well.) Sorry you didn't understand that. > And I urge our Enlightened Leader to take his own medicine. Stop flaming > the list and calling it mere commentary. So let me see if I've got this, this list should be open to all flamers EXCEPT me? Curious. At any rate, I am going to take anonymous' advice. I will largely refrain from addressing any of the garbage that ends up on the flame and spam lists. You guys are mostly just talking to yourselves anyway. Toodles, S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca Wed Jan 29 11:37:24 1997 From: f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca (f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:37:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701291937.LAA08689@toad.com> On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Dan Geer wrote: > Export controls are meaningless without domestic use restrictions and > domestic use restrictions will never pass the test of the First > Amendment. Just because something is unconstitutional doesn't mean that learned judicial appointees will find it unconstitutional. When domestic GAK is passed, it will be structured to fit into the judicial philosophy of the day. This is under the same philosophy that says television shows are not speech, but rather a commercial enterprise. If the courts were first amendments absolutists, like the persons on these two lists, there would be no problem seeing porn on primetime TV. There would also be no V-chip law. When they manage to get the political conscensus, they will pass it. Incidentally, I remind you of the results of the moot court that was held at one of the CFP conferences, where a GAK case was tried in front of real federal judges by real lawyers. Our side lost. From mikej2 at exabyte.com Wed Jan 29 11:37:25 1997 From: mikej2 at exabyte.com (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:37:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Complying with the EAR [was: More Circumventing the ITAR] Message-ID: <199701291937.LAA08691@toad.com> On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Mark Rosen wrote: > I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically > about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for You should check the exact text yourself, but the way I read the EAR, you are not "exporting" strong cryptographic software without a license (exept to Canada, which needs no license) if you do things "such as" (1) have the guests to your site acknowledge that the EAR restricts export, (2) have the guests affirm that they can legally get the software (proper citizenship or residency & location), and (3) "check the address of the destination computer to see if it is in the USA" or Canada. The last one, I interpret rather loosely to mean that if the guest's email address domain isn't one commonly used in the USA or Canada, then I deny access. We all know that not all .com addresses are North American, but chances are really good that if the address ends in .ru, then the destination machine is probably not in North America. This is not a perfect way to prevent export, of course, but it is what the regulations say, as I read them. For a pointer to the regulations and to my access request form and crypto site, see http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, and most lawyers don't even understand this stuff, so you read and act on it at your own risk. This is just my best effort to comply with the law without sacrificing my right to publish. > download at the web page below. On my web page, I have some stuff in bold > print that informs about the ITAR and tells people to go away if they're > not from the US or Canada. Does this count as an unrestricted FTP site? Is there any reason why people have to look at your warning before reading your warning? At my site, the ftp site itself is in a hidden directory that changes names often enough that people can't successfully link to the restricted files for very long without going through my warning page. Indeed, my site can't be navigated and indexed properly by web search robots. At your site, it is extremely likely that someone would find your software without ever seeing your warning. Indeed, your software is on another server with another interface. I think that your site counts as unrestricted. > Also, back to the question of registration numbers. A registration number > is just a string of letters and numbers, and is essentially the same as a > friendly letter; it contains no cryptographic code. For all anyone knows, I > could just be charging for pseudo-random numbers, again, nothing of > cryptographic significance. Is it illegal for me to mail someone outside of > the US or Canada a registration code? Thanks for any help. The registration code is legally equivalent to the registered software that it unlocks. Sending the registration code to France, for example, would be likely to be considered the same as sending the registered software to France (in violation of the laws of both countries). Now if the "unregistered" software is weak (i. e. crippled key length) without the registration code, you need not worry about posting it publicly and without restriction, as long as you don't export the registration code (except to Canada) without a license. I do this with Quicrypt (ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/qcrypt11.zip). BTW, I posted krem104.zip at my site. Please let me know if I mangled it in the process... http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm Michael Paul Johnson Opinions herein are not necessarily Exabyte's. Work: mpj at exabyte.com http://www.exabyte.com Personal: mpj at csn.net http://www.csn.net/~mpj BBS 303-772-1062 From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jan 29 11:46:33 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 11:46:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701291841.NAA25341@life.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199701291946.OAA05417@muesli.ai.mit.edu> I think that with the demise of Mr Bell and anyone running a remailer there would be an end to his scheme pretty quickly. Society is not bound to put up with cranks and psychopaths. there is no right to anonymously call for murder. The authorities could easily stop Bells scheme. The point I was making is that it is not consistent as claimed. Phill From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Wed Jan 29 12:11:40 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 12:11:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Physician, Heal Thyself! In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, > > On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote: > > > This is the stuff Sandy would presumably dump into > > his "not fit for True Cypherpunks" pile, except that he wrote it, and so it > > is by definition approved. > > It was not approved for the moderated list. I sent my comments to the > flames list where they belonged. (It went to the unedited list too, > but that's fair game as well.) Sorry you didn't understand that. > > > And I urge our Enlightened Leader to take his own medicine. Stop flaming > > the list and calling it mere commentary. > > So let me see if I've got this, this list should be open to all flamers > EXCEPT me? Curious. At any rate, I am going to take anonymous' advice. > I will largely refrain from addressing any of the garbage that ends up on > the flame and spam lists. You guys are mostly just talking to yourselves > anyway. So how would you define a flame??? Seems more REASONABLE minds want to know???? > > Toodles, > > > S a n d y > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jan 29 12:25:57 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 12:25:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701292025.MAA10079@toad.com> I think that with the demise of Mr Bell and anyone running a remailer there would be an end to his scheme pretty quickly. Society is not bound to put up with cranks and psychopaths. there is no right to anonymously call for murder. The authorities could easily stop Bells scheme. The point I was making is that it is not consistent as claimed. Phill From sopwith at cuc.edu Wed Jan 29 12:38:00 1997 From: sopwith at cuc.edu (Elliot Lee) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 12:38:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... In-Reply-To: <199701291458.GAA03382@toad.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 29 Jan 1997 harka at nycmetro.com wrote: > Actually, I might not have chosen the correct words for what I > wanted... > I am looking for sniffer-programs, that analyze e-mail traffic on > the Net and filtering out all e-mails potentially interesting for > _intelligence services_. For example, I've heard, that if an e-mail > contains the words: "assassinate President" (DISCLAIMER: I hope, our > President lives a long and happy life, even after his > impeachment...:)), it will automatically get filtered and checked > out by the Secret Service. Everytime someone sends a message through White House web site to the president ( there is a comment form on the site ) it is scanned for keywords. It probably happens on other key avenues as well. Of course there are exceptions to every rule. I heard of a woman who wrote to Clinton something like: You are such a dynamite leader. I think you have such an explosive personality, and I'm dying to meet you. If you want to scan your E-mail, write a little perl script that takes a list of keywords to scan for, and the action to take when the keywords are found. It shouldn't be too hard. -- Elliot http://www.redhat.com/ "I'm a member of the Association of Federations of Linux Project Initiators That Never Really Get Much Done (AFLPITNRGMD, for short)." Just do it! From wendigo at pobox.com Wed Jan 29 12:38:04 1997 From: wendigo at pobox.com (Mark Rogaski) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 12:38:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701292043.PAA12641@deathstar.jabberwock.org> If I had experience with Netscape plugins and spare time, I'd try it myself. But here's my proposed solution. A plugin in Netscape intercepts all requests, encrypt the URL with a pubkey algorithm, encode the string base64, send it as GET input to a proxy server. The proxy server decodes and decrypts the URL, gets the requested page, and returns it. This beats out URL-based filtering. Still need to figure out the specifics of key-exchange. If we use 40-bit encryption, it's exportable, and it still works in our threat model (ie. we don't care if the watchers figure out the URL a few hours later). To beat out dropping packets with unacceptable pattern in them, we could use an SSL-based server as the proxy. The plugin could even have a nice little on/off switch and a list list of available proxies. mark -- [] Mark Rogaski || "Computers save time like kudzu [] [] wendigo at pobox.com || prevents soil erosion." [] [] http://www.pobox.com/~wendigo/ || - afcasta at texas.net [] [] >> finger for PGP pubkey << || [] From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 29 13:05:17 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:05:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701291946.OAA05417@muesli.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <199701292009.OAA02501@manifold.algebra.com> Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > I think that with the demise of Mr Bell and anyone running > a remailer there would be an end to his scheme pretty quickly. > > Society is not bound to put up with cranks and psychopaths. > there is no right to anonymously call for murder. The authorities > could easily stop Bells scheme. > > The point I was making is that it is not consistent as claimed. > Why, death of Jim Bell from his own murder machine is a very exciting, I would say a very Kafkian thing to happen. I am looking forward to it. I even think that Jim Bell would not oppose such an outcome that much, since his assination bot would be such an important invention for the humanity. Maybe it will reverse the course of world history! - Igor. From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jan 29 13:11:48 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:11:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP Key Preview... In-Reply-To: <199701291511.HAA03682@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701291514.PAA11456@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701291511.HAA03682 at toad.com>, on 01/29/97 at 07:28 AM, harka at nycmetro.com said: >Hi there, >is there a way to preview the contents of a received public key, >without adding it automatically to the public key ring? >Thanks a lot in advance... Yes, Say newkey.asc contains the new keys you wish to preview. Thye the following: pgp -kv newkey.asc It will display all the key info in that file. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Air conditioned environment - Do not open Windows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Registered E-Secure v1.1 0000000 iQCVAwUBMu++/49Co1n+aLhhAQEa/AP/b6LvLkII2itKK1L8kvOO7rk5qta3/7kV lbB1r+cSakVGBaCpjI1tq6TmWP4H6bhP1atZX1V/yGlg6cFJx8chy6jgx3JO0Ium 6qJGsBWhSentsJfiMan13uflDLVBJ9JSEy/II5EIzxHPR88UBokal3R/XkHpkjwt tOBF5Q9hFVU= =pgtD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 13:41:05 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:41:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: exporting stego In-Reply-To: <32EF84A5.2211@ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: [I've been taking my equipment apart and rearranging it, hence the silence] Syntel writes: > Just a quickie, > Does the present ITAR / DoC regulations cover the export of Steganography pro > thanks > Steveo EAR covers all security software, including even virus checkers. Of course the gubmint is irrelevant and should be soundly ignored. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 13:42:50 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:42:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <199701280126.RAA12277@toad.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com writes: > moscow state university in russia is not bad also. > > they teach lots of theory... which is good. > > - Igor. > Do they have a master's program in computer science? :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From isptv at access.digex.net Wed Jan 29 13:44:59 1997 From: isptv at access.digex.net (ISP-TV Main Contact) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:44:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Meeks Unfiltered" on ISP-TV Wednesday nights Message-ID: <199701292144.QAA16597@access4.digex.net> *** ISP-TV Program Announcement: "Meeks Unfiltered" *** Wednesday Nights *** *** 8:00 PM ET *** If you missed "Meeks Unfiltered" last week, you missed how easy it was to intercept cell phone calls, the recent decision on the Phil Karn encryption case, and electronic freedom in Hong Kong as it is taken over by China. Don't miss "Meeks Unfiltered" this week! Brock N. Meeks is the publisher of the 800,000 subscriber CyberWire Dispatch electronic news service, and he brings his crusading style into real-time Internet video with "Meeks Unfiltered." The live uncensored hour-long show, produced and distributed through ISP-TV, explores cyberspace and cyberpolitics Wednesdays at 8 PM Eastern Time. Call-in questions will be taken during the show at (301) 847-6571. Tell Brock and co-host Declan McCullagh what you think! **** This video interview can be viewed on the ISP-TV main CU-SeeMe reflector at IP 205.197.248.54, or other ISP-TV affiliate reflectors listed at http://www.digex.net/isptv/members.html. See URL http://www.digex.net/isptv for more information about the ISP-TV Network To obtain Enhanced CU-SeeMe software, go to: http://goliath.wpine.com/cudownload.htm From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 13:45:00 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:45:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: c2 internet accounts In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <8e9a2D6w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Sandy Sandfort writes: > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > C'punks, > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > > > does c2net still offer internet accounts? I liked their > > offer for internet accounts with a 5 mb web site via > > telnet. does anyone else know of a place for cheap > > telnet only accounts? > > C2Net no longer offers new shell accounts and we are phasing out > pre-existing accounts. We still offer virtual web hosting. > > > S a n d y > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > Check out Sameer's net.scum web page for some important information on C2. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 13:47:32 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:47:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment In-Reply-To: <199701291805.KAA29363@mailmasher.com> Message-ID: <6k8a2D2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) writes: > At 10:46 AM 1/29/1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of > > libel. It is, they say, a rich man's game -- if I'm libeled by the > > NYT, I'm probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump > > can. Moreover, if I don't have the resources to sue but the > > statement is libelous, it creates a *presumption* in the minds of > > the readers that the article is certainly true. (If it were not, I > > would have sued, right?) > > The wealthy also use libel suits to suppress dissent. Greg's point > that poor people aren't worth suing is only true if the motivation is > financial. Often it is not. Conveniently, many of those whose > silence is desired are among the petty bourgeouis and have a net worth > of roughly $50,000. Enough to make the suit appear legitimate, but > not enough to allow the target to brush off the legal fees, if they > win the case. > > Consider also the artificial distinction between private and public > figures. It is easier for a private figure to sue for libel. Yet, > the most influential people in the country are private figures. > Reporters must tread very carefully when covering the activities of > these people. Thus, we hear little of them. > > It would be interesting to know when libel law was first introduced to > the United States. Does anybody know? > > John Peter Zenger Libel laws were inherited from good old England together with most of common law. When I was studying con law, I remember the very interesting precedent establishing that truth is a defense in a libel suit. Anyone remember the name? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jan 29 13:50:53 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:50:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <01BC0E04.F54F6350@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Rich Graves wrote in article <5cnvpf$jeu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > > One point I had forgotten. The demonstration took place > > on the 50th anniversary of Kristallnacht. This is one explanation > > as to why the border guards did not attempt to open fire with > > firearms or attempt to break up the demonstration with tear gas. > > I think the timing was a coincidence. (And I'm told that Kristallnacht > wasn't well advertised in East Germany; especially after the Soviets > sided the United Arab Republic, the official story was that Hitler had > been exterminating good Communists, not Jews.) This differs from my information. In point of fact the Nazis _did_ exterminate communists. At the time of Kristalnacht it was the communists who were the more direct target because they had places in the Riechstag. It was by imprisoning the communist deputies that the Nazis were able to take power and pass the enabling act. Portraying the Nazis as uniquely persecuting Jews is simply not supported by the facts. The Jews were the largest group of those persecuted but not the only group. Gypsies had less support in other countries. Other groups were persecuted for opposition rather than who they were but the numbers of murders were still large. This is one reason why the Catholic church established a convent inside Aushwitz where it is estimated that about a quarter of a million Catholics were murdered. Quite what one is then to make of appeasement by the Papacy at the time is beyond me... I don't think it points to any great moral or spiritual stand. > They gave him a gun and put him on the front, where he waved to his > friends as they walked across the border. > > I think a lot of the border guards were like Thomas. Shades of Machiavelli's description of the mercenaries union in the 1500s. Basically you could hire yourself an army but they weren't keen on there being much killing. > Yeah, yeah. Economics has something to do with it. But I think it comes > down to "Sure, I'll carry a gun, and I'll go where you tell me to go, > but I will not hurt anyone." Ideas matter. Absolutely! Phill From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jan 29 13:52:36 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:52:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible Message-ID: <01BC0E04.F8BCC4B0@crecy.ai.mit.edu> Anonymous wrote in article <5cndl2$89k at life.ai.mit.edu>... > "The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I > made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need > full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the > Russian front!"" > > My guess is that "other factors" were involved. Inevitably since the admissions tutors would not have known the means of the parents. Thats the whole idea of "needs blind" admissions. The admissions people could not give a damn about means. The alumni that are most likely to make donnations are those who made it from scratch in any case. > I noted with some interest, but little surprise, that the guy claiming MIT > required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score could barely spell, and > had major problems making a coherent point. Methinks this is why MIT > rejected him, not his lack of a "1600." Possible but remember that dyslexia is not an indicator of intelligence. The director of the Media Lab is dyslexic. Certainly if you think that being taught in a particular operating system is important you should probably try elsewhere. Depending on which classes you take you could end up using UNIX, Windows or Genera. The main advantage of UNIX is that it is reasonably compact and we have full sources which means that people can be set operating system projects. Windows NT is much too large for that although it does have many interesting APIs that make it usefull for teaching application level stuff. I would imagine that there will be people interested in NextStep for Apple too, Tim-B-L was always a Next person, but he learnt how to use it because he had an open mind. If he had thought that nothing could be better than what he had already he would still be using CERN-VM. If someone can't cope with an unfamilliar O/S they probably shouldn't be an engineer at all. An O/S is only one large software system a grad needs to deal with. They have short lifetimes, rarely being dominant for more than a decade. Phill From sopwith at cuc.edu Wed Jan 29 13:56:53 1997 From: sopwith at cuc.edu (Elliot Lee) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:56:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Trigger-Words... Message-ID: <199701292156.NAA12977@toad.com> On Wed, 29 Jan 1997 harka at nycmetro.com wrote: > Actually, I might not have chosen the correct words for what I > wanted... > I am looking for sniffer-programs, that analyze e-mail traffic on > the Net and filtering out all e-mails potentially interesting for > _intelligence services_. For example, I've heard, that if an e-mail > contains the words: "assassinate President" (DISCLAIMER: I hope, our > President lives a long and happy life, even after his > impeachment...:)), it will automatically get filtered and checked > out by the Secret Service. Everytime someone sends a message through White House web site to the president ( there is a comment form on the site ) it is scanned for keywords. It probably happens on other key avenues as well. Of course there are exceptions to every rule. I heard of a woman who wrote to Clinton something like: You are such a dynamite leader. I think you have such an explosive personality, and I'm dying to meet you. If you want to scan your E-mail, write a little perl script that takes a list of keywords to scan for, and the action to take when the keywords are found. It shouldn't be too hard. -- Elliot http://www.redhat.com/ "I'm a member of the Association of Federations of Linux Project Initiators That Never Really Get Much Done (AFLPITNRGMD, for short)." Just do it! From wendigo at pobox.com Wed Jan 29 13:56:53 1997 From: wendigo at pobox.com (Mark Rogaski) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 13:56:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701292156.NAA12978@toad.com> If I had experience with Netscape plugins and spare time, I'd try it myself. But here's my proposed solution. A plugin in Netscape intercepts all requests, encrypt the URL with a pubkey algorithm, encode the string base64, send it as GET input to a proxy server. The proxy server decodes and decrypts the URL, gets the requested page, and returns it. This beats out URL-based filtering. Still need to figure out the specifics of key-exchange. If we use 40-bit encryption, it's exportable, and it still works in our threat model (ie. we don't care if the watchers figure out the URL a few hours later). To beat out dropping packets with unacceptable pattern in them, we could use an SSL-based server as the proxy. The plugin could even have a nice little on/off switch and a list list of available proxies. mark -- [] Mark Rogaski || "Computers save time like kudzu [] [] wendigo at pobox.com || prevents soil erosion." [] [] http://www.pobox.com/~wendigo/ || - afcasta at texas.net [] [] >> finger for PGP pubkey << || [] From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 29 14:11:44 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:11:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701292211.OAA13503@toad.com> Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > I think that with the demise of Mr Bell and anyone running > a remailer there would be an end to his scheme pretty quickly. > > Society is not bound to put up with cranks and psychopaths. > there is no right to anonymously call for murder. The authorities > could easily stop Bells scheme. > > The point I was making is that it is not consistent as claimed. > Why, death of Jim Bell from his own murder machine is a very exciting, I would say a very Kafkian thing to happen. I am looking forward to it. I even think that Jim Bell would not oppose such an outcome that much, since his assination bot would be such an important invention for the humanity. Maybe it will reverse the course of world history! - Igor. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 14:11:47 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:11:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701292211.OAA13504@toad.com> ichudov at algebra.com writes: > moscow state university in russia is not bad also. > > they teach lots of theory... which is good. > > - Igor. > Do they have a master's program in computer science? :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From whgiii at amaranth.com Wed Jan 29 14:13:31 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:13:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP Key Preview... Message-ID: <199701292213.OAA13583@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701291511.HAA03682 at toad.com>, on 01/29/97 at 07:28 AM, harka at nycmetro.com said: >Hi there, >is there a way to preview the contents of a received public key, >without adding it automatically to the public key ring? >Thanks a lot in advance... Yes, Say newkey.asc contains the new keys you wish to preview. Thye the following: pgp -kv newkey.asc It will display all the key info in that file. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Air conditioned environment - Do not open Windows. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Registered E-Secure v1.1 0000000 iQCVAwUBMu++/49Co1n+aLhhAQEa/AP/b6LvLkII2itKK1L8kvOO7rk5qta3/7kV lbB1r+cSakVGBaCpjI1tq6TmWP4H6bhP1atZX1V/yGlg6cFJx8chy6jgx3JO0Ium 6qJGsBWhSentsJfiMan13uflDLVBJ9JSEy/II5EIzxHPR88UBokal3R/XkHpkjwt tOBF5Q9hFVU= =pgtD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From p.j.wester at ngi.nl Wed Jan 29 14:21:28 1997 From: p.j.wester at ngi.nl (P.J. Westerhof) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:21:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <3.0.16.19970129225431.09bf60ba@popmail.rijnhaave.nl> At 20:06 27-01-97 -0500, Hettinga wrote: >At 7:39 pm -0500 1/26/97, blanc wrote: >>p.s. I be femme > ^^^^^^^^^^ > >Franconics... Or Lesbonics of course, Skol, Peter _________________________________________________________ P.J. Westerhof LL.D e-mail P.J.WESTER at NGI.NL | Computerlaw voice +31-347-375400 | Legal informatics fax/data +31-347-375400 | IT - consultancy Web: www.ngi.nl/cr/ | Soaring _________________________________________________________ From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 14:25:49 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:25:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: exporting stego Message-ID: <199701292225.OAA13996@toad.com> [I've been taking my equipment apart and rearranging it, hence the silence] Syntel writes: > Just a quickie, > Does the present ITAR / DoC regulations cover the export of Steganography pro > thanks > Steveo EAR covers all security software, including even virus checkers. Of course the gubmint is irrelevant and should be soundly ignored. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jan 29 14:32:34 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:32:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible Message-ID: <199701292232.OAA14207@toad.com> Anonymous wrote in article <5cndl2$89k at life.ai.mit.edu>... > "The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I > made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need > full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the > Russian front!"" > > My guess is that "other factors" were involved. Inevitably since the admissions tutors would not have known the means of the parents. Thats the whole idea of "needs blind" admissions. The admissions people could not give a damn about means. The alumni that are most likely to make donnations are those who made it from scratch in any case. > I noted with some interest, but little surprise, that the guy claiming MIT > required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score could barely spell, and > had major problems making a coherent point. Methinks this is why MIT > rejected him, not his lack of a "1600." Possible but remember that dyslexia is not an indicator of intelligence. The director of the Media Lab is dyslexic. Certainly if you think that being taught in a particular operating system is important you should probably try elsewhere. Depending on which classes you take you could end up using UNIX, Windows or Genera. The main advantage of UNIX is that it is reasonably compact and we have full sources which means that people can be set operating system projects. Windows NT is much too large for that although it does have many interesting APIs that make it usefull for teaching application level stuff. I would imagine that there will be people interested in NextStep for Apple too, Tim-B-L was always a Next person, but he learnt how to use it because he had an open mind. If he had thought that nothing could be better than what he had already he would still be using CERN-VM. If someone can't cope with an unfamilliar O/S they probably shouldn't be an engineer at all. An O/S is only one large software system a grad needs to deal with. They have short lifetimes, rarely being dominant for more than a decade. Phill From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 14:32:34 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:32:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701292232.OAA14206@toad.com> nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) writes: > At 10:46 AM 1/29/1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of > > libel. It is, they say, a rich man's game -- if I'm libeled by the > > NYT, I'm probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump > > can. Moreover, if I don't have the resources to sue but the > > statement is libelous, it creates a *presumption* in the minds of > > the readers that the article is certainly true. (If it were not, I > > would have sued, right?) > > The wealthy also use libel suits to suppress dissent. Greg's point > that poor people aren't worth suing is only true if the motivation is > financial. Often it is not. Conveniently, many of those whose > silence is desired are among the petty bourgeouis and have a net worth > of roughly $50,000. Enough to make the suit appear legitimate, but > not enough to allow the target to brush off the legal fees, if they > win the case. > > Consider also the artificial distinction between private and public > figures. It is easier for a private figure to sue for libel. Yet, > the most influential people in the country are private figures. > Reporters must tread very carefully when covering the activities of > these people. Thus, we hear little of them. > > It would be interesting to know when libel law was first introduced to > the United States. Does anybody know? > > John Peter Zenger Libel laws were inherited from good old England together with most of common law. When I was studying con law, I remember the very interesting precedent establishing that truth is a defense in a libel suit. Anyone remember the name? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From hallam at ai.mit.edu Wed Jan 29 14:34:26 1997 From: hallam at ai.mit.edu (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:34:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: East German Collapse (Was: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701292234.OAA14263@toad.com> Rich Graves wrote in article <5cnvpf$jeu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > > One point I had forgotten. The demonstration took place > > on the 50th anniversary of Kristallnacht. This is one explanation > > as to why the border guards did not attempt to open fire with > > firearms or attempt to break up the demonstration with tear gas. > > I think the timing was a coincidence. (And I'm told that Kristallnacht > wasn't well advertised in East Germany; especially after the Soviets > sided the United Arab Republic, the official story was that Hitler had > been exterminating good Communists, not Jews.) This differs from my information. In point of fact the Nazis _did_ exterminate communists. At the time of Kristalnacht it was the communists who were the more direct target because they had places in the Riechstag. It was by imprisoning the communist deputies that the Nazis were able to take power and pass the enabling act. Portraying the Nazis as uniquely persecuting Jews is simply not supported by the facts. The Jews were the largest group of those persecuted but not the only group. Gypsies had less support in other countries. Other groups were persecuted for opposition rather than who they were but the numbers of murders were still large. This is one reason why the Catholic church established a convent inside Aushwitz where it is estimated that about a quarter of a million Catholics were murdered. Quite what one is then to make of appeasement by the Papacy at the time is beyond me... I don't think it points to any great moral or spiritual stand. > They gave him a gun and put him on the front, where he waved to his > friends as they walked across the border. > > I think a lot of the border guards were like Thomas. Shades of Machiavelli's description of the mercenaries union in the 1500s. Basically you could hire yourself an army but they weren't keen on there being much killing. > Yeah, yeah. Economics has something to do with it. But I think it comes > down to "Sure, I'll carry a gun, and I'll go where you tell me to go, > but I will not hurt anyone." Ideas matter. Absolutely! Phill From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 29 14:36:26 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:36:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Bruce "Penis With a Blister on it" Taylor strikes again... Message-ID: --- begin forwarded text MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:19:03 -0800 Reply-To: Law & Policy of Computer Communications Sender: Law & Policy of Computer Communications From: Robert Cannon Subject: Members of Congress file CDA Amici Curiae Brief To: CYBERIA-L at LISTSERV.AOL.COM Approximately 22 members of Congress filed an Amici Curiae brief with the Supreme Court in Reno v. ACLY, the constitutional challenge to the Communications Decency Act (this makes three known briefs filed so far in support of the CDA). The brief was filed on behalf of, among others, Exon, Coats, Helms, Grassley, Hyde, and Goodlatte. It was written by Bruce Taylor and Cathleen A. Cleaver. This brief can be accessed at http://www.cdt.org/ciec/SC_appeal/970121_Cong_brief.html Litigation update page: www.cais.net/cannon/cda/cda-up.htm --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From aaron at herringn.com Wed Jan 29 14:45:15 1997 From: aaron at herringn.com (aaron at herringn.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 14:45:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: News report RE:RSA Data Security Conference, pointer Message-ID: Report on RSA data security conference. Mentions 'Legislation in Congress could ban mandatory key storage', anyone know what they're referring to? http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,7437,00.html From sameer at c2.net Wed Jan 29 15:29:19 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:29:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701291856.KAA07395@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701292348.PAA27392@gabber.c2.net> David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. His talk at the RSA conference was such a load of bullshit it wasn't even funny. "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export allowance. They said it was going to undermine their national security." -- Start of PGP signed section. > "In an interview Tuesday, [David L.] Aaron [the Feds' Crypto Ambassador] disputed the industry's view that the U.S. efforts to control cryptographic technology are being outstripped by the pace of the technology. > > "When I talk to other governments," he said, "they still don't feel that the cat is out of the bag." > > What the fuck do *they* know? > > DCF -- End of PGP signed section, PGP failed! -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From sqa at usa.net Wed Jan 29 15:30:21 1997 From: sqa at usa.net (sqa at usa.net) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:30:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: H E Y!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Message-ID: <199701292328.PAA25852@norway.it.earthlink.net> Hello,^Morons, $ $ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$ $ $ $$ $$ $ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $$ $ $ $ $$ $$ $ $ $$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $ $ *** HELP HUMANITY AND OUR EARTH *** NO MONTHLY FINANCIAL COMMITTMENTS *** NO INVENTORY *** BANKING *** INTERNATIONAL CREDIT UNION / VISA *** TRADE CREDIT *** STOCK OPTION *** INSURANCE AND LEASING STARQUEST ASSOCIATION HAS BEEN IN DEVELOPMENT FOR 5 YEARS IT CAN BEST BE DESCRIBED AS A HUMANITARIAN ASSOCIATION WITH VAST TECHNOLOGY TO ENHANCE OUR LIFE AND EARTH. FOR FREE INFORMATION EMAIL US AT sqa at usa.net WITH YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OR CALL OUR 24 HOURS INTRO LINE AT 1-888-882-STAR(7827) THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SINCERELY, MEMBERSHIP COUNCIL From p.j.wester at NGI.NL Wed Jan 29 15:43:21 1997 From: p.j.wester at NGI.NL (P.J. Westerhof) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:43:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <199701292343.PAA16364@toad.com> At 20:06 27-01-97 -0500, Hettinga wrote: >At 7:39 pm -0500 1/26/97, blanc wrote: >>p.s. I be femme > ^^^^^^^^^^ > >Franconics... Or Lesbonics of course, Skol, Peter _________________________________________________________ P.J. Westerhof LL.D e-mail P.J.WESTER at NGI.NL | Computerlaw voice +31-347-375400 | Legal informatics fax/data +31-347-375400 | IT - consultancy Web: www.ngi.nl/cr/ | Soaring _________________________________________________________ From sameer at c2.net Wed Jan 29 15:43:25 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:43:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701292343.PAA16370@toad.com> David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. His talk at the RSA conference was such a load of bullshit it wasn't even funny. "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export allowance. They said it was going to undermine their national security." -- Start of PGP signed section. > "In an interview Tuesday, [David L.] Aaron [the Feds' Crypto Ambassador] disputed the industry's view that the U.S. efforts to control cryptographic technology are being outstripped by the pace of the technology. > > "When I talk to other governments," he said, "they still don't feel that the cat is out of the bag." > > What the fuck do *they* know? > > DCF -- End of PGP signed section, PGP failed! -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From rah at shipwright.com Wed Jan 29 15:43:35 1997 From: rah at shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:43:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Bruce "Penis With a Blister on it" Taylor strikes again... Message-ID: <199701292343.PAA16393@toad.com> --- begin forwarded text MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:19:03 -0800 Reply-To: Law & Policy of Computer Communications Sender: Law & Policy of Computer Communications From: Robert Cannon Subject: Members of Congress file CDA Amici Curiae Brief To: CYBERIA-L at LISTSERV.AOL.COM Approximately 22 members of Congress filed an Amici Curiae brief with the Supreme Court in Reno v. ACLY, the constitutional challenge to the Communications Decency Act (this makes three known briefs filed so far in support of the CDA). The brief was filed on behalf of, among others, Exon, Coats, Helms, Grassley, Hyde, and Goodlatte. It was written by Bruce Taylor and Cathleen A. Cleaver. This brief can be accessed at http://www.cdt.org/ciec/SC_appeal/970121_Cong_brief.html Litigation update page: www.cais.net/cannon/cda/cda-up.htm --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah at shipwright.com), Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/ "If *you* don't go to FC97, *I* don't go to FC97" From aaron at herringn.com Wed Jan 29 15:45:03 1997 From: aaron at herringn.com (aaron at herringn.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:45:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: News report RE:RSA Data Security Conference, pointer Message-ID: <199701292345.PAA16450@toad.com> Report on RSA data security conference. Mentions 'Legislation in Congress could ban mandatory key storage', anyone know what they're referring to? http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,7437,00.html From drose at azstarnet.com Wed Jan 29 15:46:32 1997 From: drose at azstarnet.com (drose at azstarnet.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 15:46:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701292345.QAA14341@web.azstarnet.com> "Phill" wrote: >Society is not bound to put up with cranks and psychopaths. Err, "Phill", how then do you see yourself fitting in? From helpinghands at lgcy.com Wed Jan 29 16:24:46 1997 From: helpinghands at lgcy.com (helpinghands at lgcy.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:24:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Important information and instruction Message-ID: <00153551800187@lgcy.com> You obviously have the power and _certainly- the right to delete this unsolicited message. However, it _does_ contain information that will be extremely valuable to you regardless of your current employment situation so I admonish you to read it. Besides, it'll take less than one minute. NOTE: I obtained your e-mail address from a personal search of Internet ads using a variety of sources. It is not a generic purchased list, but is highly targeted. It will also be used just one time...THIS time. You need NOT send a "delete" or "remove" request nor do any other such nonsense to _not_ receive mail from me again regarding this information. If you have any interest at all in seeing how to _really_ do business on the Internet, I invite you to visit: http://www.cyber-action.com/oed/number1.html (If your e-mail program supports it, you can just double-click on the URL above and your browser will take you there.) Seeking home-based employment? Or _any_ employment? A career change? Something to assist you financially till your "boat comes in" with what you're currently doing? Well, here're some valuable job-hunting sites on the Internet: http://www.occ.com http://www.monster.com http://www.jobweb.org http://www.human.resourcecenter.com http://www.jobcenter.com If you don't already have a text-file, online resume prepared, you might want to check out... http://lgcy.com/users/h/helpinghands/strmline.htm ...for a head-start on the process. That's it. Hope this information serves you well. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 29 16:36:16 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:36:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300036.QAA18048@toad.com> At 08:15 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: >I think a hole in your thinking is to assume that the assasins have no >motive other than financial gain. I would submit that there are those that >have the skills, training and a political agenda coherent with the >wagerers, lacking only the financial incentive to make the risks >acceptable. These wetworkers won't consider accepting the bribe of the >rich/powerful This may be true, but the example was to show how easy a defensive line could be thrown up around the powerful. For example, conventional body guards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledge that they will be buried with the tyrant. These body guards could be ten children out of each local village. Merely a human shield. In an attack, they would scatter, but the parents would know that the children would die if a successful action were taken against the tyrant. Also, the tyrant could put an open bounty on anyone caught trying to harm him. Just bring the decapitated head of the assassin along with a VHS cassette of the attempted action for a big reward. By layering the defenses, it becomes increasingly difficult for anyone to get through. Obviously the castles walls are the first line of defense, so a reward is given for anyone caught using any entrance to the fortress except those that are provided. The household is told that their participation will result in the extermination of their families. They are then told that if they know of an impending action and fail to report it or attempt to stop it, they are considered party it those actions. A human shield of innocents is "given the privaledge to live in the fortress with our great leader" so that actions by concerned parties is limited further. A standing bounty is placed on the head of the assassin, who so ever brings in the head of the assassin and all children parented by that person after the assination will be given a reward of some set sum. Probably 110%. A bounty is set on security breaches, this bounty would probably be 110% of the death mark on the tyrant. A series of more conventional boobytraps are layed in normally inaccessable areas, the layers of these either being prisoners who have unknowningly been condemned to die, the tyrant himself, or some other disposable or trustable deployment device. The most common of these would probably be a mine field between the two outer most walls of the fortress, and maybe a funnel-gun parimeter inside of that. An inner sanctum with self contained air, water, and food is maintained for the tyrant and h[is/er] closest relatives/advisors. This sanctum would be accessed by biometrics and only used in a percieved emergency. All dissent is declared illegal with capitol punishment for the mere discussion of the impending death of the tyrant, exceptions to this would be persons in the direct company of the tyrant with the tyrants full awareness, and permission. From drose at AZStarNet.com Wed Jan 29 16:55:45 1997 From: drose at AZStarNet.com (drose at AZStarNet.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:55:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300055.QAA18469@toad.com> "Phill" wrote: >Society is not bound to put up with cranks and psychopaths. Err, "Phill", how then do you see yourself fitting in? From karn at Qualcomm.com Wed Jan 29 16:55:51 1997 From: karn at Qualcomm.com (Phil Karn) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:55:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: <199701300055.QAA18477@toad.com> I think you're being far too subtle here. The issues have been clearly drawn in my case. The government is also now officially on record as reserving the authority to regulate the exports of even paper copies of cryptographic source code (e.g., books). They have simply chosen not to do so for now out of the goodness of their hearts. Or, more likely, because even they understand the furor this would cause, and the damage it would do to their position in court. Phil From das at razor.engr.sgi.com Wed Jan 29 16:55:59 1997 From: das at razor.engr.sgi.com (Anil Das) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:55:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: <199701300055.QAA18485@toad.com> On Jan 29, 2:23pm, Phil Karn wrote: > Subject: Re: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project > I think you're being far too subtle here. The issues have been clearly > drawn in my case. The government is also now officially on record as > reserving the authority to regulate the exports of even paper copies > of cryptographic source code (e.g., books). But isn't your case still based on the arbitrariness of prohibiting the export of a floppy while allowing the export of a book containing the same information, unlike the Bernstein case, which is based on the constitutional protection for free speech? That is the impression I got from the various press reports and web pages. -- Anil Das From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Wed Jan 29 16:56:39 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 16:56:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300056.QAA18513@toad.com> At 08:15 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: >I think a hole in your thinking is to assume that the assasins have no >motive other than financial gain. I would submit that there are those that >have the skills, training and a political agenda coherent with the >wagerers, lacking only the financial incentive to make the risks >acceptable. These wetworkers won't consider accepting the bribe of the >rich/powerful This may be true, but the example was to show how easy a defensive line could be thrown up around the powerful. For example, conventional body guards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledge that they will be buried with the tyrant. These body guards could be ten children out of each local village. Merely a human shield. In an attack, they would scatter, but the parents would know that the children would die if a successful action were taken against the tyrant. Also, the tyrant could put an open bounty on anyone caught trying to harm him. Just bring the decapitated head of the assassin along with a VHS cassette of the attempted action for a big reward. By layering the defenses, it becomes increasingly difficult for anyone to get through. Obviously the castles walls are the first line of defense, so a reward is given for anyone caught using any entrance to the fortress except those that are provided. The household is told that their participation will result in the extermination of their families. They are then told that if they know of an impending action and fail to report it or attempt to stop it, they are considered party it those actions. A human shield of innocents is "given the privaledge to live in the fortress with our great leader" so that actions by concerned parties is limited further. A standing bounty is placed on the head of the assassin, who so ever brings in the head of the assassin and all children parented by that person after the assination will be given a reward of some set sum. Probably 110%. A bounty is set on security breaches, this bounty would probably be 110% of the death mark on the tyrant. A series of more conventional boobytraps are layed in normally inaccessable areas, the layers of these either being prisoners who have unknowningly been condemned to die, the tyrant himself, or some other disposable or trustable deployment device. The most common of these would probably be a mine field between the two outer most walls of the fortress, and maybe a funnel-gun parimeter inside of that. An inner sanctum with self contained air, water, and food is maintained for the tyrant and h[is/er] closest relatives/advisors. This sanctum would be accessed by biometrics and only used in a percieved emergency. All dissent is declared illegal with capitol punishment for the mere discussion of the impending death of the tyrant, exceptions to this would be persons in the direct company of the tyrant with the tyrants full awareness, and permission. From cynthb at homer.sonetis.com Wed Jan 29 17:08:35 1997 From: cynthb at homer.sonetis.com (Cynthia H. Brown) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:08:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701300108.UAA26140@homer.iosphere.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Mon 27 Jan, SpyKing queried: > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a > teenage son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer > science in college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's > leaning toward MIT. Any suggestions from list members as to colleges > to investigate? Avi Rubin at NYU has compiled a list of all security- and crypto- related university courses that he is aware of. The URL is: http://www.cs.nyu.edu/~rubin/courses.html (This was posted on sci.crypt a couple of weeks ago.) Hope this gives a starting point, Cynthia -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: cp850 iQCVAwUBMu/0bpOg7xGCJGQtAQEEPgP8DIMqGqUmGWXtWWrQpv7OP+iIFxegwS9J 6+ZRg1OeB/ivLV2ZTvPbyZJ5a0zevrGIM4uPPjt2YQVLdpyZrpWm0TNPlPE4bgb8 hWEKkpfF8HVRF5jf4s80x3nhmtMzRLSSXy9L03f/m+I45l9HkTOQ4tX7U3WE42ea 9rGdR7SUm1U= =qDPt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- =============================================================== Cynthia H. Brown Ottawa, Ontario, Canada E-mail: cynthb at sonetis.com Home Page: http://www.sonetis.com/~cynthb/ PGP Key: See Home Page Junk mail will be ignored in the order in which it is received. It is morally as bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it. - Edmund Way Teale, "Circle of the Seasons" From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com Wed Jan 29 17:18:05 1997 From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl') Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:18:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <199701300138.UAA11233@unix.asb.com> On 27 Jan 97 at 22:39, Alan Olsen wrote: You wrote: > I would like to see PGPMail support Pegusus Mail for the reason that I have > used the crypto plug-in for Pegusus and found it inadiquate for general > usage. Same here. The PGP plug in was awful... (if it didn't find the key... and the key had to have the exact user-id you were mailing to) it sent it out in the clear. A serious bug. > Pegusus's current crypto hooks do not deal well with remailers and multiple > keys. PGPMail does not deal with remailers as well as I would like, but it > is far easier to use than the Pegusus solution. Might be worth making suggestions to the Pegasus Mail team... now that PGPMail is out, they could 'modify' the plug-ins for Version 3.0 (which I hear they are working on). Since it's made in New Zealand, there's no ITAR/EAR problems. As for remailers, once crypto is plugged in, a remailer plug-in with would work. (That's possibly an easy-enough hack too.) An API for PGPMail you'd be a nice thing... then one can write apps to use it. Rob ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From miner333 at dogbert.xroads.com Wed Jan 29 17:21:03 1997 From: miner333 at dogbert.xroads.com (miner) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:21:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Making OCR'ed code transfer easier Message-ID: <2.2.32.19970130011914.00737930@dogbert.xroads.com> A month or two ago someone related their experience with OCRing code and getting it to work; even when it compiled correctly there were still subtle errors that he/she had to spend hours finding. With the recent threads on OCRing the DES cracker I was thinking of ways to make it more foolproof without going so far that the FEDs would get excited. If the author/publisher was to include a hash of the source code the person doing the scanning would know when it was good without having to compile it and then run it to discover there were still errors in the source. A hash per page of code would be even easier as it would localize the errors to a more manageable area, or even more sophisticated methods could be used to localize any errors. How far you could go in providing feedback on the correctness of the OCR process without getting the FEDs all excited is the question. Just a thought miner From cynthb at homer.sonetis.com Wed Jan 29 17:26:15 1997 From: cynthb at homer.sonetis.com (Cynthia H. Brown) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:26:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701300126.RAA19235@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Mon 27 Jan, SpyKing queried: > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a > teenage son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer > science in college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's > leaning toward MIT. Any suggestions from list members as to colleges > to investigate? Avi Rubin at NYU has compiled a list of all security- and crypto- related university courses that he is aware of. The URL is: http://www.cs.nyu.edu/~rubin/courses.html (This was posted on sci.crypt a couple of weeks ago.) Hope this gives a starting point, Cynthia -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: cp850 iQCVAwUBMu/0bpOg7xGCJGQtAQEEPgP8DIMqGqUmGWXtWWrQpv7OP+iIFxegwS9J 6+ZRg1OeB/ivLV2ZTvPbyZJ5a0zevrGIM4uPPjt2YQVLdpyZrpWm0TNPlPE4bgb8 hWEKkpfF8HVRF5jf4s80x3nhmtMzRLSSXy9L03f/m+I45l9HkTOQ4tX7U3WE42ea 9rGdR7SUm1U= =qDPt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- =============================================================== Cynthia H. Brown Ottawa, Ontario, Canada E-mail: cynthb at sonetis.com Home Page: http://www.sonetis.com/~cynthb/ PGP Key: See Home Page Junk mail will be ignored in the order in which it is received. It is morally as bad not to care whether a thing is true or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to care how you got your money as long as you have got it. - Edmund Way Teale, "Circle of the Seasons" From rwright at adnetsol.com Wed Jan 29 17:54:45 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 17:54:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... Message-ID: <199701300154.RAA02504@adnetsol.adnetsol.com> On or About 29 Jan 97 at 2:13, Rich Graves wrote: > Yes, I mentioned that here and in comp.org.eff.talk a couple weeks > ago. No need to turn images off. Just tell AltaVista you want > text-only: > > http://altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/query?pg=&text=yes > > You may also find the text-only page a hell of a lot faster. Funny you should mention this. It's the only search engine I use, and it's the one on my "links" site. http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia/links.html Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Wed Jan 29 18:01:48 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Mutatis Mutantdis) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:01:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701300223.VAA12817@unix.asb.com> On 29 Jan 1997 17:33:41 -0500, you wrote: >If I had experience with Netscape plugins and spare time, I'd >try it myself. But here's my proposed solution. >A plugin in Netscape intercepts all requests, encrypt the URL >with a pubkey algorithm, encode the string base64, send it as GET input to >a proxy server. >The proxy server decodes and decrypts the URL, gets the requested page, >and returns it. This beats out URL-based filtering. Depends who is doing the filtering? If it's mom and dad keeping you from looking at naughty pix, maybe. If it's the gov't keeping you from looking at subversive sites, maybe not: they'll go out of their way to block such proxies, and in some countries you could get in hellish trouble for owning such a plug-in. Rob From rwright at adnetsol.com Wed Jan 29 18:10:59 1997 From: rwright at adnetsol.com (Ross Wright) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:10:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: AltaVista sprouts a hole ... Message-ID: <199701300210.SAA20120@toad.com> On or About 29 Jan 97 at 2:13, Rich Graves wrote: > Yes, I mentioned that here and in comp.org.eff.talk a couple weeks > ago. No need to turn images off. Just tell AltaVista you want > text-only: > > http://altavista.digital.com/cgi-bin/query?pg=&text=yes > > You may also find the text-only page a hell of a lot faster. Funny you should mention this. It's the only search engine I use, and it's the one on my "links" site. http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia/links.html Ross =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906 From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com Wed Jan 29 18:11:02 1997 From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl') Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:11:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5 Message-ID: <199701300211.SAA20126@toad.com> On 27 Jan 97 at 22:39, Alan Olsen wrote: You wrote: > I would like to see PGPMail support Pegusus Mail for the reason that I have > used the crypto plug-in for Pegusus and found it inadiquate for general > usage. Same here. The PGP plug in was awful... (if it didn't find the key... and the key had to have the exact user-id you were mailing to) it sent it out in the clear. A serious bug. > Pegusus's current crypto hooks do not deal well with remailers and multiple > keys. PGPMail does not deal with remailers as well as I would like, but it > is far easier to use than the Pegusus solution. Might be worth making suggestions to the Pegasus Mail team... now that PGPMail is out, they could 'modify' the plug-ins for Version 3.0 (which I hear they are working on). Since it's made in New Zealand, there's no ITAR/EAR problems. As for remailers, once crypto is plugged in, a remailer plug-in with would work. (That's possibly an easy-enough hack too.) An API for PGPMail you'd be a nice thing... then one can write apps to use it. Rob ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Wed Jan 29 18:11:02 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Mutatis Mutantdis) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:11:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701300211.SAA20125@toad.com> On 29 Jan 1997 17:33:41 -0500, you wrote: >If I had experience with Netscape plugins and spare time, I'd >try it myself. But here's my proposed solution. >A plugin in Netscape intercepts all requests, encrypt the URL >with a pubkey algorithm, encode the string base64, send it as GET input to >a proxy server. >The proxy server decodes and decrypts the URL, gets the requested page, >and returns it. This beats out URL-based filtering. Depends who is doing the filtering? If it's mom and dad keeping you from looking at naughty pix, maybe. If it's the gov't keeping you from looking at subversive sites, maybe not: they'll go out of their way to block such proxies, and in some countries you could get in hellish trouble for owning such a plug-in. Rob From miner333 at dogbert.xroads.com Wed Jan 29 18:12:44 1997 From: miner333 at dogbert.xroads.com (miner) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:12:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Making OCR'ed code transfer easier Message-ID: <199701300212.SAA20142@toad.com> A month or two ago someone related their experience with OCRing code and getting it to work; even when it compiled correctly there were still subtle errors that he/she had to spend hours finding. With the recent threads on OCRing the DES cracker I was thinking of ways to make it more foolproof without going so far that the FEDs would get excited. If the author/publisher was to include a hash of the source code the person doing the scanning would know when it was good without having to compile it and then run it to discover there were still errors in the source. A hash per page of code would be even easier as it would localize the errors to a more manageable area, or even more sophisticated methods could be used to localize any errors. How far you could go in providing feedback on the correctness of the OCR process without getting the FEDs all excited is the question. Just a thought miner From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 18:33:04 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:33:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300232.SAA15330@mail.pacifier.com> At 09:40 PM 1/27/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > >jim bell wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > >> Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >> prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >> any recognition of this fact. > >Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility >or consistency. "I love you too! B^) Question: What is a "whacko solution"? Why do you believe AP qualifies? Can you list any other "solutions" which are, indeed, "solutions" which are NOT "whacko" by your definition? (I'm trying to determine whether or not you even agree that there is a problem!) Let me pose an issue here by counterexample: Suppose there was a plantation, containing a master and his slaves. You are told that the slaves are "unhappy". (They're unhappy because they're slaves!!!) That's a "problem." Okay, let me propose that there are at least two broad "solutions" to this "problem": First, change the working conditions just enough to make the slaves acceptably happy. Or, second, eliminate the slavery altogether. Both are "solutions". The first, obviously, is only a "solution" from the stanpoint of the master. The second appears to be only a "solution" from the standpoint of the slaves, since the master obviously doesn't want to lose his slaves! Could you legitimately call the second solution a "whacko solution"? (It would be, from the limited standpoint of the master.) How about the first? That's the problem with using such a poorly-defined term as "whacko" to describe anything, particularly when many people don't agree. And here's a question: What do you mean by "credibility"? I've explained it in enough detail to convince a rather substantial number of intelligent people that it is likely to be possible, and to some it sounds like it is desireable. >If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out >on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be >dead as a doornail in a week. A claim which doesn't disprove the functionality of AP one whit. In fact, quite the opposite: If AP was, indeed, non-functional, then nobody would bother with me at all. The fact that you think they would shows that you believe AP threatens SOMEBODY. This means that your arguments, as minimal as they are, are internally contradictory. They simply don't hold together. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From atb at purple.reddesign.com Wed Jan 29 18:38:34 1997 From: atb at purple.reddesign.com (Angooki Taipu) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:38:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: > David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. His >talk at the RSA conference was such a load of bullshit it wasn't even >funny. > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export >allowance. They said it was going to undermine their national >security." I'm sure a few countries are upset because the US policy may in some way impede their citizens ability to adopt STRONG cryptography and secure their information infrastructure, thus injuring their national security. Remember, Aaron is employee of the government. He talks in doublespeak, Angooki Taipu atb at purple.reddesign.com From erp at digiforest.com Wed Jan 29 18:41:39 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:41:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible In-Reply-To: <199701290659.WAA21869@toad.com> Message-ID: > I noted with some interest, but little surprise, that the guy claiming MIT > required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score could barely spell, and > had major problems making a coherent point. Methinks this is why MIT > rejected him, not his lack of a "1600." ... Not to point out something obvious about this but the person who wrote this did not have "guts" enough or, just likes his privacy a bit more than the average person, to come out and write this non-anonymously. But since that isn't why I am writing this, I'll leave off of it for now. ... The reason I am writing this is because I am "the guy claiming MIT required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score." I was informed this by my school counselor, along with many other things which are as equally "obnoxious" to my possible college acceptances. -- I did point out though, in my letter, that my connection was experiencing sever lag for some reason. I did narrow that down to being because my servers call in server and account server where on two different networks. Another point to this is that in my family I am the best speller. It is possibly genetic, but it is mostly because of where I grew up and the other "backwoodsy" things of my "youth". Now I realise this sounds like a bunch of excuses and such, and yes I guess it is, but I can if I sit down and think about something for a milli second longer than normal, and don't let my left hand out race my right hand, type things with propper grammer and spelling to my current extent. Now if the one who did post that "anonymously" would be so kind as to say such "brave" statements outloud without his or her precious "anonymousity" it would be much appreciated. Other than that, I do believe that is about it to this later. Goodnight and fare you "well" Erp ps -- please excuse the quotes, I was using them for mor eaccenting and well for words that fit in my own way. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Check my poetry page if you would like to see more of my bad spelling and horrendous grammer at: http://www.digiforest.com/~erp/poetry.html From erp at digiforest.com Wed Jan 29 18:48:38 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 18:48:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <199701292211.OAA13504@toad.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ichudov at algebra.com writes: > > > moscow state university in russia is not bad also. > > > > they teach lots of theory... which is good. > > > > - Igor. > > > > Do they have a master's program in computer science? :-) --- I looked up on Moscow State University the other day, after having seen the message which brought this question. So yes, they do have a Master's program in Computer Science, at least they claim to have one. Erp > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > From ja94a08 at tdi.itm.edu.my Wed Jan 29 19:12:56 1997 From: ja94a08 at tdi.itm.edu.my (iamme) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:12:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701300310.LAA00651@ss5-15.itm.edu.my> what about purdue and caltech ? anyone has Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh www ? he he man > From owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Wed Jan 29 14:57 SGT 1997 > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:23:53 -0500 > From: Matthew Toth > To: SpyKing > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: Best Computer School? > > MIT is one the best schools in the country for C.S. > Close behind is Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh, > PA. (the folks who put out CERT.) Not sure how much Crypto they do, though. > > From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Jan 29 19:40:43 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:40:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: New export controls to include code signing applications Message-ID: <85459562931827@cs26.cs.auckland.ac.nz> The Men in Black made Lucky Green write: >[Listing specific software prohibited from export] >"c.2. "Software" to certify "software" controlled by 5D002.c.1; " > >And, btw, virus checkers are also prohibited from export. Makes you wonder. > >"c.3. "Software" designed or modified to protect against malicious computer >damage, e.g., viruses;" > >That includes every firewall product, every virus checker, every data security >product, and this regardless if the product uses crypto or not. The new >regulations go way beyond controlling crypto. The USG, in a massive power >grip, has put data security as a whole on the export control list. These aren't new regulations, they're old regulations which have resurfaced. I've managed to obtain a copy of part of the old pre-Wassenaar COCOM regulations, which contain the magic lines: 5.D.2.c Specific "software" as follows: 1. "Software" having the characteristics, or performing or simulating the functions of the equipment embargoed by 5.A.2 or 5.B.2. 2. "Software" to certify "software" embargoed by 5.D.2.c.1. 3. "Software" designed or modified to protect against malicious computer damage, e.g. viruses. This is from the October 1991 version. By October 1996 this had changed to: 5D002 c Specific "software" as follows: 1. "Software" having the characteristics, or performing or simulating the functions of the equipment embargoed by 5A002 or 5B002. 2. "Software" to certify "software" specified in 5D002.c.1. It looks like someone used the old COCOM regs as the basis for the EAR rather than the newer Wassenaar ones. The two are almost identical anyway except for a few minor points. It's likely that the anti-virus clause is due to bureaucratic bungling rather than malicious intent. Peter. From froomkin at law.miami.edu Wed Jan 29 19:46:09 1997 From: froomkin at law.miami.edu (Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:46:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <199701291937.LAA08689@toad.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 29 Jan 1997 f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca wrote: [stuff] > > Incidentally, I remind you of the results of the moot court that was held > at one of the CFP conferences, where a GAK case was tried in front of > real federal judges by real lawyers. Our side lost. > Um. Actually the real judges didn't render an opinion (in public) since they might have to rule for real someday and would probably be conflicted out if they had ruled on the merits in a mock trial. The opinions were by a shadow panel of law professors, and they disagreed, 2-1. == The above may have been dictated via Dragon Dictate 2.51 voice recognition. Please be alert for unintentional word substitutions. A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin at law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here. From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jan 29 19:46:25 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 19:46:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: News report RE:RSA Data Security Conference, pointer In-Reply-To: <199701292345.PAA16450@toad.com> Message-ID: I don't think CNET has any idea what they're talking about. Perhaps they mean the Burns bill? I was over at Burns' office yesterday, and Pro-CODE hasn't been reintroduced yet -- they're looking for more co-sponsors -- so that's not even correct. *shrug* I have a report on this at netlynews.com in the Afterword section, BTW. -Declan On Wed, 29 Jan 1997 aaron at herringn.com wrote: > Report on RSA data security conference. Mentions 'Legislation in Congress > could ban mandatory key storage', anyone know what they're referring to? > > http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,7437,00.html > > > > From root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net Wed Jan 29 20:07:16 1997 From: root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net (Ben Byer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:07:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES challenge status? Message-ID: <199701300356.WAA01232@bushing.plastic.crosslink.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- What exactly is the status of RSA's DES contest? I understand that at least two of the smaller contests have already been cracked, but I haven't seen much beyond theoretical discussion on the list on the topic of the DES contest. What work has been started on this contest? I am aware of Peter Trei's excellent deskr software for win32, but at the moment it chokes on RSA's real contest data as distributed. Has anybody yet worked on porting a version to x86 Linux, with nice, fast, inline assembly? How about a keyrange-server? This contest is so huge that any procedural innovations will probably be much more helpful than getting an early start. Has anybody started work on this yet, or is everyone else waiting for someone else to do it? - -- Ben Byer root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net I am not a bushing -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMvAb/LD5/Q37XXHFAQFxtQL/b7PeoWoO8gW0R35eOcA7yDmNOzg5IbIX xbrWkX0D7Tnj+8BxeQkRs2lOhhB6D6V/oh7RO6zMUwbNVaPDng0vjZXEmHAUVPnL XwSfekx47rgc43mVuXJoyval1zZuKDjE =h76F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 20:10:17 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:10:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701292348.PAA27392@gabber.c2.net> Message-ID: <79kB2D1w165w@bwalk.dm.com> sameer writes: > David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. Look who's talking - Sandy's boss! Please see http://www.fileita.it/webitalia/netscum/parekhs0.html for some important information regarding Sameer, privacy, and integrity. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 20:10:21 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:10:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701280301.TAA14685@toad.com> Message-ID: "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" writes: > The Cold War was not won by the arms race, it was won in > Eastern Europe which was never a major participant. The main > instrument that won it was West German TV which broadcast > pictures of supermarkets with full shelves into the homes > of East Germans every night. The viewers could see that it > was not mere propaganda and their relatives confirmed the > fact. As a result the East German guards on the Berlin wall > simply decided to leave their posts one night. Do a lot of Americans really believe such things? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 20:11:52 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:11:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: c2 internet accounts In-Reply-To: <199701292231.OAA14183@toad.com> Message-ID: <1LmB2D3w165w@bwalk.dm.com> "Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" writes: > Sandy Sandfort writes: > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > SANDY SANDFORT > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > > > C'punks, > > > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > > > > > does c2net still offer internet accounts? I liked their > > > offer for internet accounts with a 5 mb web site via > > > telnet. does anyone else know of a place for cheap > > > telnet only accounts? > > > > C2Net no longer offers new shell accounts and we are phasing out > > pre-existing accounts. We still offer virtual web hosting. > > > > > > S a n d y > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > > Check out Sameer's net.scum web page for some important information on C2. > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps The above article was highly crypto- and cypher-punks relevant and not a flame. Sandy Sandfort tossed it in the "flames" bucket because Sameer is Sandy's employer. Sandy won't permit any criticism of his employer on the censored list - an obvious conflict of interest. Sandy even refers to C2Net as royal "we". Recall also that Sandy Sandford published an ass-licking article about Sameer in _Wired magazine without revealing that he works for Sameer. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 20:11:58 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:11:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Physician, Heal Thyself! In-Reply-To: <199701292028.MAA10148@toad.com> Message-ID: <5XmB2D5w165w@bwalk.dm.com> OKSAS writes: > On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > SANDY SANDFORT > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > > > C'punks, > > > > On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote: > > > > > This is the stuff Sandy would presumably dump into > > > his "not fit for True Cypherpunks" pile, except that he wrote it, and so > > > is by definition approved. > > > > It was not approved for the moderated list. I sent my comments to the > > flames list where they belonged. (It went to the unedited list too, > > but that's fair game as well.) Sorry you didn't understand that. > > > > > And I urge our Enlightened Leader to take his own medicine. Stop flaming > > > the list and calling it mere commentary. > > > > So let me see if I've got this, this list should be open to all flamers > > EXCEPT me? Curious. At any rate, I am going to take anonymous' advice. > > I will largely refrain from addressing any of the garbage that ends up on > > the flame and spam lists. You guys are mostly just talking to yourselves > > anyway. > > So how would you define a flame??? Seems more REASONABLE minds > want to know???? Oksas, as you see your innocent question was classified as "flame" and dumped into "cyperpunks-flames", as are most questions about the moderator's abuse. Like many homosexuals, Sandy Sandford harbors a pathological hatred of women and is always glad to shut one up. I hope he gets AIDS soon. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 20:12:00 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:12:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701292009.OAA02501@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <1eLB2D2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > > > > I think that with the demise of Mr Bell and anyone running > > a remailer there would be an end to his scheme pretty quickly. > > > > Society is not bound to put up with cranks and psychopaths. And of course society needs leaders to determine exactly who the cranks and the psychopaths are! > > there is no right to anonymously call for murder. The authorities > > could easily stop Bells scheme. > > > > The point I was making is that it is not consistent as claimed. > > > > Why, death of Jim Bell from his own murder machine is a very exciting, I > would say a very Kafkian thing to happen. I am looking forward to it. I > even think that Jim Bell would not oppose such an outcome that much, > since his assination bot would be such an important invention for the > humanity. Maybe it will reverse the course of world history! Igor, you keep misspelling "assassination" as in "talk.politics.assassination", an unmoderated Usenet newsgroup carried by all honorable Usenet providers. The word "assassin" actually comes from "hashish". In 1090's Ismaelites (a Shi'ite sect) organized a terror group based in the castle of Alamut, north of Kazwin in today's north Iran. They got funds from Iranian landowners. Their sheikh (aka the old man of the mountain) sent suicidal fedain to kill (assassinate) Seljuk officials and their Iranian merchant supporters. Traditionally they got high on hashish when going on an assignment. In the early 1100's assassins became active in Syria and Lebanon, where they assassinated prominent Crusaders and local anti-Shi'ite landowners. In 1256 Mongols led by Hulagu took Alamut and killed the assassins; and in 1272 Egyptians killed off the Lebanese assassins. The Ismaelites are still around (led by sheikh Aga Khan, a very rich guy). --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From atb at purple.reddesign.com Wed Jan 29 20:25:54 1997 From: atb at purple.reddesign.com (Angooki Taipu) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:25:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701300425.UAA22249@toad.com> > David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. His >talk at the RSA conference was such a load of bullshit it wasn't even >funny. > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export >allowance. They said it was going to undermine their national >security." I'm sure a few countries are upset because the US policy may in some way impede their citizens ability to adopt STRONG cryptography and secure their information infrastructure, thus injuring their national security. Remember, Aaron is employee of the government. He talks in doublespeak, Angooki Taipu atb at purple.reddesign.com From erp at digiforest.com Wed Jan 29 20:25:58 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:25:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701300425.UAA22257@toad.com> On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ichudov at algebra.com writes: > > > moscow state university in russia is not bad also. > > > > they teach lots of theory... which is good. > > > > - Igor. > > > > Do they have a master's program in computer science? :-) --- I looked up on Moscow State University the other day, after having seen the message which brought this question. So yes, they do have a Master's program in Computer Science, at least they claim to have one. Erp > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps > From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 20:28:38 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:28:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300428.UAA22294@toad.com> At 09:40 PM 1/27/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > >jim bell wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu at life.ai.mit.edu>... > >> Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >> prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >> any recognition of this fact. > >Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility >or consistency. "I love you too! B^) Question: What is a "whacko solution"? Why do you believe AP qualifies? Can you list any other "solutions" which are, indeed, "solutions" which are NOT "whacko" by your definition? (I'm trying to determine whether or not you even agree that there is a problem!) Let me pose an issue here by counterexample: Suppose there was a plantation, containing a master and his slaves. You are told that the slaves are "unhappy". (They're unhappy because they're slaves!!!) That's a "problem." Okay, let me propose that there are at least two broad "solutions" to this "problem": First, change the working conditions just enough to make the slaves acceptably happy. Or, second, eliminate the slavery altogether. Both are "solutions". The first, obviously, is only a "solution" from the stanpoint of the master. The second appears to be only a "solution" from the standpoint of the slaves, since the master obviously doesn't want to lose his slaves! Could you legitimately call the second solution a "whacko solution"? (It would be, from the limited standpoint of the master.) How about the first? That's the problem with using such a poorly-defined term as "whacko" to describe anything, particularly when many people don't agree. And here's a question: What do you mean by "credibility"? I've explained it in enough detail to convince a rather substantial number of intelligent people that it is likely to be possible, and to some it sounds like it is desireable. >If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out >on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be >dead as a doornail in a week. A claim which doesn't disprove the functionality of AP one whit. In fact, quite the opposite: If AP was, indeed, non-functional, then nobody would bother with me at all. The fact that you think they would shows that you believe AP threatens SOMEBODY. This means that your arguments, as minimal as they are, are internally contradictory. They simply don't hold together. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From erp at digiforest.com Wed Jan 29 20:28:50 1997 From: erp at digiforest.com (Erp) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:28:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Getting into MIT is impossible Message-ID: <199701300428.UAA22313@toad.com> > I noted with some interest, but little surprise, that the guy claiming MIT > required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score could barely spell, and > had major problems making a coherent point. Methinks this is why MIT > rejected him, not his lack of a "1600." ... Not to point out something obvious about this but the person who wrote this did not have "guts" enough or, just likes his privacy a bit more than the average person, to come out and write this non-anonymously. But since that isn't why I am writing this, I'll leave off of it for now. ... The reason I am writing this is because I am "the guy claiming MIT required a 4.0 GPA and a 1600 combined SAT score." I was informed this by my school counselor, along with many other things which are as equally "obnoxious" to my possible college acceptances. -- I did point out though, in my letter, that my connection was experiencing sever lag for some reason. I did narrow that down to being because my servers call in server and account server where on two different networks. Another point to this is that in my family I am the best speller. It is possibly genetic, but it is mostly because of where I grew up and the other "backwoodsy" things of my "youth". Now I realise this sounds like a bunch of excuses and such, and yes I guess it is, but I can if I sit down and think about something for a milli second longer than normal, and don't let my left hand out race my right hand, type things with propper grammer and spelling to my current extent. Now if the one who did post that "anonymously" would be so kind as to say such "brave" statements outloud without his or her precious "anonymousity" it would be much appreciated. Other than that, I do believe that is about it to this later. Goodnight and fare you "well" Erp ps -- please excuse the quotes, I was using them for mor eaccenting and well for words that fit in my own way. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Check my poetry page if you would like to see more of my bad spelling and horrendous grammer at: http://www.digiforest.com/~erp/poetry.html From ja94a08 at tdi.itm.edu.my Wed Jan 29 20:40:48 1997 From: ja94a08 at tdi.itm.edu.my (iamme) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:40:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701300440.UAA22440@toad.com> what about purdue and caltech ? anyone has Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh www ? he he man > From owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Wed Jan 29 14:57 SGT 1997 > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:23:53 -0500 > From: Matthew Toth > To: SpyKing > Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com > Subject: Re: Best Computer School? > > MIT is one the best schools in the country for C.S. > Close behind is Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh, > PA. (the folks who put out CERT.) Not sure how much Crypto they do, though. > > From declan at pathfinder.com Wed Jan 29 20:40:56 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:40:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: News report RE:RSA Data Security Conference, pointer Message-ID: <199701300440.UAA22452@toad.com> I don't think CNET has any idea what they're talking about. Perhaps they mean the Burns bill? I was over at Burns' office yesterday, and Pro-CODE hasn't been reintroduced yet -- they're looking for more co-sponsors -- so that's not even correct. *shrug* I have a report on this at netlynews.com in the Afterword section, BTW. -Declan On Wed, 29 Jan 1997 aaron at herringn.com wrote: > Report on RSA data security conference. Mentions 'Legislation in Congress > could ban mandatory key storage', anyone know what they're referring to? > > http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,7437,00.html > > > > From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Wed Jan 29 20:41:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:41:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300441.UAA22476@toad.com> "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" writes: > The Cold War was not won by the arms race, it was won in > Eastern Europe which was never a major participant. The main > instrument that won it was West German TV which broadcast > pictures of supermarkets with full shelves into the homes > of East Germans every night. The viewers could see that it > was not mere propaganda and their relatives confirmed the > fact. As a result the East German guards on the Berlin wall > simply decided to leave their posts one night. Do a lot of Americans really believe such things? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From froomkin at law.miami.edu Wed Jan 29 20:41:13 1997 From: froomkin at law.miami.edu (Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:41:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701300441.UAA22482@toad.com> On Wed, 29 Jan 1997 f_estema at alcor.concordia.ca wrote: [stuff] > > Incidentally, I remind you of the results of the moot court that was held > at one of the CFP conferences, where a GAK case was tried in front of > real federal judges by real lawyers. Our side lost. > Um. Actually the real judges didn't render an opinion (in public) since they might have to rule for real someday and would probably be conflicted out if they had ruled on the merits in a mock trial. The opinions were by a shadow panel of law professors, and they disagreed, 2-1. == The above may have been dictated via Dragon Dictate 2.51 voice recognition. Please be alert for unintentional word substitutions. A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin at law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here. From root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net Wed Jan 29 20:41:15 1997 From: root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net (Ben Byer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:41:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES challenge status? Message-ID: <199701300441.UAA22483@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- What exactly is the status of RSA's DES contest? I understand that at least two of the smaller contests have already been cracked, but I haven't seen much beyond theoretical discussion on the list on the topic of the DES contest. What work has been started on this contest? I am aware of Peter Trei's excellent deskr software for win32, but at the moment it chokes on RSA's real contest data as distributed. Has anybody yet worked on porting a version to x86 Linux, with nice, fast, inline assembly? How about a keyrange-server? This contest is so huge that any procedural innovations will probably be much more helpful than getting an early start. Has anybody started work on this yet, or is everyone else waiting for someone else to do it? - -- Ben Byer root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net I am not a bushing -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMvAb/LD5/Q37XXHFAQFxtQL/b7PeoWoO8gW0R35eOcA7yDmNOzg5IbIX xbrWkX0D7Tnj+8BxeQkRs2lOhhB6D6V/oh7RO6zMUwbNVaPDng0vjZXEmHAUVPnL XwSfekx47rgc43mVuXJoyval1zZuKDjE =h76F -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz Wed Jan 29 20:42:13 1997 From: pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz (pgut001 at cs.auckland.ac.nz) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:42:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: New export controls to include code signing applications Message-ID: <199701300442.UAA22525@toad.com> The Men in Black made Lucky Green write: >[Listing specific software prohibited from export] >"c.2. "Software" to certify "software" controlled by 5D002.c.1; " > >And, btw, virus checkers are also prohibited from export. Makes you wonder. > >"c.3. "Software" designed or modified to protect against malicious computer >damage, e.g., viruses;" > >That includes every firewall product, every virus checker, every data security >product, and this regardless if the product uses crypto or not. The new >regulations go way beyond controlling crypto. The USG, in a massive power >grip, has put data security as a whole on the export control list. These aren't new regulations, they're old regulations which have resurfaced. I've managed to obtain a copy of part of the old pre-Wassenaar COCOM regulations, which contain the magic lines: 5.D.2.c Specific "software" as follows: 1. "Software" having the characteristics, or performing or simulating the functions of the equipment embargoed by 5.A.2 or 5.B.2. 2. "Software" to certify "software" embargoed by 5.D.2.c.1. 3. "Software" designed or modified to protect against malicious computer damage, e.g. viruses. This is from the October 1991 version. By October 1996 this had changed to: 5D002 c Specific "software" as follows: 1. "Software" having the characteristics, or performing or simulating the functions of the equipment embargoed by 5A002 or 5B002. 2. "Software" to certify "software" specified in 5D002.c.1. It looks like someone used the old COCOM regs as the basis for the EAR rather than the newer Wassenaar ones. The two are almost identical anyway except for a few minor points. It's likely that the anti-virus clause is due to bureaucratic bungling rather than malicious intent. Peter. From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 20:42:33 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:42:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701300442.UAA01122@mail.pacifier.com> At 11:20 AM 1/29/97 -0500, aga wrote: >On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: >> One obvious problem with the LACK of a criminal libel statute, from the >> standpoint of the "government-controlling-class," or "the bigshots," is that >> it's impossible to sue (and collect from) a (comparatively) poor person for >> defaming him...but it's still possible to put him in jail. Civil libel is, >> therefore, essentially useless to a government agent as a means of keeping >> the masses in line. >> >> >> Myself, I believe that libel should be eliminated as a cause of action in >> civil cases as well as it has, de facto, in the criminal area. If anything, >> the ability to sue for libel makes things worse: There is an illusion that >> this is easy and straightforward, if not economical. It is neither. The >> result is that people are actually MORE likely to believe a printed >> falsehood because they incorrectly assume that if it wasn't true, it >> couldn't be printed. >Interesting analysis here, but remember; libel is just one kind of >"defamation" and an action for defamation will always be actionable. Sure about that?!? >The constitution gives us the right to call the President a >motherfucker any time we want to, yes... >and it also gives the motherfucker >the right to sue. While admittedly it has been a long time since I've read the entire US Constitution, I am not under the impression that it does what you claim. Could you be more specific about the particular section which does this? > Sueing is better than fighting in the streets. For the LAWYERS, who are paid regardless of the outcome, that certainly appears to be the case. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 20:42:45 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:42:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300442.UAA01172@mail.pacifier.com> At 10:41 AM 1/29/97 -0800, Sean Roach wrote: >At 09:40 PM 1/27/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: >>Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility >>or consistency. >> >>If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out >>on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be >>dead as a doornail in a week. >> >So you're saying that the system would work. Mr. bell would be targeted, a >price on his head, for starting that very system. Mr. Bell would be a >martyr, his system being proven by his own death. It would be some varient >of his idea that would be used to kill him, a bounty. Exactly correct. I will be killed by AP, my own invention. (however, I will be killed for merely DESCRIBING it, not only if I started the first instance of it.) Before I'd published the first part of AP, I knew and accepted what was going to happen. See AP part 7, at the end, quoted here: "Awe, that a system could be produced by a handful of people that would rid the world of the scourge of war, nuclear weapons, governments, and taxes. Astonishment, at my realization that once started, it would cover the entire globe inexorably, erasing dictatorships both fascistic and communistic, monarchies, and even so-called "democracies," which as a general rule today are really just the facade of government by the special interests. Joy, that it would eliminate all war, and force the dismantling not only of all nuclear weapons, but also all militaries, making them not merely redundant but also considered universally dangerous, leaving their "owners" no choice but to dismantle them, and in fact no reason to KEEP them!" "Terror, too, because this system may just change almost EVERYTHING how we think about our current society, and even more for myself personally, the knowledge that there may some day be a large body of wealthy people who are thrown off their current positions of control of the world's governments, and the very-real possibility that they may look for a "villain" to blame for their downfall. They will find one, in me, and at that time they will have the money and (thanks to me, at least partially) the means to see their revenge. But I would not have published this essay if I had been unwilling to accept the risk." Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 29 20:42:50 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:42:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <1eLB2D2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: <199701300438.WAA07297@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > > > Why, death of Jim Bell from his own murder machine is a very exciting, I > > would say a very Kafkian thing to happen. I am looking forward to it. I > > even think that Jim Bell would not oppose such an outcome that much, > > since his assination bot would be such an important invention for the > > humanity. Maybe it will reverse the course of world history! > > Igor, you keep misspelling "assassination" as in "talk.politics.assassination", > an unmoderated Usenet newsgroup carried by all honorable Usenet providers. No, I knew what was the correct spelling, but I like the shorter one more. It sounds funny to me. - Igor. From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 20:43:26 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:43:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved Message-ID: <199701300442.UAA01150@mail.pacifier.com> At 09:37 PM 1/28/97 -0800, stewarts at ix.netcom.com wrote: >Any bets on whether the $5000 RC5-12/32/6 contest will be solved >before the www.rsa.com contest status web page is updated? :-) > >Or how long before someone in the government starts talking about >how 56 bits takes 65,000 times as long to solve as 40 bits, >which is 26 years for a whole building full of computers, >and even 48 bits ought to take a month and a half for a whole >building full of computers (or supercomputers, if they hype it up....)? This, as I pointed out long ago, is why I didn't think a "crack the DES key" contest is necessarily a good idea, at least if it's ordinary Von-Neumann-type computers doing the searching. It makes DES look artificially good. Assuming it's possible to build a chip which tests solutions in a massively-pipelined mode, the 400,000 or so solutions per second tried (for what is probably a $2000 machine) would probably increase to 100 million per second per chip (at a cost of maybe $100 per chip, if implemented in parallel). That's 5000 times more economical, which would translate to a find in 2-3 days if the same dollars in hardware were invested. _THAT_ is the break we should hope the media publicizes, not the one that will eventually happen when accomplished by PCs or Suns, etc. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From blancw at cnw.com Wed Jan 29 20:47:06 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:47:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <01BC0E26.2EB9B5C0@king1-05.cnw.com> From: P.J. Westerhof >Franconics... Or Lesbonics of course, ................................................................. le femme fatale .. Blanc From mixmaster at remail.obscura.com Wed Jan 29 20:53:04 1997 From: mixmaster at remail.obscura.com (Mixmaster) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:53:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IMPORTANT] E-Cash Message-ID: <199701300432.UAA12335@sirius.infonex.com> When Timmy C[ocksucker] May's mother gave birth to him after fucking with a bunch of sailors, she didn't know who the father was but decided to tell him that he was a Russian as the Russian sailor was the one who satisfied her the most. /\_./o__ Timmy C[ocksucker] May (/^/(_^^' ._.(_.)_ From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 20:56:13 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:56:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: libsln.htm -- Is Libel a Crime? Message-ID: <199701300456.UAA22790@toad.com> At 11:20 AM 1/29/97 -0500, aga wrote: >On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: >> One obvious problem with the LACK of a criminal libel statute, from the >> standpoint of the "government-controlling-class," or "the bigshots," is that >> it's impossible to sue (and collect from) a (comparatively) poor person for >> defaming him...but it's still possible to put him in jail. Civil libel is, >> therefore, essentially useless to a government agent as a means of keeping >> the masses in line. >> >> >> Myself, I believe that libel should be eliminated as a cause of action in >> civil cases as well as it has, de facto, in the criminal area. If anything, >> the ability to sue for libel makes things worse: There is an illusion that >> this is easy and straightforward, if not economical. It is neither. The >> result is that people are actually MORE likely to believe a printed >> falsehood because they incorrectly assume that if it wasn't true, it >> couldn't be printed. >Interesting analysis here, but remember; libel is just one kind of >"defamation" and an action for defamation will always be actionable. Sure about that?!? >The constitution gives us the right to call the President a >motherfucker any time we want to, yes... >and it also gives the motherfucker >the right to sue. While admittedly it has been a long time since I've read the entire US Constitution, I am not under the impression that it does what you claim. Could you be more specific about the particular section which does this? > Sueing is better than fighting in the streets. For the LAWYERS, who are paid regardless of the outcome, that certainly appears to be the case. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 20:57:53 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:57:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300457.UAA22821@toad.com> At 10:41 AM 1/29/97 -0800, Sean Roach wrote: >At 09:40 PM 1/27/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: >>Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility >>or consistency. >> >>If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out >>on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be >>dead as a doornail in a week. >> >So you're saying that the system would work. Mr. bell would be targeted, a >price on his head, for starting that very system. Mr. Bell would be a >martyr, his system being proven by his own death. It would be some varient >of his idea that would be used to kill him, a bounty. Exactly correct. I will be killed by AP, my own invention. (however, I will be killed for merely DESCRIBING it, not only if I started the first instance of it.) Before I'd published the first part of AP, I knew and accepted what was going to happen. See AP part 7, at the end, quoted here: "Awe, that a system could be produced by a handful of people that would rid the world of the scourge of war, nuclear weapons, governments, and taxes. Astonishment, at my realization that once started, it would cover the entire globe inexorably, erasing dictatorships both fascistic and communistic, monarchies, and even so-called "democracies," which as a general rule today are really just the facade of government by the special interests. Joy, that it would eliminate all war, and force the dismantling not only of all nuclear weapons, but also all militaries, making them not merely redundant but also considered universally dangerous, leaving their "owners" no choice but to dismantle them, and in fact no reason to KEEP them!" "Terror, too, because this system may just change almost EVERYTHING how we think about our current society, and even more for myself personally, the knowledge that there may some day be a large body of wealthy people who are thrown off their current positions of control of the world's governments, and the very-real possibility that they may look for a "villain" to blame for their downfall. They will find one, in me, and at that time they will have the money and (thanks to me, at least partially) the means to see their revenge. But I would not have published this essay if I had been unwilling to accept the risk." Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 29 20:58:59 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:58:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701300442.UAA01172@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <199701300453.WAA07422@manifold.algebra.com> jim bell wrote: > Exactly correct. I will be killed by AP, my own invention. (however, I > will be killed for merely DESCRIBING it, not only if I started the first > instance of it.) Before I'd published the first part of AP, I knew and > accepted what was going to happen. See AP part 7, at the end, quoted here: > See, Phill, I was right. igor From sales at medannet.com Wed Jan 29 20:59:02 1997 From: sales at medannet.com (sales) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 20:59:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: No Subject Message-ID: <199701300448.VAA11457@cough-syrup.nethosting.com> From blancw at cnw.com Wed Jan 29 21:10:40 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:10:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Internet, Countries, Nationalism, etc. Message-ID: <199701300510.VAA23037@toad.com> From: P.J. Westerhof >Franconics... Or Lesbonics of course, ................................................................. le femme fatale .. Blanc From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 21:11:36 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:11:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved Message-ID: <199701300511.VAA23071@toad.com> At 09:37 PM 1/28/97 -0800, stewarts at ix.netcom.com wrote: >Any bets on whether the $5000 RC5-12/32/6 contest will be solved >before the www.rsa.com contest status web page is updated? :-) > >Or how long before someone in the government starts talking about >how 56 bits takes 65,000 times as long to solve as 40 bits, >which is 26 years for a whole building full of computers, >and even 48 bits ought to take a month and a half for a whole >building full of computers (or supercomputers, if they hype it up....)? This, as I pointed out long ago, is why I didn't think a "crack the DES key" contest is necessarily a good idea, at least if it's ordinary Von-Neumann-type computers doing the searching. It makes DES look artificially good. Assuming it's possible to build a chip which tests solutions in a massively-pipelined mode, the 400,000 or so solutions per second tried (for what is probably a $2000 machine) would probably increase to 100 million per second per chip (at a cost of maybe $100 per chip, if implemented in parallel). That's 5000 times more economical, which would translate to a find in 2-3 days if the same dollars in hardware were invested. _THAT_ is the break we should hope the media publicizes, not the one that will eventually happen when accomplished by PCs or Suns, etc. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From nobody at REPLAY.COM Wed Jan 29 21:11:55 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:11:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: A comment on the censorship policy Message-ID: <199701300447.FAA16712@basement.replay.com> I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing. (Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he longs to see Oksas naked.) This whole process is showing the worst of Sandfort's censorship policy. (If this is dumped into the "Not suitable for Cypherpunks to read" list, I urge those of you who see it to pass it on to the main list.) END -- From wiseleo at juno.com Wed Jan 29 21:45:02 1997 From: wiseleo at juno.com (Leonid S Knyshov) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:45:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Altavista In-Reply-To: <199701290655.WAA21750@toad.com> Message-ID: <19970129.213741.8646.1.wiseleo@juno.com> Isn't it the future of internet advertising? I mean its just like Juno's and other companies, the only ads shown to customers are those that are relevant to their needs as submitted. Like do a search for web promotion and you are gonna get ads of various services etc. It is highly unlikely that detailed logs are kept since Alta-vista gets overwhelming number of hits. The way I go around all these ads is that I use Internet Fast Find by symantec and I love it, I purchased it after evaluating for 3 days. Sorry for commercial ;) I think it is a good idea, no wonder doubleclick.net is one of the leaders in advertising. You are shown only the ads that will potentially interest you, search for shopping and you are gonna get one of those ISN ads etc. I think it is a good idea FWIW. I wouldn't think that a company such as doubleclick.net will do you any harm. One of my job assignments is Internet research and I search for such variety of topics that those robots have no use on the information submitted. On the other hand, if I find my site on Altavista and go to it, in my referer_log I will see the entire search query and that is a valuable marketing information, you learn about how the customer found you etc. Well, this list isn't marketing101 at anywhere.com so I am afraid I won't bother with more thorough explation :) I am sorry if you consider this an OFFtopic message but I am just answering the question. On Wed, 29 Jan 97 01:03:35 EST mjw at VNET.IBM.COM writes: >From: Mark Waddington >Subject: Altavista > >> However, the doubleclick.net ads appear to bear no relationship to >the >> keywords being searched... > >Interestingly, I've just noticed over the last couple of days that the >in-line >ads are directly relevant to the search words I enter. I did a search >yesterday >on "Quicken" and "security" and all the in-line ads I was shown >referred to >security or penetration detection products. > From rnh2 at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 29 21:46:03 1997 From: rnh2 at ix.netcom.com (Rick Hornbeck) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:46:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Politics of Export Restrictions Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970129214455.00682db8@popd.ix.netcom.com> Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he runs for President in 2000? In other words, his campaign could include promises to retract existing crypto export restrictions established by his predecessor. The campaign would be accompanied by slogans and rhetoric such as "export crypto, not jobs" and the crypto/high-tech community would support Gore and the Democratic party in droves. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Wed Jan 29 21:50:32 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:50:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Passphrase security Message-ID: <199701300550.VAA29338@mailmasher.com> Deadwood Vilest K"arcinogen"OfTheMonth is so vile because rancid semen is dripping from all of his orifices. ^ ^ (o o) Deadwood Vilest K"arcinogen"OfTheMonth ( ) \___/ !_! From ichudov at algebra.com Wed Jan 29 21:55:53 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:55:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300555.VAA23931@toad.com> jim bell wrote: > Exactly correct. I will be killed by AP, my own invention. (however, I > will be killed for merely DESCRIBING it, not only if I started the first > instance of it.) Before I'd published the first part of AP, I knew and > accepted what was going to happen. See AP part 7, at the end, quoted here: > See, Phill, I was right. igor From nobody at replay.com Wed Jan 29 21:57:45 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 21:57:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: A comment on the censorship policy Message-ID: <199701300557.VAA23974@toad.com> I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing. (Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he longs to see Oksas naked.) This whole process is showing the worst of Sandfort's censorship policy. (If this is dumped into the "Not suitable for Cypherpunks to read" list, I urge those of you who see it to pass it on to the main list.) END -- From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Wed Jan 29 22:01:17 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 22:01:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: A comment on the censorship policy In-Reply-To: <199701300447.FAA16712@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote: > I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's > censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts > declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the > "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and > someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing. WEll....that's not so bad ;) > (Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then > appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, Is it so annoying...? why did you read it to that point??? :) Why could you not be so anonymous and tell me? My posts are a bit brief; Blancs' are far better, next time read hers. > engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he > longs to see Oksas naked.) Huh?? You are being a 'fluff' here ;) > This whole process is showing the worst of Sandfort's censorship policy. > > (If this is dumped into the "Not suitable for Cypherpunks to read" list, I > urge those of you who see it to pass it on to the main list.) > > END > > -- > From rnh2 at ix.netcom.com Wed Jan 29 22:10:47 1997 From: rnh2 at ix.netcom.com (Rick Hornbeck) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 22:10:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Politics of Export Restrictions Message-ID: <199701300610.WAA24288@toad.com> Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he runs for President in 2000? In other words, his campaign could include promises to retract existing crypto export restrictions established by his predecessor. The campaign would be accompanied by slogans and rhetoric such as "export crypto, not jobs" and the crypto/high-tech community would support Gore and the Democratic party in droves. From wiseleo at juno.com Wed Jan 29 22:10:51 1997 From: wiseleo at juno.com (Leonid S Knyshov) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 22:10:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Altavista Message-ID: <199701300610.WAA24295@toad.com> Isn't it the future of internet advertising? I mean its just like Juno's and other companies, the only ads shown to customers are those that are relevant to their needs as submitted. Like do a search for web promotion and you are gonna get ads of various services etc. It is highly unlikely that detailed logs are kept since Alta-vista gets overwhelming number of hits. The way I go around all these ads is that I use Internet Fast Find by symantec and I love it, I purchased it after evaluating for 3 days. Sorry for commercial ;) I think it is a good idea, no wonder doubleclick.net is one of the leaders in advertising. You are shown only the ads that will potentially interest you, search for shopping and you are gonna get one of those ISN ads etc. I think it is a good idea FWIW. I wouldn't think that a company such as doubleclick.net will do you any harm. One of my job assignments is Internet research and I search for such variety of topics that those robots have no use on the information submitted. On the other hand, if I find my site on Altavista and go to it, in my referer_log I will see the entire search query and that is a valuable marketing information, you learn about how the customer found you etc. Well, this list isn't marketing101 at anywhere.com so I am afraid I won't bother with more thorough explation :) I am sorry if you consider this an OFFtopic message but I am just answering the question. On Wed, 29 Jan 97 01:03:35 EST mjw at VNET.IBM.COM writes: >From: Mark Waddington >Subject: Altavista > >> However, the doubleclick.net ads appear to bear no relationship to >the >> keywords being searched... > >Interestingly, I've just noticed over the last couple of days that the >in-line >ads are directly relevant to the search words I enter. I did a search >yesterday >on "Quicken" and "security" and all the in-line ads I was shown >referred to >security or penetration detection products. > From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Wed Jan 29 22:16:40 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 22:16:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: A comment on the censorship policy In-Reply-To: <199701300447.FAA16712@basement.replay.com> Message-ID: <32F0597A.49AA@sk.sympatico.ca> Anonymous wrote: > > I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's > censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts > declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the > "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and > someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing. Dear Mr. or Ms. Anonymous, It is extremely easy to understand. Just read your own words. The key word here is 'accurate' criticisms. This makes them 'flames', in Sandy's mind, because the purpose of the 'censorship experiment' was to place total control of the list in the hands of a man who rarely posts and doesn't seem to participate in the list discussions, as well as for the purpose of suppressing any real dissent that may arise from list members. Also, one of the reasons that the moderation process is so haphazard, is that posts from some individuals are automatically routed to the 'flames' list at some times, and viewed/censored at other times, so that a few can be posted to the censored list to give some half-hearted illusion of fairness in the censorship process. (which remains a bad joke, nonetheless). Thank you for using the word 'inane' to describe some of my posts. Most people aren't polite enough to drop the 's' when using the word. (Not that it matters. Some individuals are automatically 'flame-approved' for the censored list.) Also, I wouldn't be too sure that the email you receive from toad.com accurately reflects what is being posted to each list. There are some funny things going on between 'incoming' and 'outgoing', and some of them are designed to make the process obtuse, and hard to follow. > has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then > appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, > engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he > longs to see Oksas naked.) Try deleting the irrelevant parts before printing out the parts about seeing Nurdane naked. That will save you time, and get you to the bathroom quicker. > This whole process is showing the worst of Sandfort's censorship policy. I think that you are being overly kind, once again, in suggesting that there really is a 'policy'. It's more like a crapshoot (pardon the pun), where the spots on the dice change at his personal whim. Toto From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 22:55:50 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 22:55:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access Message-ID: <199701300655.WAA17122@mail.pacifier.com> At 10:11 PM 1/28/97 -0600, Mike McNally wrote: >Somebody wrote: >> >> This morning at the RSA keynote, David Aaron, the US Crypto >> ambassador quoted the "Sovreign Right of Lawful Access" as >> something that goverments were determined to preserve. > >Speaking as a private indiwidual, and not as a drone in the employ >of IBM (don't get me started on the "but wait, key recovery *isn't* >the same as key escrow" hoo-ha), that dude scared the piss out of >me. I think that terminology is odd. They're getting desperate. "Soverign Right of Lawful Access" doesn't state HOW DIFFICULT that "access" is to be. Interpreted broadly, that would outlaw any encryption even if it only impeded that access a tiny bit! Or under an alternative interpretation, the mere fact that it is hypothetically possible to decrypt a message means that nothing (other than mathematical improbability) stands in the way of doing the decrypt. Also, it didn't say SECRET ACCESS, although experience tells us that they (the thugs) probably assume this. I've long pointed out that ordinary search warrants require informing people who are being searched, even if they're not home and assuming the thugs didn't trash the place the way they frequently like to. I see no reason to believe that the advent of telephone technology in the late 1800's should have retroactively re-written the US Constitution to make secret searches okay. Technically, the Bill of Rights prohibits "unreasonable searches and siezures," and doesn't specifically mention the secrecy issue, but since (am I correct in this, Real Lawyers ?) the practice up until that time required people searched to be informed of searches, a change in policy that wiretaps could be secret sounds more like taking advantage of a technological windfall, not "discovering" that the Constitution allowed something that had always before been prohibited. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From see.sig at for.address.real Wed Jan 29 23:00:54 1997 From: see.sig at for.address.real (Anil Das) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:00:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES challenge status? In-Reply-To: <199701300441.UAA22483@toad.com> Message-ID: <32F04A93.59E2@for.address.real> Ben Byer wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > What exactly is the status of RSA's DES contest? I understand that at > least two of the smaller contests have already been cracked, but I > haven't seen much beyond theoretical discussion on the list on the > topic of the DES contest. > Two? The only publicized solution so far is the RC5/32/12/5 solution from Ian Goldberg at Berkeley (and independently from Germano Caronni at ETH Z�rich). Are you saying that you know that the 48 bit RC5 contest is solved already, or are you just counting Ian's and Germano's solutions separately? -- Anil Das From hal at hal.hpl.hp.com Wed Jan 29 23:09:10 1997 From: hal at hal.hpl.hp.com (Hal Abelson) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:09:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <5cmmnm$45@life.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <9701300709.AA06440@hal.hpl.hp.com> Rick Osborne writes: The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the Russian front!" Just to set the record straight, MIT's admissions is need-blind. Lots of things go into our admissions decisions, but whether or not an applicant needs financial aid is not one of them. Admissions and financial aid are handled out of separate offices, and the people making the admissions decisions don't even see the financial aid requests. One exception: We are experimenting with the possibility of considering the amount of aid needed in the case of a few international applicants, but even here this is only a minor consideration for a small number of applicants. For domestic applicants, financial aid plays no role at all in the admissions decision. -- Hal Abelson From hal at hal.hpl.hp.com Wed Jan 29 23:09:26 1997 From: hal at hal.hpl.hp.com (Hal Abelson) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:09:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? In-Reply-To: <5cmmnm$45@life.ai.mit.edu> Message-ID: <9701300709.AA06443@hal.hpl.hp.com> Rick Osborne writes: The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the Russian front!" Just to set the record straight, MIT's admissions is need-blind. Lots of things go into our admissions decisions, but whether or not an applicant needs financial aid is not one of them. Admissions and financial aid are handled out of separate offices, and the people making the admissions decisions don't even see the financial aid requests. One exception: We are experimenting with the possibility of considering the amount of aid needed in the case of a few international applicants, but even here this is only a minor consideration for a small number of applicants. For domestic applicants, financial aid plays no role at all in the admissions decision. -- Hal Abelson From jimbell at pacifier.com Wed Jan 29 23:10:39 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:10:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access Message-ID: <199701300710.XAA25411@toad.com> At 10:11 PM 1/28/97 -0600, Mike McNally wrote: >Somebody wrote: >> >> This morning at the RSA keynote, David Aaron, the US Crypto >> ambassador quoted the "Sovreign Right of Lawful Access" as >> something that goverments were determined to preserve. > >Speaking as a private indiwidual, and not as a drone in the employ >of IBM (don't get me started on the "but wait, key recovery *isn't* >the same as key escrow" hoo-ha), that dude scared the piss out of >me. I think that terminology is odd. They're getting desperate. "Soverign Right of Lawful Access" doesn't state HOW DIFFICULT that "access" is to be. Interpreted broadly, that would outlaw any encryption even if it only impeded that access a tiny bit! Or under an alternative interpretation, the mere fact that it is hypothetically possible to decrypt a message means that nothing (other than mathematical improbability) stands in the way of doing the decrypt. Also, it didn't say SECRET ACCESS, although experience tells us that they (the thugs) probably assume this. I've long pointed out that ordinary search warrants require informing people who are being searched, even if they're not home and assuming the thugs didn't trash the place the way they frequently like to. I see no reason to believe that the advent of telephone technology in the late 1800's should have retroactively re-written the US Constitution to make secret searches okay. Technically, the Bill of Rights prohibits "unreasonable searches and siezures," and doesn't specifically mention the secrecy issue, but since (am I correct in this, Real Lawyers ?) the practice up until that time required people searched to be informed of searches, a change in policy that wiretaps could be secret sounds more like taking advantage of a technological windfall, not "discovering" that the Constitution allowed something that had always before been prohibited. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 29 23:17:44 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:17:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI=LIE In-Reply-To: <199701291637.LAA07929@homeport.org> Message-ID: <32F04AEB.12B7@gte.net> Adam Shostack wrote: > http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/fbi-lab.html > Login cypherpunks, password cypherpunks. > WASHINGTON -- For decades the FBI's reputation as a crime-fighting > agency has rested heavily on its high-tech forensic laboratory, which > could solve baffling crimes from a speck of blood, a sliver of paint > or the thinnest filament of human hair. > But an investigation by the Justice Department's inspector > general has put the FBI laboratory, and the way the agency has > used it, under the glare of public scrutiny. The findings, which were > turned over to FBI officials last week, are threatening to shatter the > image of an agency on the cutting edge of scientific sleuthing. The L.A. Times today (Wed) ran an article telling about three top lab people working on the OKC bombing case, and how they were moved or scuttled due to discrepancies. This was a new development. You'll note also that although Fujisaki (sp?) in the 2nd O.J. trial did not permit it to be introduced (to my knowledge), there was evidence that a high-up FBI lab person who testified in the first trial falsified or seriously distorted certain facts to help the prosecution. This may yet be pursued like the Fuhrman thing. From dthorn at gte.net Wed Jan 29 23:30:58 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:30:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32F04DF0.2D92@gte.net> aga wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > aga wrote: > > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > > > > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > > > > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > > > > > suffice to be immediately terminated. > > > No trial, huh? > > Good question. The law we have right now already assumes that there > > are situations where a criminal will not go peacefully, if at all. > > In some countries (years ago?) such as England, bobbies were known > > to not carry firearms for ordinary street duty. Am I right? But > > here in the USA, that would be unthinkable. > > So my proposal doesn't eliminate the responsibility portion of law > > enforcement. I'd say, if a target were eliminated thru negligence, > > malfeasance, or other wrongdoing under "color of law" or whatever, > > let the courts handle that as they do now. > Just who is doing the eliminating? > > My suggestion would give the law enforcers the ability to dispense > > the first level of justice expeditiously, which they cannot accomplish > > now due to all of the red tape and the corrupt legal system (lawyers > > specialize in getting chronic offenders off, particularly "traffic" > > offenses). By transferring a major portion of the bureaucracy to > > the pencil pushers, we can free up the street cops to do what they > > do best, namely bust or eliminate criminals. > Cops can never be trusted to "dispense justice," and half of the > cops are themselves criminals in what they do. Most cops steal > evidence and lie like crazy in Court. All they want is a conviction, > and it mattters not how it is obtained. All true. But I'm not suggesting the creation of anything new here. Cops already carry guns and kill people. All I'm suggesting is that they be empowered to kill when: 1) The crime is aggression against another person or persons; 2) The evidence is so solid (recorded?) that the officer (who risks being prosecuted if he kills unjustifiably) can carry out the enforcement without undue apprehension; 3) These things are reviewed by the elected representatives of the people, to make sure there's no hanky-panky going on. > > I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the > > virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get > > out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those > > holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to > > provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, > > given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter > > aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, > > well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better > > off when we do. > > I would trust robots more than humanoids. The Gort (sp?) robot is a perfect example, and I don't think it's all that many years away. From gbroiles at netbox.com Wed Jan 29 23:39:32 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:39:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Politics of Export Restrictions Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970129233036.00715ef8@mail.io.com> At 09:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Rick Hornbeck wrote: >Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being >imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he >runs for President in 2000? I suppose it's plausible, but it's an opportunity open to both candidates, and more plausibly (because of lack of collaboration) to the Republicans - e.g., Dan Quayle and the "Crypto Freedom For Americans" platform, promising to rescue Silicon Valley from those evil regulatory Democrats. If I were an evil politician trying to set up a trick like you suggest, I think I'd want a scheme that my opponent(s) couldn't hijack and use against me. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Wed Jan 29 23:46:52 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:46:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access In-Reply-To: <199701300710.XAA25411@toad.com> Message-ID: <32F051A0.45C3@vail.tivoli.com> jim bell wrote: > > I see no reason to believe that the advent of telephone technology > in the late 1800's should have retroactively re-written the US > Constitution ... This point, unfortunately, seems to be lost in the woods. At the panel discussions in this conference, so many people used phrases like "... law enforcement doing what they need to do..." on *both* sides of the GAK fence. "Need" to do? Well, they might "need" to do lots of things under their own view of reality, but that doesn't mean it's reasonable to negotiate towards that position. Why is it that just because one party shows up with a wacked-out agenda that the "honorable" thing to do is work towards a consensus solution? -- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 30 00:11:53 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:11:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701300036.QAA18048@toad.com> Message-ID: <32F0579F.4DFE@gte.net> Sean Roach wrote: > At 08:15 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: > >I think a hole in your thinking is to assume that the assasins have no > >motive other than financial gain. I would submit that there are those that > >have the skills, training and a political agenda coherent with the > >wagerers, lacking only the financial incentive to make the risks > >acceptable. These wetworkers won't consider accepting the bribe of the > >rich/powerful > This may be true, but the example was to show how easy a defensive line > could be thrown up around the powerful. For example, conventional body > guards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledge > that they will be buried with the tyrant. These body guards could be ten > children out of each local village. Merely a human shield. [snippo] In Prizzi's Honor, Nicholson sez "If you try to hide in a submarine on the bottom of the ocean, we will find you". But it's not even that difficult. Lob a missile into the place and blow it up. Earth penetrators are getting better too, for the Sadaam types. And there's a zillion more. Does this "rich person" really want to spend his/her life living in a sealed tomb? From see.sig at for.address.real Thu Jan 30 00:55:37 1997 From: see.sig at for.address.real (Anil Das) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:55:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES challenge status? Message-ID: <199701300855.AAA27380@toad.com> Ben Byer wrote: >=20 > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >=20 > What exactly is the status of RSA's DES contest? I understand that at > least two of the smaller contests have already been cracked, but I > haven't seen much beyond theoretical discussion on the list on the > topic of the DES contest. >=20 =09Two? The only publicized solution so far is the RC5/32/12/5 solution from Ian Goldberg at Berkeley (and independently from Germano Caronni at ETH Z=FCrich). =09Are you saying that you know that the 48 bit RC5 contest is solved already, or are you just counting Ian's and Germano's solutions separately? -- Anil Das From hal at hal.hpl.hp.com Thu Jan 30 00:55:38 1997 From: hal at hal.hpl.hp.com (Hal Abelson) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:55:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Best Computer School? Message-ID: <199701300855.AAA27381@toad.com> Rick Osborne writes: The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the Russian front!" Just to set the record straight, MIT's admissions is need-blind. Lots of things go into our admissions decisions, but whether or not an applicant needs financial aid is not one of them. Admissions and financial aid are handled out of separate offices, and the people making the admissions decisions don't even see the financial aid requests. One exception: We are experimenting with the possibility of considering the amount of aid needed in the case of a few international applicants, but even here this is only a minor consideration for a small number of applicants. For domestic applicants, financial aid plays no role at all in the admissions decision. -- Hal Abelson From gbroiles at netbox.com Thu Jan 30 00:55:45 1997 From: gbroiles at netbox.com (Greg Broiles) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:55:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Politics of Export Restrictions Message-ID: <199701300855.AAA27401@toad.com> At 09:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Rick Hornbeck wrote: >Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being >imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he >runs for President in 2000? I suppose it's plausible, but it's an opportunity open to both candidates, and more plausibly (because of lack of collaboration) to the Republicans - e.g., Dan Quayle and the "Crypto Freedom For Americans" platform, promising to rescue Silicon Valley from those evil regulatory Democrats. If I were an evil politician trying to set up a trick like you suggest, I think I'd want a scheme that my opponent(s) couldn't hijack and use against me. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles at netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. | From m5 at vail.tivoli.com Thu Jan 30 00:55:47 1997 From: m5 at vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:55:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access Message-ID: <199701300855.AAA27402@toad.com> jim bell wrote: > > I see no reason to believe that the advent of telephone technology > in the late 1800's should have retroactively re-written the US > Constitution ... This point, unfortunately, seems to be lost in the woods. At the panel discussions in this conference, so many people used phrases like "... law enforcement doing what they need to do..." on *both* sides of the GAK fence. "Need" to do? Well, they might "need" to do lots of things under their own view of reality, but that doesn't mean it's reasonable to negotiate towards that position. Why is it that just because one party shows up with a wacked-out agenda that the "honorable" thing to do is work towards a consensus solution? -- ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ Mike McNally -- Egregiously Pointy -- Tivoli Systems, "IBM" -- Austin mailto:m5 at tivoli.com mailto:m101 at io.com http://www.io.com/~m101 ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 30 00:55:50 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:55:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: FBI=LIE Message-ID: <199701300855.AAA27403@toad.com> Adam Shostack wrote: > http://www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/news/washpol/fbi-lab.html > Login cypherpunks, password cypherpunks. > WASHINGTON -- For decades the FBI's reputation as a crime-fighting > agency has rested heavily on its high-tech forensic laboratory, which > could solve baffling crimes from a speck of blood, a sliver of paint > or the thinnest filament of human hair. > But an investigation by the Justice Department's inspector > general has put the FBI laboratory, and the way the agency has > used it, under the glare of public scrutiny. The findings, which were > turned over to FBI officials last week, are threatening to shatter the > image of an agency on the cutting edge of scientific sleuthing. The L.A. Times today (Wed) ran an article telling about three top lab people working on the OKC bombing case, and how they were moved or scuttled due to discrepancies. This was a new development. You'll note also that although Fujisaki (sp?) in the 2nd O.J. trial did not permit it to be introduced (to my knowledge), there was evidence that a high-up FBI lab person who testified in the first trial falsified or seriously distorted certain facts to help the prosecution. This may yet be pursued like the Fuhrman thing. From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 30 00:55:56 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:55:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701300855.AAA27411@toad.com> Sean Roach wrote: > At 08:15 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: > >I think a hole in your thinking is to assume that the assasins have no > >motive other than financial gain. I would submit that there are those that > >have the skills, training and a political agenda coherent with the > >wagerers, lacking only the financial incentive to make the risks > >acceptable. These wetworkers won't consider accepting the bribe of the > >rich/powerful > This may be true, but the example was to show how easy a defensive line > could be thrown up around the powerful. For example, conventional body > guards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledge > that they will be buried with the tyrant. These body guards could be ten > children out of each local village. Merely a human shield. [snippo] In Prizzi's Honor, Nicholson sez "If you try to hide in a submarine on the bottom of the ocean, we will find you". But it's not even that difficult. Lob a missile into the place and blow it up. Earth penetrators are getting better too, for the Sadaam types. And there's a zillion more. Does this "rich person" really want to spend his/her life living in a sealed tomb? From dthorn at gte.net Thu Jan 30 00:56:01 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 00:56:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701300856.AAA27419@toad.com> aga wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > aga wrote: > > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > > > > > > But seriously, I was just telling the folks over the weekend, if I > > > > > > had my hand on the button, a lot of people would die very quickly. > > > > > > As in The Day The Earth Stood Still, a single act of aggression would > > > > > > suffice to be immediately terminated. > > > No trial, huh? > > Good question. The law we have right now already assumes that there > > are situations where a criminal will not go peacefully, if at all. > > In some countries (years ago?) such as England, bobbies were known > > to not carry firearms for ordinary street duty. Am I right? But > > here in the USA, that would be unthinkable. > > So my proposal doesn't eliminate the responsibility portion of law > > enforcement. I'd say, if a target were eliminated thru negligence, > > malfeasance, or other wrongdoing under "color of law" or whatever, > > let the courts handle that as they do now. > Just who is doing the eliminating? > > My suggestion would give the law enforcers the ability to dispense > > the first level of justice expeditiously, which they cannot accomplish > > now due to all of the red tape and the corrupt legal system (lawyers > > specialize in getting chronic offenders off, particularly "traffic" > > offenses). By transferring a major portion of the bureaucracy to > > the pencil pushers, we can free up the street cops to do what they > > do best, namely bust or eliminate criminals. > Cops can never be trusted to "dispense justice," and half of the > cops are themselves criminals in what they do. Most cops steal > evidence and lie like crazy in Court. All they want is a conviction, > and it mattters not how it is obtained. All true. But I'm not suggesting the creation of anything new here. Cops already carry guns and kill people. All I'm suggesting is that they be empowered to kill when: 1) The crime is aggression against another person or persons; 2) The evidence is so solid (recorded?) that the officer (who risks being prosecuted if he kills unjustifiably) can carry out the enforcement without undue apprehension; 3) These things are reviewed by the elected representatives of the people, to make sure there's no hanky-panky going on. > > I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the > > virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get > > out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those > > holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to > > provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, > > given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter > > aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, > > well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better > > off when we do. > > I would trust robots more than humanoids. The Gort (sp?) robot is a perfect example, and I don't think it's all that many years away. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 30 01:53:28 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 01:53:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <199701291411.JAA01361@raptor.research.att.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970130014152.0064ff48@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 10:45 AM 1/29/97 -0500, Dan Geer wrote: >Steve is absolutely right on the money, particularly about the likely >happiness on the government side. I pretty much agree. On the other hand, Ian did a nice job on the radio (NPR, probably was All Things Considered) of pushing the "look, if a college student can break 40 bits in a couple of hours, it's really stupid for the government to limit us like this"; a couple of other people also contributed spin, and it came out pretty strongly against export restrictions. I think we do need to get some sort of push going for 3DES as a replacement for DES - it's strong enough, even though DES is showing its age, and it's an obvious transition from the current technology. It's slower and clunkier than IDEA or RC4/128, but still not bad. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From pavelk at dator3.anet.cz Thu Jan 30 03:05:14 1997 From: pavelk at dator3.anet.cz (Pavel Korensky) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 03:05:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter In-Reply-To: <199701292156.NAA12978@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701301053.LAA00250@zenith.dator3.anet.cz> Mark Rogaski wrote: > If I had experience with Netscape plugins and spare time, I'd > try it myself. But here's my proposed solution. > > A plugin in Netscape intercepts all requests, encrypt the URL > with a pubkey algorithm, encode the string base64, send it as GET input to > a proxy server. > > The proxy server decodes and decrypts the URL, gets the requested page, > and returns it. This beats out URL-based filtering. > > Still need to figure out the specifics of key-exchange. If we use > 40-bit encryption, it's exportable, and it still works in our threat > model (ie. we don't care if the watchers figure out the URL a few hours > later). > > To beat out dropping packets with unacceptable pattern in them, we > could use an SSL-based server as the proxy. > > The plugin could even have a nice little on/off switch and a list > list of available proxies. Nice, but I can see one problem here. If I (as a censor) will want to block your communication to prohibited sites, I can block the access to the proxy computers. You will just move the blocking strategy one level up with your plug-in. The censor will block the web servers AND proxy servers. Because the list of proxy servers must be available somehow to users, it is very simple to write some kind of script running on the gateway which is blocking the acccess. The script will download the list of proxy servers, update the gateway tables and the gateway will be blocking acccess to all sites on the proxy list. Bye PavelK -- **************************************************************************** * Pavel Korensky (pavelk at dator3.anet.cz) * * DATOR3 Ltd., Modranska 1895/17, 143 00 Prague 4, Czech Republic * * PGP key fingerprint: 00 65 5A B3 70 20 F1 54 D3 B3 E4 3E F8 A3 5E 7C * **************************************************************************** From declan at pathfinder.com Thu Jan 30 04:50:17 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 04:50:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Politics of Export Restrictions In-Reply-To: <199701300855.AAA27401@toad.com> Message-ID: Agreed. It's the Republicans who are the most adamantly pro-crypto. They'd love to use it as a noose to hang Gore in 2000. If Gore switches positions -- which I think unlikely -- it'll just be another area where both parties agree. A minor point: since Gore has been the chief crypto-critic of this administration, if he switched he'd leave himself open to charges of waffling. Then again, some administration officials tell me they expect this debate to be resolved within a year, so go figure. -Declan On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Greg Broiles wrote: > At 09:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Rick Hornbeck wrote: > > >Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being > >imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he > >runs for President in 2000? > > I suppose it's plausible, but it's an opportunity open to both candidates, > and more plausibly (because of lack of collaboration) to the Republicans - > e.g., Dan Quayle and the "Crypto Freedom For Americans" platform, promising > to rescue Silicon Valley from those evil regulatory Democrats. > > If I were an evil politician trying to set up a trick like you suggest, I > think I'd want a scheme that my opponent(s) couldn't hijack and use against > me. > > -- > Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: > gbroiles at netbox.com | > http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. > | > > From tmcghan at gill-simpson.com Thu Jan 30 05:40:17 1997 From: tmcghan at gill-simpson.com (tmcghan at gill-simpson.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 05:40:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701301339.IAA24380@mail.bcpl.lib.md.us> According to Duncan Frissell > "In an interview Tuesday, [David L.] Aaron [the Feds' Crypto Ambassador] disputed the {snip} > "When I talk to other governments," he said, "they still don't feel... ===(mis)quoted, paraphrased, and enhanced from current news reports=== The Clinton administration's newly named point man on encryption policy is citing international support for U.S. policies limiting use of encryption and called for industry cooperation. Speaking to the RSA Data Security Conference in San Francisco, David Aaron said that U.S. allies support the concept of lawful access by governments and the use of key recovery mechanisms. The White House's continued restrictions on encryption have been unpopular in the cryptography community and among major U.S. corporations and high tech companies because of the business disadvantage vis a vis foreign firms. Aaron alleges that U.S. trading partners have misgivings about the U.S. government's decision in October to allow 'moderately strong' 56-bit encryption, to be exported, under controlled circumstances, but were willing to cooperate on the policy. "As far as I can see, the international encryption market will not be a free-wheeling affair," he said, adding companies should consider that lawful access and key escrow capabilities may become "a growthe industry" In his speech, Aaron also listed cases where the U.S. government said encryption was used in terrorist plots, drug dealing, child pornography and espionage, adding the White House, "in no way seeks to expand law enforcement powers nor reduce the privacy of individuals." Independent experts strongly disagreed with Aaron's characterization of the international posture following his address here, and leading U.S. legislators said they would continue to push for further reform of the restrictions. "I just don't think it will work," Sen. Conrad Burns, a Montana Republican who has been behind the legislative effort to promote use of stronger levels of encryption, said of the White House encryption policy. "I think if bad people want to do bad things to good people, they certainly won't want to file their key (with any law enforcement authorities)," Burns said in a satellite conference. Marc Rotenberg, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, rebutted Aaron's suggestion that Washington has broad international support for its concept of lawful access by governments to the keys to encrypted files and communications. Rotenberg said at the recent Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) meetings on encryption policy, that was not the case, nor were a number of countries pushing for stronger controls, as Aaron said they had been. Germany, Australia, Japan and Canada all are advancing competing cryptography capabilities, according to Rotenberg. Thomas M. McGhan tmcghan at gill-simpson.com http://www.gill-simpson.com voice: (410) 467-3335 fax: (410) 235-6961 pagenet: (410) 716-1342 cellular: (410) 241-9113 ICBM: 39.395N 76.469W From Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com Thu Jan 30 06:46:43 1997 From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com (Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:46:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: encrypt_3.html Message-ID: <199701301448.JAA11209@linux.nycmetro.com> Reuters New Media [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Kodak To Buy Wang Software Business Next Story: Netscape Counts On User Upgrades In 1997 _________________________________________________________________ Wednesday January 29 3:26 PM EST U.S. Encryption Envoy Seeks Industry Cooperation SAN FRANCISCO - The Clinton administration's newly named point man on encryption policy is citing international support for U.S. policies limiting use of encryption and called for industry cooperation. Ambassador David Aaron, special envoy for cryptography, said on a speech to the RSA Data Security Conference in San Francisco that U.S. allies support the concept of lawful access by governments and the use of key recovery mechanisms. Key recovery would involve storing encoding keys in escrow so authorities could get access to them to unscramble data in an emergency, such as to uncover criminal activity. The White House's continued restrictions on encryption have been unpopular in the cryptography community and among major U.S. corporations and high tech companies, which argue the limitations put U.S. business at a disadvantage. Aaron said some U.S. trading partners have misgivings about the U.S. government's decision in October to relax U.S. export controls to allow export of moderately strong 56-bit encryption, but were willing to cooperate on the policy. "As far as I can see, the international encryption market will not be a free-wheeling affair," he said, adding companies should consider that lawful access and key escrow capabilities may become "a growing international requirement." In his speech, Aaron also listed cases where the U.S. government said encryption was used in terrorist plots, drug dealing, child pornography and espionage, adding the White House, "in no way seeks to expand law enforcement powers nor reduce the privacy of individuals." But some independent experts who monitor cryptography policy disagreed with Aaron's characterization of the international posture following his address here, and leading U.S. legislators said they would continue to push the White House to further liberalize the restrictions. "I just don't think it will work," Sen. Conrad Burns, a Montana Republican who has been behind the legislative effort to promote use of stronger levels of encryption, said of the White House encryption policy. "I think if bad people want to do bad things to good people, they certainly won't want to file their key (with any law enforcement authorities)," he told conference attendees over a satellite linkup. Burns appeared in the linkup with three legislative colleagues to stress that together they would push to put "get the administration out in front of the cryptography curve." Marc Rotenberg, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, rebutted Aaron's suggestion that Washington has broad international support for its concept of lawful access by governments to the keys to encrypted files and communications. Rotenberg said at the recent Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) meetings on encryption policy, that was not the case, nor were a number of countries pushing for stronger controls, as Aaron said they had been. In fact, countries such as Japan, Germany, Australia and Canada all have competing cryptography capabilities they are promoting, he added. The OECD guidelines are due to be published next month. Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved _________________________________________________________________ Earlier Related Stories * Encryption Export Bill Backed In Senate - Wed Jan 29 9:54 am _________________________________________________________________ ________________________ ___________ Help _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Kodak To Buy Wang Software Business Next Story: Netscape Counts On User Upgrades In 1997 _________________________________________________________________ [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Reuters Limited Questions or Comments From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 30 06:56:10 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 06:56:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701292343.PAA16370@toad.com> Message-ID: sameer writes: > David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. His > talk at the RSA conference was such a load of bullshit it wasn't even > funny. The above is a flame. But because Sandy works for Sameer, it was posted to the censores list, not tosses to "cypherpunks-flames". --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jan 30 07:13:15 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:13:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: KOW_tow Message-ID: <1.5.4.32.19970130150747.006ba560@pop.pipeline.com> 1-28-97: "New Crypto Engines From Trusted Information Systems Allow Easy International Use of Strong Encryption " By supporting any application that calls for the use of algorithms such as DES, Triple-DES, or 128-bit RC2 or RC4, "this product will allow Windows users to use encryption as easily as they use a mouse. Previously, if developers wanted to use encryption in their products, they had to consider writing two different versions, dealing with changing export regulations, and so on. Now, they can write one version of the program and sell it worldwide, knowing that the CSP will handle the encryption legally and safely." "Two Companies Set to Offer Key Recovery Services Using Technology from TIS " SourceKey and Data Securities International (DSI) have applied for approval to operate Key Recovery Centers to support exported encryption products. TIS also announced today that it is in negotiations with the National Computing Centre, Ltd. of the U.K. and Philips Crypto BV of the Netherlands to license the first non-U.S.-based Key Recovery Centers for third party use. "Burns Prepares To Reintroduce Encryption Bill" "This time around," Burns said, "we intend to put a bill on the President's desk and find out if he is truly on the side of the users and providers of rapidly expanding high-tech goods and services." It would prohibit a mandatory system under which producers or users of hardware and software would be required to surrender a decoding "key" to a third party. ----- KOW_tow From declan at pathfinder.com Thu Jan 30 07:26:13 1997 From: declan at pathfinder.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:26:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Politics of Export Restrictions Message-ID: <199701301526.HAA05647@toad.com> Agreed. It's the Republicans who are the most adamantly pro-crypto. They'd love to use it as a noose to hang Gore in 2000. If Gore switches positions -- which I think unlikely -- it'll just be another area where both parties agree. A minor point: since Gore has been the chief crypto-critic of this administration, if he switched he'd leave himself open to charges of waffling. Then again, some administration officials tell me they expect this debate to be resolved within a year, so go figure. -Declan On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Greg Broiles wrote: > At 09:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Rick Hornbeck wrote: > > >Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being > >imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he > >runs for President in 2000? > > I suppose it's plausible, but it's an opportunity open to both candidates, > and more plausibly (because of lack of collaboration) to the Republicans - > e.g., Dan Quayle and the "Crypto Freedom For Americans" platform, promising > to rescue Silicon Valley from those evil regulatory Democrats. > > If I were an evil politician trying to set up a trick like you suggest, I > think I'd want a scheme that my opponent(s) couldn't hijack and use against > me. > > -- > Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: > gbroiles at netbox.com | > http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. > | > > From tmcghan at gill-simpson.com Thu Jan 30 07:26:15 1997 From: tmcghan at gill-simpson.com (tmcghan at gill-simpson.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:26:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701301526.HAA05652@toad.com> According to Duncan Frissell > "In an interview Tuesday, [David L.] Aaron [the Feds' Crypto Ambassador] disputed the {snip} > "When I talk to other governments," he said, "they still don't feel... ===(mis)quoted, paraphrased, and enhanced from current news reports=== The Clinton administration's newly named point man on encryption policy is citing international support for U.S. policies limiting use of encryption and called for industry cooperation. Speaking to the RSA Data Security Conference in San Francisco, David Aaron said that U.S. allies support the concept of lawful access by governments and the use of key recovery mechanisms. The White House's continued restrictions on encryption have been unpopular in the cryptography community and among major U.S. corporations and high tech companies because of the business disadvantage vis a vis foreign firms. Aaron alleges that U.S. trading partners have misgivings about the U.S. government's decision in October to allow 'moderately strong' 56-bit encryption, to be exported, under controlled circumstances, but were willing to cooperate on the policy. "As far as I can see, the international encryption market will not be a free-wheeling affair," he said, adding companies should consider that lawful access and key escrow capabilities may become "a growthe industry" In his speech, Aaron also listed cases where the U.S. government said encryption was used in terrorist plots, drug dealing, child pornography and espionage, adding the White House, "in no way seeks to expand law enforcement powers nor reduce the privacy of individuals." Independent experts strongly disagreed with Aaron's characterization of the international posture following his address here, and leading U.S. legislators said they would continue to push for further reform of the restrictions. "I just don't think it will work," Sen. Conrad Burns, a Montana Republican who has been behind the legislative effort to promote use of stronger levels of encryption, said of the White House encryption policy. "I think if bad people want to do bad things to good people, they certainly won't want to file their key (with any law enforcement authorities)," Burns said in a satellite conference. Marc Rotenberg, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, rebutted Aaron's suggestion that Washington has broad international support for its concept of lawful access by governments to the keys to encrypted files and communications. Rotenberg said at the recent Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) meetings on encryption policy, that was not the case, nor were a number of countries pushing for stronger controls, as Aaron said they had been. Germany, Australia, Japan and Canada all are advancing competing cryptography capabilities, according to Rotenberg. Thomas M. McGhan tmcghan at gill-simpson.com http://www.gill-simpson.com voice: (410) 467-3335 fax: (410) 235-6961 pagenet: (410) 716-1342 cellular: (410) 241-9113 ICBM: 39.395N 76.469W From sratte at mindvox.com Thu Jan 30 07:26:16 1997 From: sratte at mindvox.com (Swamp Ratte) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:26:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: cDc GD Update #21-1/97 Message-ID: <199701301526.HAA05653@toad.com> _ _ ((___)) [ x x ] cDc communications \ / Global Domination Update #21 (' ') January 1st, 1997 (U) Est. 1984 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT: sratte at mindvox.com CDC IS NEW FALLEN SNOW ON A BLEAK DESERT LANDSCAPE cDc communications is tittering with joy on the birth of this shiny new year to make two announcements. We are the proud parents of ten bouncing new articles in the continuing saga of the CULT OF THE DEAD COW publication. These feisty little rugrats will put a smile on the face and a Brussels sprout in the stomach with their hearty blend of entertainment and information. We also can now make public our "Good Times" virus hoax. The Good Times meme was launched by cDc to prove the gullibility of self-proclaimed "experts" on the Internet. Any chickenhead would see through the Good Times virus message as the merest wisp of smoke that it is, while the so-called experts ran around in circles, beside themselves in self-induced panic. Therefore, CULT OF THE DEAD COW claims FULL responsibility for the waves of nausea and unrest that have spread from AOL to CompuServe to Prodigy by the actions of egotistical 'experts' who roam the Information Superhighway like squeegee men, seeking to wring a buck or two from the poor souls they confront at every intersection and stoplight on the infobahn. We have far worse to unleash upon you, should you insist upon pontificating and spreading obvious falsehoods. Heed well the motto of the Hell's Angels: "Those who know, don't tell. Those who tell, don't know." We'd also like to take this opportunity to quell a nasty rumor: cDc has NOT been bought-out over the past few months to ANYONE. cDc, as always is 100% independently owned and operated and has no outside sponsors. Viacom and Ziff-Davis, puh-leeze. Coming soon: cDc presents AUDIO on the Internet via Tarkin Darklighter's Shockwave site. New releases from Weasel-MX, Gravelheaver, Tha Gates, Superior Products, Grey Man, and Crucified Goat are on the way. Also, The cDc Media List version 3 from Omega... something fresh for the spring '97 fashion season. _ _ the tedium is the message _ _ ((___)) INFORMATION IS JUNK MAIL ((___)) [ x x ] _ [ x x ] \ / _ |_|_ _ _|_ _|_ |_ _ _| _ _. _| _ _ \ / (' ') (_|_|| |_ (_) | |_ | |(/_ (_|(/_(_|(_| (_(_)\_/\_/ (' ') (U) (U) .ooM cDc communications .ooM deal with it NEW RELEASES FOR JANUARY, 1997: deal with it ________________________________/text files\________________________________ 321:"Nineteen Seventy-Seven" by OXblood Ruffin. It was a good year... Star Wars, The Sex Pistols, the Apple II, and the Death of Elvis. And you thought they weren't connected? 322:"Pariah '67" by Matt Brown. It's like _The Wonder Years_ with real blood. Like Diet Coke with real sugar. Who would've thought Paul would grow up to drum for Marilyn Manson? Gosh. 323:"CYBERsitter" by Peacefire. Overprotective parents are being led down the primrose path to potential pathos. This is an important press release from the Peacefire organization concerning their efforts against the makers of the CYBERsitter Internet filtering software. 324:"Painted Stranger" by Weasel Boy. Creepy-as-hell goth fiction. People with monochromatic wardrobes and Victorian affectations, incest, tragic young death, The Beast. You know the drill. Hup hup! 325:"Zen of Skateboarding, Part 3: Flowing Stream" by Thoai Tran. Skate and destroy. Death to false skating. The search for beauty and truth continues. 326:"The Great Southern Fire God" by John Crow. Everything would be great if it weren't for those DAMN YANKEES (nevermind The Nuge, this is _serious bidness_). Will the assembly please rise and join with me in singing "Sweet Home Alabama." 327:"Vulnerabilities in the S/KEY One-Time Password System" by Mudge. All that and a bucket of chicken wings. 328:"Pantslessness" by Mark Buda. I don't know about you, but every time I go outside without pants, the squirrels poke at my BARE-NAKED POSTERIOR with twigs. They ain't got covered rumps neither. Freaks! 329:"Quadro-Pounder" by Drunkfux. He wants lots of meat. Huh-huh. 330:"Happyland Cell Block 90210" by G. Allen Perry. "Where am I?" "You're in a cheap run-down teenage jail, that's where." "Oh my God!" -The Runaways Reading is FUNdamental! _______________________________/ - x X x - \________________________________ Fools better recognize: CULT OF THE DEAD COW is a publication and trademark of cDc communications. Established in 1984, cDc is the largest and oldest organization of the telecommunications underground worldwide, and inventor of the "e-zine." Every issue is produced on an Apple II for genuine old-school flavor. You thirst for our body of work, you know you do. Find it at these fine locations, among others: World Wide Web: //www.l0pht.com/cdc.html FTP/Gopher: cascade.net in pub/cDc Usenet: alt.fan.cult-dead-cow BBS: 806/794-4362 Entry:KILL For further information, contact: Email: sratte at mindvox.com Postal: POB 53011, Lubbock, TX, 79453, USA Sincerely, Grandmaster Ratte' cDc/Editor, Fearless Leader, and Pontiff "We're into telecom for the groupies and money." #### By THE NIGHTSTALKER and GRatte'. Copyright (c) 1997 cDc communications. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 30 07:27:53 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:27:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701301527.HAA05666@toad.com> At 10:45 AM 1/29/97 -0500, Dan Geer wrote: >Steve is absolutely right on the money, particularly about the likely >happiness on the government side. I pretty much agree. On the other hand, Ian did a nice job on the radio (NPR, probably was All Things Considered) of pushing the "look, if a college student can break 40 bits in a couple of hours, it's really stupid for the government to limit us like this"; a couple of other people also contributed spin, and it came out pretty strongly against export restrictions. I think we do need to get some sort of push going for 3DES as a replacement for DES - it's strong enough, even though DES is showing its age, and it's an obvious transition from the current technology. It's slower and clunkier than IDEA or RC4/128, but still not bad. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From pavelk at dator3.anet.cz Thu Jan 30 07:27:55 1997 From: pavelk at dator3.anet.cz (Pavel Korensky) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:27:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701301527.HAA05667@toad.com> Mark Rogaski wrote: > If I had experience with Netscape plugins and spare time, I'd > try it myself. But here's my proposed solution. > > A plugin in Netscape intercepts all requests, encrypt the URL > with a pubkey algorithm, encode the string base64, send it as GET input to > a proxy server. > > The proxy server decodes and decrypts the URL, gets the requested page, > and returns it. This beats out URL-based filtering. > > Still need to figure out the specifics of key-exchange. If we use > 40-bit encryption, it's exportable, and it still works in our threat > model (ie. we don't care if the watchers figure out the URL a few hours > later). > > To beat out dropping packets with unacceptable pattern in them, we > could use an SSL-based server as the proxy. > > The plugin could even have a nice little on/off switch and a list > list of available proxies. Nice, but I can see one problem here. If I (as a censor) will want to block your communication to prohibited sites, I can block the access to the proxy computers. You will just move the blocking strategy one level up with your plug-in. The censor will block the web servers AND proxy servers. Because the list of proxy servers must be available somehow to users, it is very simple to write some kind of script running on the gateway which is blocking the acccess. The script will download the list of proxy servers, update the gateway tables and the gateway will be blocking acccess to all sites on the proxy list. Bye PavelK -- **************************************************************************** * Pavel Korensky (pavelk at dator3.anet.cz) * * DATOR3 Ltd., Modranska 1895/17, 143 00 Prague 4, Czech Republic * * PGP key fingerprint: 00 65 5A B3 70 20 F1 54 D3 B3 E4 3E F8 A3 5E 7C * **************************************************************************** From Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com Thu Jan 30 07:27:56 1997 From: Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com (Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:27:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: encrypt_3.html Message-ID: <199701301527.HAA05668@toad.com> Reuters New Media [ Yahoo | Write Us | Search | Info ] [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Kodak To Buy Wang Software Business Next Story: Netscape Counts On User Upgrades In 1997 _________________________________________________________________ Wednesday January 29 3:26 PM EST U.S. Encryption Envoy Seeks Industry Cooperation SAN FRANCISCO - The Clinton administration's newly named point man on encryption policy is citing international support for U.S. policies limiting use of encryption and called for industry cooperation. Ambassador David Aaron, special envoy for cryptography, said on a speech to the RSA Data Security Conference in San Francisco that U.S. allies support the concept of lawful access by governments and the use of key recovery mechanisms. Key recovery would involve storing encoding keys in escrow so authorities could get access to them to unscramble data in an emergency, such as to uncover criminal activity. The White House's continued restrictions on encryption have been unpopular in the cryptography community and among major U.S. corporations and high tech companies, which argue the limitations put U.S. business at a disadvantage. Aaron said some U.S. trading partners have misgivings about the U.S. government's decision in October to relax U.S. export controls to allow export of moderately strong 56-bit encryption, but were willing to cooperate on the policy. "As far as I can see, the international encryption market will not be a free-wheeling affair," he said, adding companies should consider that lawful access and key escrow capabilities may become "a growing international requirement." In his speech, Aaron also listed cases where the U.S. government said encryption was used in terrorist plots, drug dealing, child pornography and espionage, adding the White House, "in no way seeks to expand law enforcement powers nor reduce the privacy of individuals." But some independent experts who monitor cryptography policy disagreed with Aaron's characterization of the international posture following his address here, and leading U.S. legislators said they would continue to push the White House to further liberalize the restrictions. "I just don't think it will work," Sen. Conrad Burns, a Montana Republican who has been behind the legislative effort to promote use of stronger levels of encryption, said of the White House encryption policy. "I think if bad people want to do bad things to good people, they certainly won't want to file their key (with any law enforcement authorities)," he told conference attendees over a satellite linkup. Burns appeared in the linkup with three legislative colleagues to stress that together they would push to put "get the administration out in front of the cryptography curve." Marc Rotenberg, director of the Washington, D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center, rebutted Aaron's suggestion that Washington has broad international support for its concept of lawful access by governments to the keys to encrypted files and communications. Rotenberg said at the recent Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) meetings on encryption policy, that was not the case, nor were a number of countries pushing for stronger controls, as Aaron said they had been. In fact, countries such as Japan, Germany, Australia and Canada all have competing cryptography capabilities they are promoting, he added. The OECD guidelines are due to be published next month. Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved _________________________________________________________________ Earlier Related Stories * Encryption Export Bill Backed In Senate - Wed Jan 29 9:54 am _________________________________________________________________ ________________________ ___________ Help _________________________________________________________________ Previous Story: Kodak To Buy Wang Software Business Next Story: Netscape Counts On User Upgrades In 1997 _________________________________________________________________ [ Index | News | World | Biz | Tech | Politic | Sport | Scoreboard | Entertain | Health ] _________________________________________________________________ Reuters Limited Questions or Comments From jya at pipeline.com Thu Jan 30 07:40:53 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:40:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: KOW_tow Message-ID: <199701301540.HAA05946@toad.com> 1-28-97: "New Crypto Engines From Trusted Information Systems Allow Easy International Use of Strong Encryption " By supporting any application that calls for the use of algorithms such as DES, Triple-DES, or 128-bit RC2 or RC4, "this product will allow Windows users to use encryption as easily as they use a mouse. Previously, if developers wanted to use encryption in their products, they had to consider writing two different versions, dealing with changing export regulations, and so on. Now, they can write one version of the program and sell it worldwide, knowing that the CSP will handle the encryption legally and safely." "Two Companies Set to Offer Key Recovery Services Using Technology from TIS " SourceKey and Data Securities International (DSI) have applied for approval to operate Key Recovery Centers to support exported encryption products. TIS also announced today that it is in negotiations with the National Computing Centre, Ltd. of the U.K. and Philips Crypto BV of the Netherlands to license the first non-U.S.-based Key Recovery Centers for third party use. "Burns Prepares To Reintroduce Encryption Bill" "This time around," Burns said, "we intend to put a bill on the President's desk and find out if he is truly on the side of the users and providers of rapidly expanding high-tech goods and services." It would prohibit a mandatory system under which producers or users of hardware and software would be required to surrender a decoding "key" to a third party. ----- KOW_tow From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Thu Jan 30 07:56:08 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:56:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: OTP security Message-ID: <854638719.107050.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > 1.You've got 16 hardware devices that each generate random noise. > 2.One of the devices fails (or is sabotaged) and emits a predictable stream > (10101...) > 3.The other 15 devices are just fine, and the stream generated by one > device does not effect the stream of another. > 4.You do not know of the (failure/sabotage) until *after* you've generated > your encyrted documents and they are out of your hands. > > So the revamped question is: > How secure are those documents now? Bottom line: You have lost some possible decryptions of the cyphertext. Every 16th bit is now determined therefore each 2nd byte has only 128 possible states. This, rather suprisingly, does not seem to affect the security (though I would say this is a flawed conclusion as we have a pile of sand problem here, how many grains make a pile, how many rngs can be flawed before the security is affected?) I really haven`t had the time to look at it properly, I will do so in the near future as it seems to be an interesting problem... Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From tmcghan at gill-simpson.com Thu Jan 30 07:59:19 1997 From: tmcghan at gill-simpson.com (tmcghan at gill-simpson.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:59:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Sovreign Right of Lawful Access Message-ID: <199701301558.KAA13324@mail.bcpl.lib.md.us> according to the notorious jim bell > {snip} They're getting desperate. "Sovereign Right of Lawful Access" > doesn't state HOW DIFFICULT that "access" is to be. {snip} Just might get a bit more 'difficult', if these demagogues get their grandstand play off.... >Encryption Export Bill Backed In Senate >WASHINGTON - A bipartisan group of U.S. senators has endorsed a bill >to promote U.S. exports of encryption technology by removing government >barriers on foreign sales. >"Foreign companies are fully utilizing this technology, while >Americans companies have their hands tied with draconian U.S. laws on >encryption," Sen. John Ashcroft, R-Missouri, said. >He joined Sens Conrad Burns, R-Montana and Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont >in endorsing the Promotion of Commerce Online in the Digital Era >.................^^........^..^........^.............^.......^.. >(PRO-CODE) bill. Don't you just love their cute little acronym? Must have laid awake nights thinking that one up! Thomas M. McGhan tmcghan at gill-simpson.com http://www.gill-simpson.com voice: (410) 467-3335 fax: (410) 235-6961 pagenet: (410) 716-1342 cellular: (410) 241-9113 ICBM: 39.395N 76.469W From rnh2 at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 30 07:59:35 1997 From: rnh2 at ix.netcom.com (Rick Hornbeck) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 07:59:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: The Politics of Export Restrictions - Clarified Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970130075821.00689c60@popd.ix.netcom.com> I agree the strategy would have to be hijack-proof. Something like Gore experiencing a convenient "change of heart" towards the end of this current term and convincing Clinton and the administration to soften crypto export restrictions which would make Gore look like a hero to the high-tech community just in time for the election. Naturally this would have to be carefully scripted but the objective would be to keep the democrats in power. Just a theory. >Return-Path: >Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:43:43 -0800 >From: Greg Broiles >To: Rick Hornbeck >Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com >Subject: Re: The Politics of Export Restrictions >Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com > >At 09:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Rick Hornbeck wrote: > >>Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being >>imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he >>runs for President in 2000? > >I suppose it's plausible, but it's an opportunity open to both candidates, >and more plausibly (because of lack of collaboration) to the Republicans - >e.g., Dan Quayle and the "Crypto Freedom For Americans" platform, promising >to rescue Silicon Valley from those evil regulatory Democrats. > >If I were an evil politician trying to set up a trick like you suggest, I >think I'd want a scheme that my opponent(s) couldn't hijack and use against >me. > >-- >Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: >gbroiles at netbox.com | >http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. > | > > > From svolaf at inet.uni-c.dk Thu Jan 30 08:00:20 1997 From: svolaf at inet.uni-c.dk (Svend Olaf Mikkelsen) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:00:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: The BrydDes descracker. Beta-version available. Message-ID: <32f5c492.24108705@mail.uni-c.dk> BrydDes is a DOS program, which issues a known plaintext attack for DES encryption. The method is brute force. ECB mode and CBC mode with known IV are supported. On a Pentium 120, this version of the program can test 369,000 keys in a second. Please note that this is a beta-release. A new version will be shipped February 11th, or earlier if errors are discovered. So far source is not included. Automatic restart from the last key tested is not supported yet, but a shell could be written. The code is tested on a Pentium, but should run on a 486. The program is available at http://inet.uni-c.dk/~svolaf/des.htm Svend Olaf PS. "Bryd" is crack or break in Danish. From paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Thu Jan 30 08:01:08 1997 From: paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk (paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:01:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <854638718.107051.0@fatmans.demon.co.uk> > > The list has been disentigrating for some time since the disgusting > > incident when Dimitri was forcibly unsubscribed from the list. > > I'm curious about the gratuitous use of the word "forcibly" by > Paul. Does this mean Gilmore took a fire axe to the computer or > something? Dimitri was unsubscribed. It was done more or less > against his will. ("More or less" because he in effect said to > John, "bet you can't stop me.") What does "forcibly" add to this > discussion besides melodrama? No force was required. John had > the right and ability to pull the plug on Dimitri. "No animals > were harmed in the making of this film." "Force," my ass. If you can honestly say you think that Dimitri agreed to his being unsubscribed and not being allowed to re-subscribe then I concede the point, however, you cannot argue this. > > have also been a number of postings from members of the list claiming > > to understand anarchism who support censorship to "protect new > > members of the list". > > There are various definitions of "censorship" and various flavors > of anarchism. I'm a market anarchist, Paul is not. Paul claims > to believe that any form of moderation is censorship. I think > that enforcing standards of decorum on a private, voluntary list > are not censorship. Reasonable minds may differ. I acknowledge > that Paul's interpretations are not without some justification. > (I just think they are incorrect in the instant case.) Paul, on > the other hand, seems to be a True Believer. He brooks no view > other than his own. (Curiously hypocritical under the > circumstrances.) My point is not that moderating a private forum is censorship, this is not supposed to be a private forum (if at any point John chooses to make it so that is his right as the list is his property, however, he professes, at least in a collective sense along with the other list founders, that it is a free and anarchic list where people would not be prevented from posting whatever they want, censorship in this context (call it moderation of you like) seems to me out of place)). > > So, there would be no intellectual dishonesty in a country claiming > > to be a free and open society "trying out" fascism for a month or > > two? - After all it`s a private country just as this is a private > > list.... > > Paul's sophistry is showing. Nation-states are entities that > exercise a monopoly on the use of force (real force, Paul) > within (and often without) their boundries. Mail lists are far > more like private homes, businesses or clubs. When you are a > guest there, you are subject to their rules of behavior. The list is indeed a private forum and I resent the term sophistry. My interpretation of the lists original purpose and idealogy is clearly different from your own so we are arguing the wrong point. My interpretation is that the list was supposed to act as a community as much as a forum and is therefore erring to the side of a nation state as opposed to private property, even though, when we come down to it it is someones property.. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul at fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul at crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul at cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 30 08:38:12 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:38:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701300510.VAA23055@toad.com> Message-ID: ichudov at algebra.com writes: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) writes: > > > > > > Why, death of Jim Bell from his own murder machine is a very exciting, I > > > would say a very Kafkian thing to happen. I am looking forward to it. I > > > even think that Jim Bell would not oppose such an outcome that much, > > > since his assination bot would be such an important invention for the > > > humanity. Maybe it will reverse the course of world history! > > > > Igor, you keep misspelling "assassination" as in "talk.politics.assassinati > > an unmoderated Usenet newsgroup carried by all honorable Usenet providers. > > No, I knew what was the correct spelling, but I like the shorter one > more. It sounds funny to me. > > - Igor. > It looks like Igor has made it to Sandy's list of "flamers" whose every submission is procmailed to "cypherpunks-flames". The above quote is crypto-relevant (as is assassination politics) and contains no flames. it was tossed into "cypherpunks-flames" by a robot. The time stamps clearly show that Sandy didn't even look at it. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Thu Jan 30 08:40:43 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:40:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: Message-ID: On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > sameer writes: > > > David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. His > > talk at the RSA conference was such a load of bullshit it wasn't even > > funny. > > The above is a flame. But because Sandy works for Sameer, it was posted > to the censores list, not tosses to "cypherpunks-flames". Hmm, I wonder what Sandy does for Sameer... Regards, From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 30 08:46:05 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 08:46:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: A comment on the censorship policy In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <7Zoc2D4w165w@bwalk.dm.com> OKSAS writes: > On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote: > > I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's > > censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts > > declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the > > "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and > > someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing. > > WEll....that's not so bad ;) I find Oksas's posts to be very interesting. > > (Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then > > appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, > Is it so annoying...? why did you read it to that point??? :) > Why could you not be so anonymous and tell me? My posts are > a bit brief; Blancs' are far better, next time read hers. > > > engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he > > longs to see Oksas naked.) > > Huh?? You are being a 'fluff' here ;) "Anonymous" is lying - I never posted any such thing. of course the cocksuckr moderator passed on the "anon's" lies to the censored mailing list, and I bet he's goingto auto-bounce my refutation to "flames" - just as everyone had predicted. > > > This whole process is showing the worst of Sandfort's censorship policy. > > > > (If this is dumped into the "Not suitable for Cypherpunks to read" list, I > > urge those of you who see it to pass it on to the main list.) If you don't like the sandfart's moderation policy, you can just read the unedited list and institute your own moderation policy using 'procmail'. That's pretty much what the sandfart does anyway. Fluff from people he likes makes it to the censored list (like a request to jya's bot cc'd to the whole censored list) whie anything I or Toto or Oksas say is auto-junked. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 30 09:03:04 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:03:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701301658.KAA03849@manifold.algebra.com> Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > It looks like Igor has made it to Sandy's list of "flamers" whose every > submission is procmailed to "cypherpunks-flames". The above quote is > crypto-relevant (as is assassination politics) and contains no flames. > it was tossed into "cypherpunks-flames" by a robot. The time stamps > clearly show that Sandy didn't even look at it. I am not sure if the above is true. Please post the time stamps (several of them) that show that my posts are auto-junked. Thank you. - Igor. From azur at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 09:17:15 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:17:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: >Sean Roach wrote: >> At 08:15 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: >> >I think a hole in your thinking is to assume that the assasins have no >> >motive other than financial gain. I would submit that there are those that >> >have the skills, training and a political agenda coherent with the >> >wagerers, lacking only the financial incentive to make the risks >> >acceptable. These wetworkers won't consider accepting the bribe of the >> >rich/powerful > >> This may be true, but the example was to show how easy a defensive line >> could be thrown up around the powerful. For example, conventional body >> guards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledge >> that they will be buried with the tyrant. These body guards could be ten >> children out of each local village. Merely a human shield. > >[snippo] > >In Prizzi's Honor, Nicholson sez "If you try to hide in a submarine on >the bottom of the ocean, we will find you". But it's not even that >difficult. Lob a missile into the place and blow it up. Earth >penetrators are getting better too, for the Sadaam types. And >there's a zillion more. Does this "rich person" really want to >spend his/her life living in a sealed tomb? Yep. Chemical Biological Weapons (CBW), the choice of many future terrorists and assassins, can now be produced by anyone with a solid background in organic chemistry or microbiology and a relatively modest amount of funding (< USD 10,000). Delivery can be by any number of means, including: static (e.g., planted at a location in wait for the target and remotely triggered, for example by a pager. Cost less than USD 500) or dynamic (e.g., a small remotely piloted or autonomous aircraft, for example, a modified giant-scale RC plane. Cost less than USD 3000 if remotely controlled, USD 5000-10,000 if autonomous using DGPS guidance). EE experience is assumed. If the assassin is unconcerned with collateral damage his success depends only on knowing where his target will be and when. Since CBW agents can have a considerable kill zone there is no need for 'crosshair' accuracy. --Steve From biz25 at prodigy.net Thu Jan 30 09:18:53 1997 From: biz25 at prodigy.net (biz25 at prodigy.net) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:18:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Just ask you a question Message-ID: <199701301701.MAA316230@mail1y-int.prodigy.net> Hi, I just want to ask you a question. This is not "unsolicated" email. Do you want me to post you the URL & information if you are MLM & Business Opportinuties Seeker? Please put "SUBSCRIBE" in the subject line. I will put your name on my list. You may give me your new URL. I will send your URL to the people who are on the "Subscribe" email list. If you don't want me to post you the URL & information, please type "UNSUBSCRIBE" in the subject line. I will remove your name on my list. Thanks, Sonia From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 30 09:26:53 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:26:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Authenticated mail command processor Message-ID: <199701301721.LAA04053@manifold.algebra.com> Hi, I am wondering if anyone has written a package for remote command processing that has authentication and access control built in. I am looking for the following: 1) PGP Authentication of each incoming message 2) Access control where ability of users to execute commands is finely limited 3) Protection against replay and MITM attacks, encryption 4) Sending back of the results of execution 5) Some form of logging I need it for my cryptorobomoderator bot, to allow moderators to go to vacations and perform other admin tasks w/o logging in. Thank you. - Igor. From azur at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 09:28:23 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:28:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701301728.JAA09025@toad.com> >Sean Roach wrote: >> At 08:15 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Steve Schear wrote: >> >I think a hole in your thinking is to assume that the assasins have no >> >motive other than financial gain. I would submit that there are those that >> >have the skills, training and a political agenda coherent with the >> >wagerers, lacking only the financial incentive to make the risks >> >acceptable. These wetworkers won't consider accepting the bribe of the >> >rich/powerful > >> This may be true, but the example was to show how easy a defensive line >> could be thrown up around the powerful. For example, conventional body >> guards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledge >> that they will be buried with the tyrant. These body guards could be ten >> children out of each local village. Merely a human shield. > >[snippo] > >In Prizzi's Honor, Nicholson sez "If you try to hide in a submarine on >the bottom of the ocean, we will find you". But it's not even that >difficult. Lob a missile into the place and blow it up. Earth >penetrators are getting better too, for the Sadaam types. And >there's a zillion more. Does this "rich person" really want to >spend his/her life living in a sealed tomb? Yep. Chemical Biological Weapons (CBW), the choice of many future terrorists and assassins, can now be produced by anyone with a solid background in organic chemistry or microbiology and a relatively modest amount of funding (< USD 10,000). Delivery can be by any number of means, including: static (e.g., planted at a location in wait for the target and remotely triggered, for example by a pager. Cost less than USD 500) or dynamic (e.g., a small remotely piloted or autonomous aircraft, for example, a modified giant-scale RC plane. Cost less than USD 3000 if remotely controlled, USD 5000-10,000 if autonomous using DGPS guidance). EE experience is assumed. If the assassin is unconcerned with collateral damage his success depends only on knowing where his target will be and when. Since CBW agents can have a considerable kill zone there is no need for 'crosshair' accuracy. --Steve From ericm at lne.com Thu Jan 30 09:28:49 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:28:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Altavista In-Reply-To: <199701300610.WAA24295@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701301727.JAA30040@slack.lne.com> Leonid S Knyshov writes: [about targeted webvertising using stats gathered by tracking browsers] > I think it is a good idea, no wonder doubleclick.net is one of the > leaders in advertising. You are shown only the ads that will potentially > interest you, search for shopping and you are gonna get one of those ISN > ads etc. > > I think it is a good idea FWIW. > > I wouldn't think that a company such as doubleclick.net will do you any > harm. Probably not. But the practice still bothers me. _I_ want to control what information about me others can have. I do not want the precedent set that on the Net, what you do is trackable by every organization who might care. Sooner or later someone _would_ use that information to hurt me. That's why I wrote cookie jar, a program that lets the user have better control over which 'cookies' if any they release to web servers, and what other information their browser gives out. See http://www.lne.com/ericm/cookie_jar/ for details and code. > >Interestingly, I've just noticed over the last couple of days that the > >in-line > >ads are directly relevant to the search words I enter. I did a search > >yesterday > >on "Quicken" and "security" and all the in-line ads I was shown > >referred to > >security or penetration detection products. This doesn't bother me as much (besides the fucking ads, which I hate... maybe I'll make cookie jar smart enough to nuke them). The reason is that the ads are selected based on what you typed in to the search engine right then- there's no tracking involved like with Doubleclick. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu Thu Jan 30 09:45:27 1997 From: unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu (Internaut) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 09:45:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular phone triangulation Message-ID: <01BC0EA2.D52FC620@s13-pm07.tnstate.campus.mci.net> Snow wrote: I'd rather become an "arms dealer". You may already be one if the government keeps this ITAR shit up. --Internaut From sameer at c2.net Thu Jan 30 10:08:57 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:08:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701301831.KAA12660@gabber.c2.net> > > Remember, Aaron is employee of the government. He talks in doublespeak, Aaron is employee of the government. Therefore he must lie. -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Thu Jan 30 10:20:23 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:20:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? In-Reply-To: <199701300441.UAA22482@toad.com> Message-ID: <0mwCLF200YUh0Imr80@andrew.cmu.edu> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" writes: > The above may have been dictated via Dragon Dictate 2.51 voice > recognition. Please be alert for unintentional word substitutions. Stego? Maybe 3 bits per substituted word? Good bye, uhnsufride, hello, "speech recognition." Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMvDlzMkz/YzIV3P5AQExTAL/d5/Bd7hrwi6zWAsHTm+W8j072sQVtVjx kkFbxf5oBYObYScT8h57PZlZcobumV3I8sjAguPVBeBC9uMIiKDd8H0xh5w0Ncr5 EcIsRwmpn/6rXutrUO1IUVTnepCJq6gn =iACw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jan 30 10:35:05 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:35:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter In-Reply-To: <199701301527.HAA05667@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701301237.MAA26312@mailhub.amaranth.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701301527.HAA05667 at toad.com>, on 01/30/97 at 11:53 AM, Pavel Korensky said: >Nice, but I can see one problem here. >If I (as a censor) will want to block your communication to prohibited sites, I can block >the access to the proxy computers. You will just move the blocking strategy one level up >with your plug-in. The censor will block the web servers AND proxy servers. Because the >list of proxy servers must be available somehow to users, it is very simple to write some >kind of script running on the gateway which is blocking the acccess. The script will >download the list of proxy servers, update the gateway tables and the gateway will be >blocking acccess to all sites on the proxy list. In addition to this I (as a censor) would make it Illegal to access, read, possess the information on these "blocked" sites. Add some keyword monitoring to the gateway along with logging. This will allow me to selectively go after those who try to circumvent my censoring attempts. I would also want to make the ISP's liable for their users accessing this info. That way I can intimidate them into doing all the work for me. (You can see this approach in several areas of US law enforcemant. Arrest bartenders for serving minors, arrest store clerks for selling cigaretts to minors, shut down of BBS for users posting "dirty pictures", going after ISP's for pirated software and other copyright infringments by their users.) Whenever I did decide to prosecute someone I would make it a big public show for everyone to see with very stiff penalties. After several of these trails the "sheep factor" will keep 99% of the population in line (US Crypto policy is a prime example). The point I am trying to make is that for the censor his set-up does not need to be that sophisticated as fear and intimidation will keep 99% of the rank-and-file in line. As for the other 1%, well they already know who they are and new laws will only help take care of that "problem". - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Your brain. Windows: Your brain on drugs. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Registered E-Secure v1.1 0000000 iQCVAwUBMvDsPI9Co1n+aLhhAQFWQgQAsdoDpHejDa46iU2JKtCUvvpI2ee4Ok5z kLkXDWZUc2AkDJpmLYIVkyPUOzz18vNkUiXYlRVnrKzgAgmL/cAydcuyrqfN9czH 1OuujOlJ2t/OwXsSePRptcfDL6XeCQXww5stlS7UXKosG9w0ZWHYOxHvvV9FjDBi UqjkQwFtSVI= =t8Dr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From oksas at asimov.montclair.edu Thu Jan 30 10:35:55 1997 From: oksas at asimov.montclair.edu (OKSAS) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:35:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: A comment on the censorship policy In-Reply-To: <7Zoc2D4w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > OKSAS writes: > > On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote: > > > I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's > > > censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving posts > > > declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the > > > "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, and > > > someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing. > > > > WEll....that's not so bad ;) > > I find Oksas's posts to be very interesting. Thank you. > > > (Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and then > > > appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, > > Is it so annoying...? why did you read it to that point??? :) > > Why could you not be so anonymous and tell me? My posts are > > a bit brief; Blancs' are far better, next time read hers. > > > > > engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how he > > > longs to see Oksas naked.) > > > > Huh?? You are being a 'fluff' here ;) > > "Anonymous" is lying - I never posted any such thing. of course the > cocksuckr moderator passed on the "anon's" lies to the censored mailing > list, and I bet he's goingto auto-bounce my refutation to "flames" > - just as everyone had predicted. Anonymous is a jerk. > > Best Regards, OKSAS From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 10:38:07 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:38:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701301837.KAA10130@mail.pacifier.com> At 01:16 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Sean Roach wrote: >At 10:47 PM 1/27/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >>In the current political system, in the US for instance, 51% of the >>population is able to screw the remaining 49%, just as long as they can >>maintain the majority. Or, perhaps even more accurately and ominously, a >>tiny fraction of the population (the current leadership class) is able to >>screw the 49%, as long as they have the un-thinking backing of the remaining >>and relatively uninvolved 51%. >> >>AP disables this system. AP turns government into the moral equivalent of a >>pick-up football game: Nobody is being forced to play, and everybody and >>anybody can simply "get up and leave" whenever he wants to. The moment the >>"rules of the game" to make an individual's continued participation >>unsatisfying, he can leave. >> >... >In our society, which, if I remember correctly, 10% of the population >control 90% of the wealth, AP would only lead to 10% of the population being >able to screw the remaining 90%. At least as it is, it takes a simple majority. No, that doesn't work. AP does involve money, that's true, but what "the poor" lack in individual assets they make up for in numbers. And AP implements a sort of "mutual disarmament," by not only preventing that 10% from screwing the 90%, but also prevents the 90% from screwing the 10%. >As for the murder of the rich, here is a scenerio. > >A collection of poor pool their capitol to have a tyrant killed. >The tyrant assembles a counter-wager saying that anyone able to prove thier >ability to kill him without harming him, and who can show they got through >will get 110% of the poor's bid. Question: Where does he get the money for the reward? If he gets it through taxation, he'll anger the people who were taxed and they'll pay to see him die. If he got in through taxation in the past, enough people will STILL be angry enough with him to see him dead. His employees (the ones who probably have the most opportunity to kill him) would be made just about as wealthy by killing him as taking him up on his odd offer. Worse, for him, is that he'd lose money paying off those people if they showed they could have "succeeded." Even if they were not motivated to actually kill him, they'd be motived to SHOW they could kill him, and notice that they'll become just about as rich for KILLING him as merely showing they can! Notice that your idea also assumes that an employee has to become willing to, in effect, plot against his employer in such a way that he can be assured that his actions won't be incorrectly interpretated as a genuine assassination attempt. How can you (or anyone else?) tell the difference until the plan either succeeds or fails?) Moreover, how can the employee trust that his boss will actually honor his promise? I think you're also (falsely) assuming that a deliberately-unsuccessful assassination demonstration immunizes the tyrant from a repeat performance. True, it's often useful to know what kinds of attacks are possible, but that doesn't mean that the system can be fixed to prevent future repetitions... The tyrant, then, either loses his life or a lot of money, and he still can't trust anybody. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 10:38:18 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:38:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701301837.KAA10125@mail.pacifier.com> At 09:05 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: >I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the >virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get >out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those >holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to >provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, >given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter >aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, >well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better >off when we do. Your comparison with the fictional Gort, in the movie "The day the earth stood still" is of course apt. It was only after I'd written most of the essay that I realized that an AP-type system would function much as Gort did. Occasionally we (CP) see a spoof where somebody claims to have developed a software program to "replace the judicial system" or something like that. Well, the problem with such a claim (aside from the obvious and enormous AI-type difficulties) is that the current system contains numerous biases. Writing a program to replace the legal system would presumably require that these biases be measured (and admitted-to!) and implemented into a well-defined system. What we'd discover is that the current system only barely resembles the guarantees in the US Constitution. At that point, there would be an argument between those who will insist that the Constitution be followed, and those who believe that the current de-facto system, however biased, be maintained as-is. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 10:39:47 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:39:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701301837.KAA10112@mail.pacifier.com> At 03:22 AM 1/29/97 -0800, Greg Broiles wrote: >At 10:42 PM 1/28/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > >>It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects >>libelous or other defamatory speech. > >Defamation is not protected by the First Amendment; but the First Amendment >limits the application of defamation law in many circumstances. For >example, the First Amendment requires plaintiffs to prove "actual malice" >if they are a public official, public figure, or a private person seeking >punitive damages. What you ought to explain to us laymen is that the terminology "actual malice" dates from the case New York Times vs. Sullivan, and it used a definition of "malice" that was not in any dictionary at the time. My recollection: Sullivan was a local hero in a particular area in the south in the last 50's (?), gave a speech to a crowd of (?) people who were probably in sympathy with segregation. They proceeded to march. Later, the New York Times claimed (as I vaguely recall it, although it's been years since I read a description) that he had instigated a riot. Sullivan sued, claiming his reputation had been damaged. Arguably, it had, although it's probably equally arguable that Sullivan had done something that would have been looked upon somewhat unsympathetically by non-Southerners. The local (southern, of course) jury found NYT guilty of libel, and awarded Sullivan some huge judgment. (Had the jury been made up of northern people, presumably Sullivan would have lost.) The problem here is that two long-honored principles collided: One, the "free speech" issue, generally tries to guarantee organizations like NY Times the right to print the news and the leeway to do so. The second principle that people should be able to sue for libel in a local court, and be awarded whatever amount of money the jury declares. The problem with this was obvious, after the verdict: It, in effect, allowed essentially any burg in the country, no matter how backwards, potentially to bankrupt any targeted organ of the national news media. Something had to give. Unfortunately, the SC screwed up, as usual. The proper thing for them to do would have been to abandon libel law entirely, recognizing that it did more harm than good. But they blew it: They invented the "actual malice" standard out of whole cloth, raising the standard for libel suits by "public figures," which is really a rather arbitrary standard. Don't go to any ordinary English dictionary for this "malice" definition; it didn't exist before the Sullivan decision, not even in lawbooks. It was really just a rabbit pulled from a hat to try to avoid the collision I mentioned above. Side note: I think that the SC should be unable to re-define ordinary English words. But they try anyway. Basically, it became harder to sue well-known persons. However, what really happened is that they SC had merely put off the problem for another day, because the DEFINITION of a "public figure" was at least as malleable as Jell-O. And oddly, it was eventually revealed that you could be a "public figure" with respect to one subject, but NOT a "public figure" on another. Etc. Ironically, now that Richard Jewell (incorrectly identified as Atlanta bombing suspect) has sued some newspapers (and his former employer) for libel, it seems likely that at least some of those defendants will try to argue that merely being named by the government as a criminal suspect makes him "a public figure." BTW, I think that pressing the Richard Jewell incident would be an excellent way to derail any sort of claim that the government can obey the law. Apparently, they got a number of search warrants based on, essentially, nothing, and to rub this in the government's nose would show that the so-called "probable-cause" standard for warrants is not followed in practice. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From shamrock at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 10:55:20 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 10:55:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970130101929.006c7ea4@192.100.81.137> At 01:41 AM 1/30/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >I think we do need to get some sort of push going for 3DES as a >replacement for DES - it's strong enough, even though DES is showing >its age, and it's an obvious transition from the current technology. >It's slower and clunkier than IDEA or RC4/128, but still not bad. The migration to 3DES is underway, at least in the banking sector. ANSI X.9, the group that deals with many of the protocols used in the banking industry, has made tremendous progress. 3DES, elliptic curve, and a host of other improvements all are out of committee and should be available as official (for bankers :-) specs soon, if they aren't already. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred "I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence." Mahatma Gandhi From unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu Thu Jan 30 11:12:14 1997 From: unde0275 at frank.mtsu.edu (Internaut) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:12:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cellular phone triangulation Message-ID: <199701301912.LAA12034@toad.com> Snow wrote: I'd rather become an "arms dealer". You may already be one if the government keeps this ITAR shit up. --Internaut From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 30 11:12:33 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:12:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Authenticated mail command processor Message-ID: <199701301912.LAA12058@toad.com> Hi, I am wondering if anyone has written a package for remote command processing that has authentication and access control built in. I am looking for the following: 1) PGP Authentication of each incoming message 2) Access control where ability of users to execute commands is finely limited 3) Protection against replay and MITM attacks, encryption 4) Sending back of the results of execution 5) Some form of logging I need it for my cryptorobomoderator bot, to allow moderators to go to vacations and perform other admin tasks w/o logging in. Thank you. - Igor. From sameer at c2.net Thu Jan 30 11:12:40 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:12:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701301912.LAA12067@toad.com> > > Remember, Aaron is employee of the government. He talks in doublespeak, Aaron is employee of the government. Therefore he must lie. -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu Thu Jan 30 11:12:50 1997 From: jer+ at andrew.cmu.edu (Jeremiah A Blatz) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:12:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701301912.LAA12100@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" writes: > The above may have been dictated via Dragon Dictate 2.51 voice > recognition. Please be alert for unintentional word substitutions. Stego? Maybe 3 bits per substituted word? Good bye, uhnsufride, hello, "speech recognition." Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMvDlzMkz/YzIV3P5AQExTAL/d5/Bd7hrwi6zWAsHTm+W8j072sQVtVjx kkFbxf5oBYObYScT8h57PZlZcobumV3I8sjAguPVBeBC9uMIiKDd8H0xh5w0Ncr5 EcIsRwmpn/6rXutrUO1IUVTnepCJq6gn =iACw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From shamrock at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 11:12:54 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:12:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701301912.LAA12108@toad.com> At 01:41 AM 1/30/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >I think we do need to get some sort of push going for 3DES as a >replacement for DES - it's strong enough, even though DES is showing >its age, and it's an obvious transition from the current technology. >It's slower and clunkier than IDEA or RC4/128, but still not bad. The migration to 3DES is underway, at least in the banking sector. ANSI X.9, the group that deals with many of the protocols used in the banking industry, has made tremendous progress. 3DES, elliptic curve, and a host of other improvements all are out of committee and should be available as official (for bankers :-) specs soon, if they aren't already. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred "I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence." Mahatma Gandhi From ericm at lne.com Thu Jan 30 11:12:57 1997 From: ericm at lne.com (Eric Murray) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:12:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Altavista Message-ID: <199701301912.LAA12116@toad.com> Leonid S Knyshov writes: [about targeted webvertising using stats gathered by tracking browsers] > I think it is a good idea, no wonder doubleclick.net is one of the > leaders in advertising. You are shown only the ads that will potentially > interest you, search for shopping and you are gonna get one of those ISN > ads etc. > > I think it is a good idea FWIW. > > I wouldn't think that a company such as doubleclick.net will do you any > harm. Probably not. But the practice still bothers me. _I_ want to control what information about me others can have. I do not want the precedent set that on the Net, what you do is trackable by every organization who might care. Sooner or later someone _would_ use that information to hurt me. That's why I wrote cookie jar, a program that lets the user have better control over which 'cookies' if any they release to web servers, and what other information their browser gives out. See http://www.lne.com/ericm/cookie_jar/ for details and code. > >Interestingly, I've just noticed over the last couple of days that the > >in-line > >ads are directly relevant to the search words I enter. I did a search > >yesterday > >on "Quicken" and "security" and all the in-line ads I was shown > >referred to > >security or penetration detection products. This doesn't bother me as much (besides the fucking ads, which I hate... maybe I'll make cookie jar smart enough to nuke them). The reason is that the ads are selected based on what you typed in to the search engine right then- there's no tracking involved like with Doubleclick. -- Eric Murray ericm at lne.com ericm at motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 11:13:33 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:13:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701301913.LAA12143@toad.com> At 09:05 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: >I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the >virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get >out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those >holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to >provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, >given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter >aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, >well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better >off when we do. Your comparison with the fictional Gort, in the movie "The day the earth stood still" is of course apt. It was only after I'd written most of the essay that I realized that an AP-type system would function much as Gort did. Occasionally we (CP) see a spoof where somebody claims to have developed a software program to "replace the judicial system" or something like that. Well, the problem with such a claim (aside from the obvious and enormous AI-type difficulties) is that the current system contains numerous biases. Writing a program to replace the legal system would presumably require that these biases be measured (and admitted-to!) and implemented into a well-defined system. What we'd discover is that the current system only barely resembles the guarantees in the US Constitution. At that point, there would be an argument between those who will insist that the Constitution be followed, and those who believe that the current de-facto system, however biased, be maintained as-is. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From whgiii at amaranth.com Thu Jan 30 11:13:41 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:13:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701301913.LAA12151@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <199701301527.HAA05667 at toad.com>, on 01/30/97 at 11:53 AM, Pavel Korensky said: >Nice, but I can see one problem here. >If I (as a censor) will want to block your communication to prohibited sites, I can block >the access to the proxy computers. You will just move the blocking strategy one level up >with your plug-in. The censor will block the web servers AND proxy servers. Because the >list of proxy servers must be available somehow to users, it is very simple to write some >kind of script running on the gateway which is blocking the acccess. The script will >download the list of proxy servers, update the gateway tables and the gateway will be >blocking acccess to all sites on the proxy list. In addition to this I (as a censor) would make it Illegal to access, read, possess the information on these "blocked" sites. Add some keyword monitoring to the gateway along with logging. This will allow me to selectively go after those who try to circumvent my censoring attempts. I would also want to make the ISP's liable for their users accessing this info. That way I can intimidate them into doing all the work for me. (You can see this approach in several areas of US law enforcemant. Arrest bartenders for serving minors, arrest store clerks for selling cigaretts to minors, shut down of BBS for users posting "dirty pictures", going after ISP's for pirated software and other copyright infringments by their users.) Whenever I did decide to prosecute someone I would make it a big public show for everyone to see with very stiff penalties. After several of these trails the "sheep factor" will keep 99% of the population in line (US Crypto policy is a prime example). The point I am trying to make is that for the censor his set-up does not need to be that sophisticated as fear and intimidation will keep 99% of the rank-and-file in line. As for the other 1%, well they already know who they are and new laws will only help take care of that "problem". - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: OS/2: Your brain. Windows: Your brain on drugs. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Registered E-Secure v1.1 0000000 iQCVAwUBMvDsPI9Co1n+aLhhAQFWQgQAsdoDpHejDa46iU2JKtCUvvpI2ee4Ok5z kLkXDWZUc2AkDJpmLYIVkyPUOzz18vNkUiXYlRVnrKzgAgmL/cAydcuyrqfN9czH 1OuujOlJ2t/OwXsSePRptcfDL6XeCQXww5stlS7UXKosG9w0ZWHYOxHvvV9FjDBi UqjkQwFtSVI= =t8Dr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 11:13:48 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:13:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701301913.LAA12159@toad.com> At 01:16 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Sean Roach wrote: >At 10:47 PM 1/27/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >>In the current political system, in the US for instance, 51% of the >>population is able to screw the remaining 49%, just as long as they can >>maintain the majority. Or, perhaps even more accurately and ominously, a >>tiny fraction of the population (the current leadership class) is able to >>screw the 49%, as long as they have the un-thinking backing of the remaining >>and relatively uninvolved 51%. >> >>AP disables this system. AP turns government into the moral equivalent of a >>pick-up football game: Nobody is being forced to play, and everybody and >>anybody can simply "get up and leave" whenever he wants to. The moment the >>"rules of the game" to make an individual's continued participation >>unsatisfying, he can leave. >> >... >In our society, which, if I remember correctly, 10% of the population >control 90% of the wealth, AP would only lead to 10% of the population being >able to screw the remaining 90%. At least as it is, it takes a simple majority. No, that doesn't work. AP does involve money, that's true, but what "the poor" lack in individual assets they make up for in numbers. And AP implements a sort of "mutual disarmament," by not only preventing that 10% from screwing the 90%, but also prevents the 90% from screwing the 10%. >As for the murder of the rich, here is a scenerio. > >A collection of poor pool their capitol to have a tyrant killed. >The tyrant assembles a counter-wager saying that anyone able to prove thier >ability to kill him without harming him, and who can show they got through >will get 110% of the poor's bid. Question: Where does he get the money for the reward? If he gets it through taxation, he'll anger the people who were taxed and they'll pay to see him die. If he got in through taxation in the past, enough people will STILL be angry enough with him to see him dead. His employees (the ones who probably have the most opportunity to kill him) would be made just about as wealthy by killing him as taking him up on his odd offer. Worse, for him, is that he'd lose money paying off those people if they showed they could have "succeeded." Even if they were not motivated to actually kill him, they'd be motived to SHOW they could kill him, and notice that they'll become just about as rich for KILLING him as merely showing they can! Notice that your idea also assumes that an employee has to become willing to, in effect, plot against his employer in such a way that he can be assured that his actions won't be incorrectly interpretated as a genuine assassination attempt. How can you (or anyone else?) tell the difference until the plan either succeeds or fails?) Moreover, how can the employee trust that his boss will actually honor his promise? I think you're also (falsely) assuming that a deliberately-unsuccessful assassination demonstration immunizes the tyrant from a repeat performance. True, it's often useful to know what kinds of attacks are possible, but that doesn't mean that the system can be fixed to prevent future repetitions... The tyrant, then, either loses his life or a lot of money, and he still can't trust anybody. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 11:13:57 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:13:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701301913.LAA12184@toad.com> At 03:22 AM 1/29/97 -0800, Greg Broiles wrote: >At 10:42 PM 1/28/97 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > >>It has been asserted by at least one member that the 1st Amendment protects >>libelous or other defamatory speech. > >Defamation is not protected by the First Amendment; but the First Amendment >limits the application of defamation law in many circumstances. For >example, the First Amendment requires plaintiffs to prove "actual malice" >if they are a public official, public figure, or a private person seeking >punitive damages. What you ought to explain to us laymen is that the terminology "actual malice" dates from the case New York Times vs. Sullivan, and it used a definition of "malice" that was not in any dictionary at the time. My recollection: Sullivan was a local hero in a particular area in the south in the last 50's (?), gave a speech to a crowd of (?) people who were probably in sympathy with segregation. They proceeded to march. Later, the New York Times claimed (as I vaguely recall it, although it's been years since I read a description) that he had instigated a riot. Sullivan sued, claiming his reputation had been damaged. Arguably, it had, although it's probably equally arguable that Sullivan had done something that would have been looked upon somewhat unsympathetically by non-Southerners. The local (southern, of course) jury found NYT guilty of libel, and awarded Sullivan some huge judgment. (Had the jury been made up of northern people, presumably Sullivan would have lost.) The problem here is that two long-honored principles collided: One, the "free speech" issue, generally tries to guarantee organizations like NY Times the right to print the news and the leeway to do so. The second principle that people should be able to sue for libel in a local court, and be awarded whatever amount of money the jury declares. The problem with this was obvious, after the verdict: It, in effect, allowed essentially any burg in the country, no matter how backwards, potentially to bankrupt any targeted organ of the national news media. Something had to give. Unfortunately, the SC screwed up, as usual. The proper thing for them to do would have been to abandon libel law entirely, recognizing that it did more harm than good. But they blew it: They invented the "actual malice" standard out of whole cloth, raising the standard for libel suits by "public figures," which is really a rather arbitrary standard. Don't go to any ordinary English dictionary for this "malice" definition; it didn't exist before the Sullivan decision, not even in lawbooks. It was really just a rabbit pulled from a hat to try to avoid the collision I mentioned above. Side note: I think that the SC should be unable to re-define ordinary English words. But they try anyway. Basically, it became harder to sue well-known persons. However, what really happened is that they SC had merely put off the problem for another day, because the DEFINITION of a "public figure" was at least as malleable as Jell-O. And oddly, it was eventually revealed that you could be a "public figure" with respect to one subject, but NOT a "public figure" on another. Etc. Ironically, now that Richard Jewell (incorrectly identified as Atlanta bombing suspect) has sued some newspapers (and his former employer) for libel, it seems likely that at least some of those defendants will try to argue that merely being named by the government as a criminal suspect makes him "a public figure." BTW, I think that pressing the Richard Jewell incident would be an excellent way to derail any sort of claim that the government can obey the law. Apparently, they got a number of search warrants based on, essentially, nothing, and to rub this in the government's nose would show that the so-called "probable-cause" standard for warrants is not followed in practice. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 11:15:43 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:15:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701301915.LAA14465@mail.pacifier.com> What you're presented (included in its entirety below) is what I've come to call an "AP story problem." I've worked through many of those myself; their main problem is that they don't carefully describe why _each_ person in the "play" you've described would be motivated to do what it's claim he does, and why he DOES NOT do other things to fix the situation he's in. Remember, I'm not merely talking about the main character, but also the ones who are (apparently?) incidental. For just one example, you said: "conventional bodyguards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledgethat they will be buried with the tyrant." What motivates these people? Are they hostages? If they're hostages, then presumably that means they're motivated to seek the death of anyone who is holding them. What about their relatives; don't they have any sympathy for those who are taken? Why don't they donate to AP to see the lead guy dead? Etc. Etc. At 04:36 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Sean Roach wrote: >This may be true, but the example was to show how easy a defensive line >could be thrown up around the powerful. For example, conventional body >guards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledge >that they will be buried with the tyrant. These body guards could be ten >children out of each local village. Merely a human shield. In an attack, >they would scatter, but the parents would know that the children would die >if a successful action were taken against the tyrant. Also, the tyrant >could put an open bounty on anyone caught trying to harm him. Just bring >the decapitated head of the assassin along with a VHS cassette of the >attempted action for a big reward. > >By layering the defenses, it becomes increasingly difficult for anyone to >get through. > >Obviously the castles walls are the first line of defense, so a reward is >given for anyone caught using any entrance to the fortress except those that >are provided. > >The household is told that their participation will result in the >extermination of their families. They are then told that if they know of an >impending action and fail to report it or attempt to stop it, they are >considered party it those actions. > >A human shield of innocents is "given the privaledge to live in the fortress >with our great leader" so that actions by concerned parties is limited further. >A standing bounty is placed on the head of the assassin, who so ever brings >in the head of the assassin and all children parented by that person after >the assination will be given a reward of some set sum. Probably 110%. > >A bounty is set on security breaches, this bounty would probably be 110% of >the death mark on the tyrant. > >A series of more conventional boobytraps are layed in normally inaccessable >areas, the layers of these either being prisoners who have unknowningly been >condemned to die, the tyrant himself, or some other disposable or trustable >deployment device. The most common of these would probably be a mine field >between the two outer most walls of the fortress, and maybe a funnel-gun >parimeter inside of that. > >An inner sanctum with self contained air, water, and food is maintained for >the tyrant and h[is/er] closest relatives/advisors. This sanctum would be >accessed by biometrics and only used in a percieved emergency. > >All dissent is declared illegal with capitol punishment for the mere >discussion of the impending death of the tyrant, exceptions to this would be >persons in the direct company of the tyrant with the tyrants full awareness, >and permission. > > > > Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 11:48:34 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:48:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html Message-ID: <199701301948.LAA18794@mail.pacifier.com> At 03:26 AM 1/28/97 -0500, Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com wrote: > Reuters New Media > Monday January 27 9:50 AM EST > >UAE Launches Service To Censor Internet [deleted] > The proxy server will be pre-fed with Internet addresses where access > is blocked off, industry sources said. But the server will be unable > to block access if addresses of prohibited sites are changed, as > frequently happens. > > Etisalat says it will disconnect any customer who abused its Internet > services and violated "order and clear laws." > > "Singapore has succeeded to a great extent in its drive to control > harm done by the Internet," said another Etisalat official. "Why > cannot we?" I wonder what these people will think when organizations like Teledesic and Iridium start operating (low-earth-orbit satellites) to allow totally-wireless connectivity. It seems to me that there will be a market for services that allow anonymous browsing, perhaps with encrypted requests that return otherwise-unidentified data on a publicly-accessible airwaves. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 11:48:43 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:48:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701301948.LAA18798@mail.pacifier.com> At 01:03 AM 1/28/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >jim bell wrote: >> >> At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: >> >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') >> >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >> >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >> >any recognition of this fact. >> >........................................................ >> > >> >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? >> >> Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list >> concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using >> encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of >> using encryption. > >Actually AP is one of the more interesting topics here. I think that there >is a clear need for an AP bot. > >Do you feel like writing it? Desire? Yes. Ability? Maybe. Time? No. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Thu Jan 30 11:56:04 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 11:56:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: [PICS] Financial Cryptography Message-ID: <19970130194905.25337.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Dr.Dopehead Vulgar K{arcinogen} Of The Moment has been fired for stealing blow jobs. |\_/| (0_0) Dr.Dopehead Vulgar K{arcinogen} Of The Moment ==(Y)== ---(u)---(u)--- From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 12:07:30 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:07:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GSM] ElGamal Message-ID: <199701302007.MAA30259@mailmasher.com> Dumbbell Vasectomy's abysmal grammer, atrocious spelling and feeble responses clearly identify him as a product of the American education system. _.._ _.._ ,','"_:./\/\,'_ `.`. /_:--:_ ( oo ) _:--:_\ Dumbbell Vasectomy /' `'`vv'`' `\ From aga at dhp.com Thu Jan 30 12:08:12 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:08:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701301837.KAA10125@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: > At 09:05 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: > > >I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the > >virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get > >out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those > >holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to > >provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, > >given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter > >aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, > >well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better > >off when we do. > > > Your comparison with the fictional Gort, in the movie "The day the earth > stood still" is of course apt. It was only after I'd written most of the > essay that I realized that an AP-type system would function much as Gort did. > > Occasionally we (CP) see a spoof where somebody claims to have developed a > software program to "replace the judicial system" or something like that. You may be able to replace the "Letter of the Law" but you can not replace the "Spirit of the Law" with an Android or a bot. (notice I refuse to type like a geek with those "`" characters) So, humanoids will always be entitled to a jury of their "peers" as the constitution says, and that means no AI involved. AI was made for usenet management. > Well, the problem with such a claim (aside from the obvious and enormous > AI-type difficulties) is that the current system contains numerous biases. > Writing a program to replace the legal system would presumably require that > these biases be measured (and admitted-to!) and implemented into a > well-defined system. > > What we'd discover is that the current system only barely resembles the > guarantees in the US Constitution. At that point, there would be an argument > between those who will insist that the Constitution be followed, and those > who believe that the current de-facto system, however biased, be maintained > as-is. > The 12 to 0 verdict will always be the bias in favor of the defendant, and it must stay that way. > > > Jim Bell > jimbell at pacifier.com > With the different combinations of Perl and Java and Lisp that are around today, the time will come when an android or an AI bot will have become dangerous to society, and charged with a crime. Will it be entitled to a jury of it's peers? mail.cypherpunks alt.usenet.admin From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 12:11:35 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:11:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html Message-ID: <199701302011.MAA14532@toad.com> At 03:26 AM 1/28/97 -0500, Lynx_User at linux.nycmetro.com wrote: > Reuters New Media > Monday January 27 9:50 AM EST > >UAE Launches Service To Censor Internet [deleted] > The proxy server will be pre-fed with Internet addresses where access > is blocked off, industry sources said. But the server will be unable > to block access if addresses of prohibited sites are changed, as > frequently happens. > > Etisalat says it will disconnect any customer who abused its Internet > services and violated "order and clear laws." > > "Singapore has succeeded to a great extent in its drive to control > harm done by the Internet," said another Etisalat official. "Why > cannot we?" I wonder what these people will think when organizations like Teledesic and Iridium start operating (low-earth-orbit satellites) to allow totally-wireless connectivity. It seems to me that there will be a market for services that allow anonymous browsing, perhaps with encrypted requests that return otherwise-unidentified data on a publicly-accessible airwaves. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 12:13:02 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:13:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: [FWD] Elliptic curves Message-ID: <199701302012.MAA31404@mailmasher.com> Dr.Dimitri Vagina K[ondom] Of The Moment has been fired for anally raping officemates. _ O O _ \-|-\_/-|-/ Dr.Dimitri Vagina K[ondom] Of The Moment /^\ /^\ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 12:13:16 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:13:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701302013.MAA14609@toad.com> At 01:03 AM 1/28/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >jim bell wrote: >> >> At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: >> >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') >> >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >> >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >> >any recognition of this fact. >> >........................................................ >> > >> >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? >> >> Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list >> concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using >> encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of >> using encryption. > >Actually AP is one of the more interesting topics here. I think that there >is a clear need for an AP bot. > >Do you feel like writing it? Desire? Yes. Ability? Maybe. Time? No. Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From jimbell at pacifier.com Thu Jan 30 12:15:51 1997 From: jimbell at pacifier.com (jim bell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:15:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701302015.MAA14691@toad.com> What you're presented (included in its entirety below) is what I've come to call an "AP story problem." I've worked through many of those myself; their main problem is that they don't carefully describe why _each_ person in the "play" you've described would be motivated to do what it's claim he does, and why he DOES NOT do other things to fix the situation he's in. Remember, I'm not merely talking about the main character, but also the ones who are (apparently?) incidental. For just one example, you said: "conventional bodyguards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledgethat they will be buried with the tyrant." What motivates these people? Are they hostages? If they're hostages, then presumably that means they're motivated to seek the death of anyone who is holding them. What about their relatives; don't they have any sympathy for those who are taken? Why don't they donate to AP to see the lead guy dead? Etc. Etc. At 04:36 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Sean Roach wrote: >This may be true, but the example was to show how easy a defensive line >could be thrown up around the powerful. For example, conventional body >guards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledge >that they will be buried with the tyrant. These body guards could be ten >children out of each local village. Merely a human shield. In an attack, >they would scatter, but the parents would know that the children would die >if a successful action were taken against the tyrant. Also, the tyrant >could put an open bounty on anyone caught trying to harm him. Just bring >the decapitated head of the assassin along with a VHS cassette of the >attempted action for a big reward. > >By layering the defenses, it becomes increasingly difficult for anyone to >get through. > >Obviously the castles walls are the first line of defense, so a reward is >given for anyone caught using any entrance to the fortress except those that >are provided. > >The household is told that their participation will result in the >extermination of their families. They are then told that if they know of an >impending action and fail to report it or attempt to stop it, they are >considered party it those actions. > >A human shield of innocents is "given the privaledge to live in the fortress >with our great leader" so that actions by concerned parties is limited further. >A standing bounty is placed on the head of the assassin, who so ever brings >in the head of the assassin and all children parented by that person after >the assination will be given a reward of some set sum. Probably 110%. > >A bounty is set on security breaches, this bounty would probably be 110% of >the death mark on the tyrant. > >A series of more conventional boobytraps are layed in normally inaccessable >areas, the layers of these either being prisoners who have unknowningly been >condemned to die, the tyrant himself, or some other disposable or trustable >deployment device. The most common of these would probably be a mine field >between the two outer most walls of the fortress, and maybe a funnel-gun >parimeter inside of that. > >An inner sanctum with self contained air, water, and food is maintained for >the tyrant and h[is/er] closest relatives/advisors. This sanctum would be >accessed by biometrics and only used in a percieved emergency. > >All dissent is declared illegal with capitol punishment for the mere >discussion of the impending death of the tyrant, exceptions to this would be >persons in the direct company of the tyrant with the tyrants full awareness, >and permission. > > > > Jim Bell jimbell at pacifier.com From PADGETT at hobbes.orl.mmc.com Thu Jan 30 12:16:12 1997 From: PADGETT at hobbes.orl.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:16:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved Message-ID: <970130151428.20215ea4@hobbes.orl.mmc.com> Jim Bell rote: >Assuming it's possible to build a chip which tests solutions in a >massively-pipelined mode, the 400,000 or so solutions per second tried (for >what is probably a $2000 machine) would probably increase to 100 million per >second per chip (at a cost of maybe $100 per chip, if implemented in >parallel). That's 5000 times more economical, which would translate to a >find in 2-3 days if the same dollars in hardware were invested. Hi Jim, still on your list 8*) Funny thing is that 3 1/2 hours for a 40 bit search is the "real world" number I was using two years ago (can look it up in various archives) so is interesting that the first real test came out exactly the same. Is why I said 40 bits should not protect anything worth more than U$250.00 Have good reason to believe your estimate for a purpose built machine this year (expect 600,000,000 to 1,000,000,000 kps per sieve - these will not be cheap chips but will be commecially available). Expect 400 arrays would be required to do DES in a day (average) but is a lot more achievable than the 65k postulated by the gang of nine. Still would not be too concerned about using DES so long as every message encrypted (including orders for a tuna on rye) and each uses a different key - is "security by obscurity" in a way but am comfortable with it. Besides, if really concerned will just superencrypt. Warmly, Padgett "I love it when a plan comes together." From vznuri at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 12:36:11 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:36:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701291856.KAA07395@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701302036.MAA26546@netcom14.netcom.com> as I've said before, I really hate the "cat out of the bag" saying, as Aaron's recent comments indicate. ONLY A TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT WOULD PUT THE CAT IN THE BAG IN THE FIRST PLACE maybe we can distill this into a new saying, instead of the favorite "cats out of bags". I've said repeatedly that pro-crypto advocates using the "cat out of the bag" analogy is actually damaging to the position that the constitution guarantees crypto freedom via free speech and privacy. it encourages the government side to do exactly as Aaron is doing-- arguing that the cat is not out of the bag, when *that's*not*the*point* how about, GOVERNMENT SHOULD STOP SUFFOCATING CRYPTO CAT!!! From gen2600 at aracnet.com Thu Jan 30 12:38:48 1997 From: gen2600 at aracnet.com (Genocide) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 12:38:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: NSA Rainbow Series. In-Reply-To: <199701291856.KAA07394@toad.com> Message-ID: A while back someone posted the 1-800 number for the NSA to call in and get the Rainbow series delivered.... well, I called and put in an order and it never came, I need to call them again... I don't have the phone numbere number anymore...does anyone have it? Can someone email me the number again? Genocide Head of the Genocide2600 Group ============================================================================ **Coming soon! www.Genocide2600.com! ____________________ *---===| |===---* *---===| Genocide |===---* "You can be a king or a street *---===| 2600 |===---* sweeper, but everyone dances with the *---===|__________________|===---* Grim Reaper." Email: gen2600 at aracnet.com Web: http://www.aracnet.com/~gen2600 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. It is by the Mountain Dew that the thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. ================================================================================ From anonymous at miron.vip.best.com Thu Jan 30 13:07:18 1997 From: anonymous at miron.vip.best.com (anonymous at miron.vip.best.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:07:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [IMPORTANT] Man in the Middle Message-ID: <199701302059.MAA13084@miron.vip.best.com> Dense Venomous will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking his own daughter's prepubescent body. |\_/| (0_0) Dense Venomous ==(Y)== ---(u)---(u)--- From haystack at holy.cow.net Thu Jan 30 13:08:01 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:08:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Dr. Denning Message-ID: <199701302049.PAA28115@holy.cow.net> Dogfucker L Vinegar KOfTheMoment is so vile because rancid semen is dripping from all of his orifices. /~~~\ {-O^O-} Dogfucker L Vinegar KOfTheMoment \ o / (-) From rnh2 at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 30 13:40:24 1997 From: rnh2 at ix.netcom.com (Rick Hornbeck) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:40:24 -0800 (PST) Subject: Clarification on The Politics of Export Restrictions Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970130133913.0068c9b0@popd.ix.netcom.com> I am submitting the following a second time as the first one did not seem to get posted. ============== I agree the strategy would have to be hijack-proof. Something like Gore experiencing a convenient "change of heart" towards the end of this current term and convincing Clinton and the administration to soften crypto export restrictions which would make Gore look like a hero to the high-tech community just in time for the election. Naturally this would have to be carefully scripted but the objective would be to keep the democrats in power. Just a theory. >>Return-Path: >>Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:43:43 -0800 >>From: Greg Broiles >>To: Rick Hornbeck >>Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com >>Subject: Re: The Politics of Export Restrictions >>Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com >> >>At 09:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Rick Hornbeck wrote: >> >>>Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being >>>imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he >>>runs for President in 2000? >> >>I suppose it's plausible, but it's an opportunity open to both candidates, >>and more plausibly (because of lack of collaboration) to the Republicans - >>e.g., Dan Quayle and the "Crypto Freedom For Americans" platform, promising >>to rescue Silicon Valley from those evil regulatory Democrats. >> >>If I were an evil politician trying to set up a trick like you suggest, I >>think I'd want a scheme that my opponent(s) couldn't hijack and use against >>me. >> >>-- >>Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: >>gbroiles at netbox.com | >>http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. >> | >> >> >> From haystack at holy.cow.net Thu Jan 30 13:55:44 1997 From: haystack at holy.cow.net (Bovine Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 13:55:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: Counterproductive Dorothy Denning Flames Message-ID: <199701302137.QAA28407@holy.cow.net> Warning: if you fuck a Dr.Decoy Vomit K Of The Moment in the ass, a tapeworm might bite your penis. /\ /\ + \______/ + / . . \ < / > Dr.Decoy Vomit K Of The Moment \ \--/ / ------ From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Thu Jan 30 14:00:31 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:00:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: Info please! Message-ID: <19970130214811.27622.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Dr.Dickhead L[axative] Vagina K[arcass] Of The Moment's abysmal grammer, atrocious spelling and feeble responses clearly identify him as a product of the American education system. ,_, *-._W_,-* Dr.Dickhead L[axative] Vagina K[arcass] Of The Moment `-;-;-' " " From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Thu Jan 30 14:02:17 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:02:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: [CRYPTO] ElGamal Message-ID: <19970130214809.27595.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Here, Dimwit Vandal K[arcass] Of The Moment descends into total inanity. He should have a cold shower and/or a Turkish coffee. ^-^-^-@@-^-^-^ (..) Dimwit Vandal K[arcass] Of The Moment From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 30 14:10:38 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:10:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701301831.KAA12660@gabber.c2.net> Message-ID: sameer writes: > > > > Remember, Aaron is employee of the government. He talks in doublespeak, > > Aaron is employee of the government. Therefore he must lie. Sandy and Greg are employees of Sameer. Therefore all 3 must lie. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 30 14:17:05 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:17:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Security alert!!! Message-ID: WARNING: There's a rogue trojan horse out there on the internet known as the "stronghold web server". It's actually a hacked-up version of Apache with a backdoor, which allows hackers (or whoever knows the backdoor) to steal credit card numbers and other confidentil information on the Internet. Be careful! Always use encryption. Do not send confidential information 9such as passwords and credit card numbers) to any site running the trojan horse "stronghold". In general, beware of "snake oil" security products and hacked-up versions of free software. Please repost this warning to all relevant computer security forums. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 30 14:22:21 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:22:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: Message-ID: OKSAS writes: > On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > > sameer writes: > > > > > David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. His > > > talk at the RSA conference was such a load of bullshit it wasn't even > > > funny. > > > > The above is a flame. But because Sandy works for Sameer, it was posted > > to the censores list, not tosses to "cypherpunks-flames". > > Hmm, I wonder what Sandy does for Sameer... > > Regards, > Not surprisingly, Sandy (a law school flunky) is a salesman for Sameer. So is greg broils, who graduated from some obscure law school but hasn't passed a bar exam. :-) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From markm at voicenet.com Thu Jan 30 14:23:34 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:23:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: ad.doubleclick.net (fwd) Message-ID: Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:15:38 -0800 From: Caveh Frank Jalali Subject: URL filtering, Re: ad.doubleclick.net (RISKS-18.78) The obvious defense against hostile or undesirable web sites is to not visit them in the first place. This process can in fact be automated in netscape's browser. This saves bandwidth and your time! The basic premise is that the browser may optionally execute a function on every URL before it is accessed to determine whether a direct connection should be made or a proxy should be used in the process. This affords the opportunity to [mis]direct the browser to fetch the document from an invalid source. this is a good approximation of not getting the document at all. We sit behind a fire wall, so all WWW access has to funnel through a proxy. If I tell netscape to fetch an external document using a direct connection, the connection attempt will fail, and the document will not be accessed. Netscape will put a broken image icon in its place. Here are the nuts and bolts to do it, but some assembly is required: Under options/network preferences/proxies, select "automatic proxy config" and tell it which file to use. Call it something like "file:///HOMEDIR/.netscape/proxy.pac", replacing HOMEDIR with your home directory; the actual code is included below. Next, go to options/general preferences/helpers and create an application helper of type "application/x-ns-proxy-autoconfig" for suffix "pac", handled by "navigator". Install this java-script code to do the actual filtering. call it "file:///HOMEDIR/.netscape/proxy.pac", as mentioned before. ================ function FindProxyForURL(url, host) { if ( isResolvable(host) && ! shExpMatch(host, "[0-9]*") ) return "DIRECT" ; else if (host == "advertising.quote.com") return "DIRECT" ; else if (host == "ad.doubleclick.net") return "DIRECT" ; else if (shExpMatch(url, "*:*/ads/*")) return "DIRECT" ; else return "PROXY webcache:8080; "; } From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 30 14:24:37 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:24:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Censorship In-Reply-To: <199701301913.LAA12120@toad.com> Message-ID: OKSAS writes: > On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > OKSAS writes: > > > On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote: > > > > I cannot understand how some of my (accurate) criticisms of Sandfort's > > > > censorhip polices---some in direct response to his own self-serving pos > > > > declaring himself not to be a flamer himself---are not making it to the > > > > "New and Improved Censored List," while inane posts from Toto, Thorn, a > > > > someone named "Nurdane Oksas" are appearing. > > > > > > WEll....that's not so bad ;) > > > > I find Oksas's posts to be very interesting. > > Thank you. You are very welcome -- Sandy is a jerk for tossing your mail! > > > > > (Oksas has the especially annoying habit of quoting entire posts and th > > > > appending a one-line piece of completely list-irrelevant fluff. Also, > > > Is it so annoying...? why did you read it to that point??? :) > > > Why could you not be so anonymous and tell me? My posts are > > > a bit brief; Blancs' are far better, next time read hers. > > > > > > > engaging in lovey-dovey posts with Vulis, who writes messages about how > > > > longs to see Oksas naked.) > > > > > > Huh?? You are being a 'fluff' here ;) > > > > "Anonymous" is lying - I never posted any such thing. of course the > > cocksuckr moderator passed on the "anon's" lies to the censored mailing > > list, and I bet he's goingto auto-bounce my refutation to "flames" > > - just as everyone had predicted. > > Anonymous is a jerk. > > > So are gilmore and the sandfart. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From vznuri at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 14:26:28 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:26:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701302226.OAA19162@toad.com> as I've said before, I really hate the "cat out of the bag" saying, as Aaron's recent comments indicate. ONLY A TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT WOULD PUT THE CAT IN THE BAG IN THE FIRST PLACE maybe we can distill this into a new saying, instead of the favorite "cats out of bags". I've said repeatedly that pro-crypto advocates using the "cat out of the bag" analogy is actually damaging to the position that the constitution guarantees crypto freedom via free speech and privacy. it encourages the government side to do exactly as Aaron is doing-- arguing that the cat is not out of the bag, when *that's*not*the*point* how about, GOVERNMENT SHOULD STOP SUFFOCATING CRYPTO CAT!!! From shamrock at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 14:28:08 1997 From: shamrock at netcom.com (Lucky Green) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:28:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Last nail for US crypto export policy? Message-ID: <199701302228.OAA19229@toad.com> At 01:41 AM 1/30/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >I think we do need to get some sort of push going for 3DES as a >replacement for DES - it's strong enough, even though DES is showing >its age, and it's an obvious transition from the current technology. >It's slower and clunkier than IDEA or RC4/128, but still not bad. The migration to 3DES is underway, at least in the banking sector. ANSI X.9, the group that deals with many of the protocols used in the banking industry, has made tremendous progress. 3DES, elliptic curve, and a host of other improvements all are out of committee and should be available as official (for bankers :-) specs soon, if they aren't already. -- Lucky Green PGP encrypted mail preferred "I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence." Mahatma Gandhi From gen2600 at aracnet.com Thu Jan 30 14:28:56 1997 From: gen2600 at aracnet.com (Genocide) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:28:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: NSA Rainbow Series. Message-ID: <199701302228.OAA19264@toad.com> A while back someone posted the 1-800 number for the NSA to call in and get the Rainbow series delivered.... well, I called and put in an order and it never came, I need to call them again... I don't have the phone numbere number anymore...does anyone have it? Can someone email me the number again? Genocide Head of the Genocide2600 Group ============================================================================ **Coming soon! www.Genocide2600.com! ____________________ *---===| |===---* *---===| Genocide |===---* "You can be a king or a street *---===| 2600 |===---* sweeper, but everyone dances with the *---===|__________________|===---* Grim Reaper." Email: gen2600 at aracnet.com Web: http://www.aracnet.com/~gen2600 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. It is by the Mountain Dew that the thoughts acquire speed, the lips acquire stains, the stains become a warning. It is by caffeine alone that I set my mind in motion. ================================================================================ From PADGETT at hobbes.orl.mmc.com Thu Jan 30 14:29:07 1997 From: PADGETT at hobbes.orl.mmc.com (A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:29:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved Message-ID: <199701302229.OAA19293@toad.com> Jim Bell rote: >Assuming it's possible to build a chip which tests solutions in a >massively-pipelined mode, the 400,000 or so solutions per second tried (for >what is probably a $2000 machine) would probably increase to 100 million per >second per chip (at a cost of maybe $100 per chip, if implemented in >parallel). That's 5000 times more economical, which would translate to a >find in 2-3 days if the same dollars in hardware were invested. Hi Jim, still on your list 8*) Funny thing is that 3 1/2 hours for a 40 bit search is the "real world" number I was using two years ago (can look it up in various archives) so is interesting that the first real test came out exactly the same. Is why I said 40 bits should not protect anything worth more than U$250.00 Have good reason to believe your estimate for a purpose built machine this year (expect 600,000,000 to 1,000,000,000 kps per sieve - these will not be cheap chips but will be commecially available). Expect 400 arrays would be required to do DES in a day (average) but is a lot more achievable than the 65k postulated by the gang of nine. Still would not be too concerned about using DES so long as every message encrypted (including orders for a tuna on rye) and each uses a different key - is "security by obscurity" in a way but am comfortable with it. Besides, if really concerned will just superencrypt. Warmly, Padgett "I love it when a plan comes together." From aga at dhp.com Thu Jan 30 14:31:37 1997 From: aga at dhp.com (aga) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:31:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199701302231.OAA19359@toad.com> On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, jim bell wrote: > At 09:05 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: > > >I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the > >virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get > >out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those > >holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to > >provide something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, > >given advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter > >aggression and the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, > >well, the rest of us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better > >off when we do. > > > Your comparison with the fictional Gort, in the movie "The day the earth > stood still" is of course apt. It was only after I'd written most of the > essay that I realized that an AP-type system would function much as Gort did. > > Occasionally we (CP) see a spoof where somebody claims to have developed a > software program to "replace the judicial system" or something like that. You may be able to replace the "Letter of the Law" but you can not replace the "Spirit of the Law" with an Android or a bot. (notice I refuse to type like a geek with those "`" characters) So, humanoids will always be entitled to a jury of their "peers" as the constitution says, and that means no AI involved. AI was made for usenet management. > Well, the problem with such a claim (aside from the obvious and enormous > AI-type difficulties) is that the current system contains numerous biases. > Writing a program to replace the legal system would presumably require that > these biases be measured (and admitted-to!) and implemented into a > well-defined system. > > What we'd discover is that the current system only barely resembles the > guarantees in the US Constitution. At that point, there would be an argument > between those who will insist that the Constitution be followed, and those > who believe that the current de-facto system, however biased, be maintained > as-is. > The 12 to 0 verdict will always be the bias in favor of the defendant, and it must stay that way. > > > Jim Bell > jimbell at pacifier.com > With the different combinations of Perl and Java and Lisp that are around today, the time will come when an android or an AI bot will have become dangerous to society, and charged with a crime. Will it be entitled to a jury of it's peers? mail.cypherpunks alt.usenet.admin From sandfort at crl.com Thu Jan 30 14:31:43 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:31:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701302036.MAA26546@netcom14.netcom.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > as I've said before, I really hate the "cat out of the bag" > saying, as Aaron's recent comments indicate. Interestingly, the saying, "to let the cat out of the bag" is related to the saying, "to buy a pig in a poke." A poke is a sack or bag. In times past, street peddlers would sell a mark a young pig. The pig was supposedly put into a poke, but in fact, a bag with a cat in it was substituted. By the time the mark figured out his mistake by "letting the cat out of the bag," the peddler was long gone. The lesson the mark learned was "Don't buy a pig in a poke." The better metaphor for crypto is that the genie is out of the bottle. Alternatively, that the crypto bell cannot be unrung. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From rnh2 at ix.netcom.com Thu Jan 30 14:53:28 1997 From: rnh2 at ix.netcom.com (Rick Hornbeck) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:53:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Clarification on The Politics of Export Restrictions Message-ID: <199701302253.OAA20119@toad.com> I am submitting the following a second time as the first one did not seem to get posted. ============== I agree the strategy would have to be hijack-proof. Something like Gore experiencing a convenient "change of heart" towards the end of this current term and convincing Clinton and the administration to soften crypto export restrictions which would make Gore look like a hero to the high-tech community just in time for the election. Naturally this would have to be carefully scripted but the objective would be to keep the democrats in power. Just a theory. >>Return-Path: >>Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:43:43 -0800 >>From: Greg Broiles >>To: Rick Hornbeck >>Cc: cypherpunks at toad.com >>Subject: Re: The Politics of Export Restrictions >>Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com >> >>At 09:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Rick Hornbeck wrote: >> >>>Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being >>>imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he >>>runs for President in 2000? >> >>I suppose it's plausible, but it's an opportunity open to both candidates, >>and more plausibly (because of lack of collaboration) to the Republicans - >>e.g., Dan Quayle and the "Crypto Freedom For Americans" platform, promising >>to rescue Silicon Valley from those evil regulatory Democrats. >> >>If I were an evil politician trying to set up a trick like you suggest, I >>think I'd want a scheme that my opponent(s) couldn't hijack and use against >>me. >> >>-- >>Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: >>gbroiles at netbox.com | >>http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. >> | >> >> >> From markm at voicenet.com Thu Jan 30 14:54:25 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:54:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: ad.doubleclick.net (fwd) Message-ID: <199701302254.OAA20146@toad.com> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:15:38 -0800 From: Caveh Frank Jalali Subject: URL filtering, Re: ad.doubleclick.net (RISKS-18.78) The obvious defense against hostile or undesirable web sites is to not visit them in the first place. This process can in fact be automated in netscape's browser. This saves bandwidth and your time! The basic premise is that the browser may optionally execute a function on every URL before it is accessed to determine whether a direct connection should be made or a proxy should be used in the process. This affords the opportunity to [mis]direct the browser to fetch the document from an invalid source. this is a good approximation of not getting the document at all. We sit behind a fire wall, so all WWW access has to funnel through a proxy. If I tell netscape to fetch an external document using a direct connection, the connection attempt will fail, and the document will not be accessed. Netscape will put a broken image icon in its place. Here are the nuts and bolts to do it, but some assembly is required: Under options/network preferences/proxies, select "automatic proxy config" and tell it which file to use. Call it something like "file:///HOMEDIR/.netscape/proxy.pac", replacing HOMEDIR with your home directory; the actual code is included below. Next, go to options/general preferences/helpers and create an application helper of type "application/x-ns-proxy-autoconfig" for suffix "pac", handled by "navigator". Install this java-script code to do the actual filtering. call it "file:///HOMEDIR/.netscape/proxy.pac", as mentioned before. ================ function FindProxyForURL(url, host) { if ( isResolvable(host) && ! shExpMatch(host, "[0-9]*") ) return "DIRECT" ; else if (host == "advertising.quote.com") return "DIRECT" ; else if (host == "ad.doubleclick.net") return "DIRECT" ; else if (shExpMatch(url, "*:*/ads/*")) return "DIRECT" ; else return "PROXY webcache:8080; "; } From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Thu Jan 30 14:59:27 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:59:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: [DSS] Zero-knowledge interactive proofs Message-ID: <19970130224808.29068.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Dr.Deflated Viscera has been fired for anally raping officemates. o \ o / _ o __| \ / |__ o _ \ o / o /|\ | /\ ___\o \o | o/ o/__ /\ | /|\ / \ / \ | \ /) | ( \ /o\ / ) | (\ / | / \ / \ Dr.Deflated Viscera From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 15:12:58 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:12:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ADMINISTRIVIUM] S/MIME Message-ID: <199701302312.PAA04312@mailmasher.com> Dr.Disruptive L[eakage] Vulis does NOT eat pussy. He only eats asshole if it's got a big dick up in front. Whoever calls him bisexual is a fucking liar. He likes to suck cocks in front of an audience. /\_./o__ Dr.Disruptive L[eakage] Vulis (/^/(_^^' ._.(_.)_ From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 15:13:12 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:13:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Degausser Message-ID: <199701302313.PAA04406@mailmasher.com> Deceptive L Violent K Of The Moment enjoys sucking the puss from his syphilitic homosexual friends. /o)\ Deceptive L Violent K Of The Moment \(o/ From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 15:14:47 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:14:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: Spam filters Message-ID: <199701302312.PAA04358@mailmasher.com> Deviant Vitriolic KOTM likes to be the man in the middle, getting it both up the ass and in his mouth. ^-^-^-@@-^-^-^ (..) Deviant Vitriolic KOTM From vznuri at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 15:32:56 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:32:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <199701302332.PAA12616@netcom23.netcom.com> fascinating reading sandy, but > >The better metaphor for crypto is that the genie is out of the >bottle. Alternatively, that the crypto bell cannot be unrung. these have the same conceptual limitations I was flaming. to use the analogy: 1. it is unconstitutional to put a crypto genie in a bottle in the first place. 2. it is unconstitutional to make laws against ringing crypto bells. again, when you use the above analogies, the government can argue with you and say, "no, we thing that crypto hasn't really spread as much as it could without the ITAR", and this is a pretty difficult point to argue. how can you argue that crypto has spread as much as it possibly can? relaxing regulations would surely cause it to spread more than it has. admittedly, I can't think of a nice substitute with a good "ring to it". however, I do like the saying that crypto-news has been using about "our safe, our KEYS!!" or something similar. I propose that people emphasize this. using any of the other analogies just encourages orwellian thinking along the lines in the government: oh YEAH?! who SAYS the genie is out of the bottle?! what makes you think we can't put him BACK THERE?! so imho its all a diversion and a decoy. it's the wrong argument to get involved in-- has crypto spread to make it impossible to contain? and as the saying goes, "never get in an argument with a fool, people might not know the difference". do we believe in the constitution or not? perhaps it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy when we don't. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 15:36:42 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:36:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Clipper chip Message-ID: <199701302336.PAA11396@mailmasher.com> Dick Vandal will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking his own mother's dead body. /^\ |-| | | _| |____ Dick Vandal | | | | | <| | | | | \_______| From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 15:37:43 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:37:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: [PGP] PEM Message-ID: <199701302337.PAA11726@mailmasher.com> Dr.Deadwood L[apdancer] Vasectomy K[retin]OTM likes to be the man in the middle, getting it both up the ass and in his mouth. /// (0 0) ____ooO_(_)_Ooo__ Dr.Deadwood L[apdancer] Vasectomy K[retin]OTM From sandfort at crl.crl.com Thu Jan 30 15:57:17 1997 From: sandfort at crl.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:57:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701302357.PAA22100@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > as I've said before, I really hate the "cat out of the bag" > saying, as Aaron's recent comments indicate. Interestingly, the saying, "to let the cat out of the bag" is related to the saying, "to buy a pig in a poke." A poke is a sack or bag. In times past, street peddlers would sell a mark a young pig. The pig was supposedly put into a poke, but in fact, a bag with a cat in it was substituted. By the time the mark figured out his mistake by "letting the cat out of the bag," the peddler was long gone. The lesson the mark learned was "Don't buy a pig in a poke." The better metaphor for crypto is that the genie is out of the bottle. Alternatively, that the crypto bell cannot be unrung. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 30 15:57:23 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:57:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html In-Reply-To: <199701301948.LAA18794@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <32F13DA1.A95@sk.sympatico.ca> jim bell wrote: > I wonder what these people will think when organizations like Teledesic and > Iridium start operating (low-earth-orbit satellites) to allow > totally-wireless connectivity. It seems to me that there will be a market > for services that allow anonymous browsing, perhaps with encrypted requests > that return otherwise-unidentified data on a publicly-accessible airwaves. Think of the possibility of satellite-fed 'roving' InterNet sites. What will be the 'export' implications of sending crypto to a place such as site.nowhere, site.somewhere, and site.intheUS-hee-hee. Toto From vznuri at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 15:57:27 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:57:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701302357.PAA22117@toad.com> fascinating reading sandy, but > >The better metaphor for crypto is that the genie is out of the >bottle. Alternatively, that the crypto bell cannot be unrung. these have the same conceptual limitations I was flaming. to use the analogy: 1. it is unconstitutional to put a crypto genie in a bottle in the first place. 2. it is unconstitutional to make laws against ringing crypto bells. again, when you use the above analogies, the government can argue with you and say, "no, we thing that crypto hasn't really spread as much as it could without the ITAR", and this is a pretty difficult point to argue. how can you argue that crypto has spread as much as it possibly can? relaxing regulations would surely cause it to spread more than it has. admittedly, I can't think of a nice substitute with a good "ring to it". however, I do like the saying that crypto-news has been using about "our safe, our KEYS!!" or something similar. I propose that people emphasize this. using any of the other analogies just encourages orwellian thinking along the lines in the government: oh YEAH?! who SAYS the genie is out of the bottle?! what makes you think we can't put him BACK THERE?! so imho its all a diversion and a decoy. it's the wrong argument to get involved in-- has crypto spread to make it impossible to contain? and as the saying goes, "never get in an argument with a fool, people might not know the difference". do we believe in the constitution or not? perhaps it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy when we don't. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 15:57:40 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:57:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GSM] 2 Questions Message-ID: <199701302357.PAA17055@mailmasher.com> Dense Vaginal K>rudrud Dinghy Violent K)arcass(OfTheMonth wears satin lingerie embroidered with pink swastikas, prancing around for his homosexual, AIDS infected lovers. /\_./o__ Dinghy Violent K)arcass(OfTheMonth (/^/(_^^' ._.(_.)_ From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 15:57:53 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:57:53 -0800 (PST) Subject: Denial of service attack Message-ID: <199701302357.PAA17131@mailmasher.com> Disruptive Viscera K[ondom] Of The Minute grew a beard to look like his mother. (~\/~) /~'\ /`~\ _ _ `\ /'( ` ) ( `\/' ) `' `\ /' `\ /' Disruptive Viscera K[ondom] Of The Minute `\ /' `\/' ' From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 30 16:06:59 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:06:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor In-Reply-To: <199701301948.LAA18798@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <199701310002.SAA11258@manifold.algebra.com> jim bell wrote: > > At 01:03 AM 1/28/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >jim bell wrote: > >> > >> At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: > >> >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') > >> >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > >> >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > >> >any recognition of this fact. > >> >........................................................ > >> > > >> >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? > >> > >> Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list > >> concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using > >> encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of > >> using encryption. > > > >Actually AP is one of the more interesting topics here. I think that there > >is a clear need for an AP bot. > > > >Do you feel like writing it? > > Desire? Yes. Ability? Maybe. Time? No. > You can hire someone to write it. - Igor. From sandfort at crl.com Thu Jan 30 16:29:43 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:29:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701302332.PAA12616@netcom23.netcom.com> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > fascinating reading sandy, but > > > > >The better metaphor for crypto is that the genie is out of the > >bottle. Alternatively, that the crypto bell cannot be unrung. > > these have the same conceptual limitations I was flaming. to > use the analogy: > > 1. it is unconstitutional to put a crypto genie in a bottle > in the first place. > 2. it is unconstitutional to make laws against ringing crypto bells. We do not disagree except neither of the metaphors I gave suggest anything about the "putting in the bag" part of the deal. In no way does either suggest a right, power or even ability of anyone to limit any freedom. They are mute on the subject. Their sole meaning is that one CAN'T undo what is already done. In the instant case, that means the wide-spread availability of strong crypto. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 16:33:11 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 16:33:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: [GSM] Hardening mailing lists against spam attacks Message-ID: <199701310033.QAA27430@mailmasher.com> Dr.Derisve Vitriol K[reep]OfTheMoment died of AIDS last night with his faggot lover. __o _ \<_ Dr.Derisve Vitriol K[reep]OfTheMoment (_)/(_) From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 30 17:20:30 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:20:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Clarification on The Politics of Export Restrictions In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970130133913.0068c9b0@popd.ix.netcom.com> Message-ID: Rick Hornbeck writes: > I am submitting the following a second time as the first one did not seem > to get posted. > ... Sandy Sandford continues to junk crypto-relevant submissions to the "flames" list. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Thu Jan 30 17:23:34 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:23:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Get cybersitter to block your ISP In-Reply-To: <5ckclk$6kl@kew.globalnet.co.uk> Message-ID: Path: perun!news2.panix.com!news.panix.com!panix!news.bbnplanet.com!cam-news-hub1.bbnplanet.com!howland.erols.net!rill.news.pipex.net!pipex!news-lond.gsl.net!news.gsl.net!news-feed1.globalnet.co.uk!kew.globalnet.co.uk!usenet From: pevans at globalnet.co.uk.removethispart (evans-the-swim) Newsgroups: alt.privacy,alt.censorship,alt.revenge,news.admin.censorship,alt.html Subject: Get cybersitter to block your ISP Message-ID: <5ckclk$6kl at kew.globalnet.co.uk> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 1997 20:16:16 GMT Lines: 153 NNTP-Posting-Host: client856c.globalnet.co.uk X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82 To all readers: I suggest that you do as I have done. If you have a web page, add a link (or many) dealing with Cybersitter, and email Mr. Milburn. Here's my example... Mr. Milburn: I have been reading the reports of you and your company's unethical, deceptive, bullying, and probably defamatory practices. It appears that your response to critics is to add their ISP to the list of sites blocked by your software. Accordingly, I have added to my home page links to various sites and files which will inform the reader of the true nature of your agenda. I am also suggesting to readers in all the newsgroups that relate to this issue that they do the same. My hope is that they will respond by doing so, and in turn force you to add so many ISP's to your list that you effectively restrict your users from the entire net. If successful, this will lead ultimately to the mass realisation that Cybersitter does not do what it is advertised to do, and that people wishing to "protect" their children from influences with which they disagree should choose other methods, and that you and your company will disappear as yet another burp in the turgid indigestion of the net. Please respond when you have added my ISP to your list of blocked sites. Feel free to email my postmaster as well. A sample of the information available to visitors to my site follows: ============================================= Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 14:36:55 -0800 From: Jonathan Wallace Subject: 1--Solid Oak Blocking Software & Ethical Spectacle FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Jonathan Wallace jw at bway.net NEW YORK CITY, January 19, 1997--In an apparent act of retaliation against a critic of the company, Solid Oak Sofware has added The Ethical Spectacle (http://www.spectacle.org) to the list of Web sites blocked by its Cybersitter software. The Ethical Spectacle is a monthly Webzine examining the intersection of ethics, law and politics in our society, which recently urged its readers not to buy Cybersitter because of Solid Oak's unethical behavior. The Ethical Spectacle is edited by Jonathan Wallace, a New York- based software executive and attorney who is the co-author, with Mark Mangan, of Sex, Laws and Cyberspace (Henry Holt, 1996), a book on Internet censorship. "In the book," Wallace said, "we took the position-- naively, I now think--that use of blocking software by parents was a less restrictive alternative to government censorship. We never expected that publishers of blocking software would block sites for their political content alone, as Solid Oak has done." Solid Oak describes its product as blocking sites which contain obscene and indecent material, hate speech, and advocacy of violence and illegal behavior. In late 1996, computer journalists Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com) and Brock Meeks (brock at well.com) broke the story that Cybersitter blocked the National Organization for Women site (http://www.now.org) along with other political and feminist organizations. In addition, the product blocked entire domains such as well.com, maintained by the venerable Well online service. McCullagh and Meeks implied that they had received an inner look at the Cybersitter database of blocked sites from someone who had reverse engineered the software. Shortly afterwards, Solid Oak asked the FBI to begin a criminal investigation of the two journalists and accused college student Bennett Haselton (bennett at peacefire.org) of being their source. Though McCullagh, Meeks and Haselton all denied he was the source (or that anything illegal had occurred), Solid Oak president Brian Milburn called Haselton an "aspiring felon" and threatened to add his Internet service provider to the blocked list if it did not muzzle Haselton. Haselton came to Milburn's attention by founding Peacefire, a student organization opposing censorship. On his Web pages (http://www.peacefire.org), Haselton posted an essay called "Where Do We Not Want You to Go Today?" criticizing Solid Oak. The company promptly added Peacefire to its blocked list, claiming that Haselton had reverse engineered its software, an allegation for which the company has never produced any evidence. "At that point," Wallace said, "I felt Milburn was acting like the proverbial 800-pound gorilla. I added a link to the Spectacle top page called 'Don't Buy Cybersitter' (http://www.spectacle.org/alert/peace.html). Anyone clicking on the link would see a copy of Bennett's 'Where Do We Not Want You to Go' page with some added material, including my thoughts on the inappropriateness of Solid Oak's behavior. I wrote the company, informing them of my actions and telling them that they misrepresent their product when they claim it blocks only indecent material, hate speech and the like." Solid Oak has now responded by blocking The Ethical Spectacle. "I wrote to Milburn and to Solid Oak technical support demanding an explanation," Wallace said. "I pointed out that The Spectacle does not fit any of their published criteria for blocking a site. I received mail in return demanding that I cease writing to them and calling my mail 'harassment'--with a copy to the postmaster at my ISP." Wallace continued: "With other critics such as Declan, Brock and Bennett, Solid Oak has claimed reverse engineering of its software, in supposed violation of its shrink-wrapped license. I have never downloaded, purchased or used Cybersitter, nor had any access to its database. I believe that Solid Oak's sole reason for blocking my site is the 'Don't Buy Cybersitter' page, criticizing the company's bullying behavior." The Ethical Spectacle includes the internationally respected An Auschwitz Alphabet (http://www.spectacle.org/695/ausch.html), a compilation of resources pertaining to the Holocaust. "Sixty percent of the Spectacle's traffic consists of visitors to the Holocaust materials," Wallace said. "Schoolteachers have used it in their curricula, it was the subject of a lecture at a museum in Poland some weeks ago, and every month, I get letters from schoolchildren thanking me for placing it online. Now, due to Solid Oak's actions, Cybersitter's claimed 900,000 users will no longer have access to it." Solid Oak can be contacted at blocking.problems at solidoak.com, or care of its president, Brian Milburn (bmilburn at solidoak.com.) ----------------------------------------------- Jonathan Wallace The Ethical Spectacle http://www.spectacle.org Co-author, Sex, Laws and Cyberspace http://www.spectacle.org/freespch/ "We must be the change we wish to see in the world."--Gandhi From dsmith at prairienet.org Thu Jan 30 17:33:15 1997 From: dsmith at prairienet.org (David E. Smith) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:33:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: A comment on the censorship policy Message-ID: <3.0.32.19970130192408.006879d8@midwest.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 12:19 AM 1/30/97 -0800, Toto wrote: > It is extremely easy to understand. Just read your own words. > The key word here is 'accurate' criticisms. This makes them 'flames', >in Sandy's mind, because the purpose of the 'censorship experiment' >was to place total control of the list in the hands of a man who >rarely posts and doesn't seem to participate in the list discussions, >as well as for the purpose of suppressing any real dissent that may >arise from list members. Interesting interpretation. Mind you, I'm obliged to disagree. My understanding was that the moderator is supposed to ONLY filter out ads and utterly-content-free messages. (Mind you, I took the smart out and subbed to cp-unedited, so I'm in no place to judge.) If the idea was to place control in the hands of someone who rarely posts, why not give it to me? There are probably a few hundred of the real addresses on this list (not the mail-echoers) that have never posted. > Also, one of the reasons that the moderation process is so >haphazard, is that posts from some individuals are automatically >routed to the 'flames' list at some times, and viewed/censored >at other times, so that a few can be posted to the censored >list to give some half-hearted illusion of fairness in the >censorship process. (which remains a bad joke, nonetheless). Aha, a good point to be brought up: Sandy, are you autofiltering anyone based on user name, or on certain keywords? Seems to defeat the purpose of having a _human_ moderator. dave -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMvFJl3EZTZHwCEpFAQHGiQf/QjEj9QJ+9viADYdfSQJumpXhb8BF+MHQ zbAYVGxLyt/WYA96cykFHYk2hCzkcfph/XDksSB6lmaStHFHfPCOAOHReu6xfHg2 3+3RyOI/eBJS8RS6z5dQBWTnKiu35sk5J2wMcnOWfMQXTWz8jYVAHnyBh9x39huP +Iwj4jOE0Qelu4/FZhgVgo3tktw5sBGjmaZgOvu/24DoT2YPsG9EQ74i6suX0B15 eE1uPaP+2zumwYpV2ywYNbfFyExY2K9XM6k7M/ZNwpplMyf+plYigVUkNRP6KJWK Gvp3bN6mAa2BF/bnoyCGTulC3By785Fk3s+EV2hUVknoZwH3SGF53w== =Sl5a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 30 17:56:01 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:56:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html Message-ID: <199701310156.RAA01126@toad.com> jim bell wrote: > I wonder what these people will think when organizations like Teledesic and > Iridium start operating (low-earth-orbit satellites) to allow > totally-wireless connectivity. It seems to me that there will be a market > for services that allow anonymous browsing, perhaps with encrypted requests > that return otherwise-unidentified data on a publicly-accessible airwaves. Think of the possibility of satellite-fed 'roving' InterNet sites. What will be the 'export' implications of sending crypto to a place such as site.nowhere, site.somewhere, and site.intheUS-hee-hee. Toto From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 30 17:56:03 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:56:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701310156.RAA01133@toad.com> jim bell wrote: > > At 01:03 AM 1/28/97 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >jim bell wrote: > >> > >> At 10:21 PM 1/26/97 -0800, blanc wrote: > >> >From: jim bell (in response to Dimitri Vulis') > >> >Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > >> >prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > >> >any recognition of this fact. > >> >........................................................ > >> > > >> >1) Jim, why do you insist on discussing this on an forum for encryption? > >> > >> Because it's on-topic, that's why. Because it's not merely a list > >> concerning METHODS of encryption, it's also about the _reasons_ for using > >> encryption, as well as the _effects_ (both small-scale and large-scale) of > >> using encryption. > > > >Actually AP is one of the more interesting topics here. I think that there > >is a clear need for an AP bot. > > > >Do you feel like writing it? > > Desire? Yes. Ability? Maybe. Time? No. > You can hire someone to write it. - Igor. From sandfort at crl.crl.com Thu Jan 30 17:56:05 1997 From: sandfort at crl.crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 17:56:05 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701310156.RAA01139@toad.com> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > fascinating reading sandy, but > > > > >The better metaphor for crypto is that the genie is out of the > >bottle. Alternatively, that the crypto bell cannot be unrung. > > these have the same conceptual limitations I was flaming. to > use the analogy: > > 1. it is unconstitutional to put a crypto genie in a bottle > in the first place. > 2. it is unconstitutional to make laws against ringing crypto bells. We do not disagree except neither of the metaphors I gave suggest anything about the "putting in the bag" part of the deal. In no way does either suggest a right, power or even ability of anyone to limit any freedom. They are mute on the subject. Their sole meaning is that one CAN'T undo what is already done. In the instant case, that means the wide-spread availability of strong crypto. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From vznuri at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 18:39:28 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 18:39:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701310156.RAA01139@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701310239.SAA14891@netcom17.netcom.com> Sandy: >> >> 1. it is unconstitutional to put a crypto genie in a bottle >> in the first place. >> 2. it is unconstitutional to make laws against ringing crypto bells. > >We do not disagree except neither of the metaphors I gave suggest >anything about the "putting in the bag" part of the deal. In no >way does either suggest a right, power or even ability of anyone >to limit any freedom. They are mute on the subject. Their sole >meaning is that one CAN'T undo what is already done. In the >instant case, that means the wide-spread availability of strong >crypto. ability to use strong crypto is not "either or" but a matter of degree. the question is not "is strong crypto available", but, "how much harder would the NSA's peeping be if ITAR was relaxed? the real question is, do we have the right to use strong crypto, or don't we? if we don't then the government has the authority to regulate it to its heart's content, *regardless* of whether those laws are effective or not. cpunks seem to think that a govt can only have *effective* laws. but there is obviously no such constraint. I think we need to approach it from the point of view that we have the *right* to use strong crypto, and see if the supreme court agrees. hence I'm very interested in the bernstein etc. cases, which may be the ultimate breakthrough eventually.. there is no end to the blathering about genies, cats, or bells that can sway the govt, but a single supreme court decision can have a revolutionary effect. again I still think the genie/cat/bell metaphor is a disservice to the cause, but feel free to defy me. just one crackpot's opinion, YMMV From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 30 19:37:56 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 19:37:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Complying with the EAR [was: More Circumventing the ITAR] Message-ID: <199701310337.TAA03170@toad.com> At 11:14 AM 1/29/97 -0700, Michael Paul Johnson wrote: >On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Mark Rosen wrote: > >> I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically >> about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for > >You should check the exact text yourself, but the way I read the EAR, you >are not "exporting" strong cryptographic software without a license (exept >to Canada, which needs no license) if you do things "such as" >(1) have the guests to your site acknowledge that the EAR restricts >export, (2) have the guests affirm that they can legally get the software >(proper citizenship or residency & location), and (3) "check the address >of the destination computer to see if it is in the USA" or Canada. The >last one, I interpret rather loosely to mean that if the guest's email >address domain isn't one commonly used in the USA or Canada, then I deny >access. We all know that not all .com addresses are North American, but >chances are really good that if the address ends in .ru, then the >destination machine is probably not in North America. This is not a >perfect way to prevent export, of course, but it is what the regulations >say, as I read them. For a pointer to the regulations and to my access >request form and crypto site, see http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm ... An easy crack to that would be to request access from a hotmail, or similair, account. This account would show up as being on US soil while the account holder would not necessarily be so. In this way, someone with an account ending in your .ru would get through because h[is/er] e-mail request originated from inside the U.S. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 30 19:38:01 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 19:38:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701310337.TAA03177@toad.com> At 03:43 PM 1/29/97 -0500, Mark Rogaski wrote: >If I had experience with Netscape plugins and spare time, I'd >try it myself. But here's my proposed solution. > >A plugin in Netscape intercepts all requests, encrypt the URL >with a pubkey algorithm, encode the string base64, send it as GET input to >a proxy server. > >The proxy server decodes and decrypts the URL, gets the requested page, >and returns it. This beats out URL-based filtering. > >Still need to figure out the specifics of key-exchange. If we use >40-bit encryption, it's exportable, and it still works in our threat >model (ie. we don't care if the watchers figure out the URL a few hours >later). > >To beat out dropping packets with unacceptable pattern in them, we >could use an SSL-based server as the proxy. > >The plugin could even have a nice little on/off switch and a list >list of available proxies. ... The above paragraph would be a problem, unless you wanted to update the program with a great regualrity. Each time the offending government got the software and blocked all of those sites, the software would be worthless. This would be no big deal if you could guarantee some means of someone getting the software, which would certainly be illegal, again and again. Better to have the user key in the proxy that h[is/er] cousin/uncle/best friend/boss/client/guest told h[im/er] about. Here is a similar idea. Have your plug-in replace the part of Netscape that checks the URL with INTERNIC or similar. Have the system accept your address for the proxy and send the requested URL to it, the server then FTP's the contents of the page (and if server time is readily available, its sub-pages), places them in a temporary directory on itself and allows your computer to see it there thinking that it is on a totally different machine. This way the proxy owner would not have to stay on top of the latest restricted material. The main problem would be that the system would absorb twice as much time, once for the download to itself, and once to show it to you. This is not terribly different to Netscape's caching of recently visited pages in memory on the off-chance that you will return. If you changed passwords at the same time that you changed addresses, and reported them together, the government wouldn't be able to keep up. When the government did its sweep of objectionable words, it would come to this site that would have no such data. Only by having the access password, would they be able to reveal that site as a proxy. If they knew the password then they would already know that that was a proxy site because they would have been given both the password and the address at the same time. You then try to maintain several different addressess at a time, each with a different password. As the Government blocks one, change its password and its address. The software would be either two-piece, assuming a dedicated client plug-in, or one-piece. The pieces would be as follows. The proxy, this software would be as small as possible and would only be a front end. Ideally this software should fit on one 3.5" disk. The address to this machine would be the address handed out. In the one-part scenario, this would be implemented as a web-page with a CGI script for the address. The user types in the request and this bot fetches it, placing it in a special directory for the use of this script, this directory would probably be erased after the allotted space was filled, though not before, (you don't stay logged in to the remote machine when using Netscape so erasing on hang-up would mean continually reloading the data.) The proxy would then refresh your client with the requested information. In the two piece scenario, this proxy would interact with the plug-in in much the same way, forgoing the CGI script. The client, the plug-in, if present, would take over the Location field and have a set up menu to type in the proxy's URL and password. In that way the user would see h[im/er]self as accessing the web page directly. Certainly more user friendly, once the client were configured, though not quite as flexible. In this system the government could make both accessing the proxy and possession of the client illegal. It would also be a problem for persons who use a machine to which they have no control. If the setup were un changeable or reset after power-down, this system would require the user to continually re set up the client. The proxy could be as simple as an opening screen with a field for the password and the URL. The proxy should re-link all external links into its own system so that the system can be transparent after the initial page. In other words, the links should be replaced with a second HTML document with the password and search-criteria inside in much the same way that search-engines relay your request to itself, in the URL. This would be a simple script that changed all occurances of "A HREF="HTTP://This.is.the/real/site.html"" to "A HREF="internal/directory.html Query?=HTTP://This.is.the/real/site.html+password"" From root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net Thu Jan 30 19:45:44 1997 From: root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net (Ben Byer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 19:45:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES challenge status? In-Reply-To: <32F04A93.59E2@for.address.real> Message-ID: <199701310335.WAA02650@bushing.plastic.crosslink.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Ben Byer wrote: > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > > What exactly is the status of RSA's DES contest? I understand that at > > least two of the smaller contests have already been cracked, but I > > haven't seen much beyond theoretical discussion on the list on the > > topic of the DES contest. > > > > Two? The only publicized solution so far is the > RC5/32/12/5 solution from Ian Goldberg at Berkeley > (and independently from Germano Caronni at ETH Z�rich). > > Are you saying that you know that the 48 bit RC5 > contest is solved already, or are you just counting Ian's > and Germano's solutions separately? Ooops! Mea culpa. That's what I meant. - -- Ben Byer root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net I am not a bushing -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMvFohbD5/Q37XXHFAQFBIQL+IiN8gFqyjvxhvJ6C0hN4KecTbD82Vwmp nD0w79LxR0fX+E4unJf/QvEdVh8FkrMqwO39MtYB3dIXqepljOlKDjs7DveRv+Fp eGtCSl7OayCdgtKUe32ELr+px0Y8Rsqj =UZps -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From nobody at huge.cajones.com Thu Jan 30 19:52:46 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 19:52:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Shave the Whales Message-ID: <199701310352.TAA13485@mailmasher.com> What a joy to make a public mockery of Dogfucker L"amprey" Vulis K"adaver" Of The Moment! __[I]__ o-o' __oOo__(-)_oOo__ Dogfucker L"amprey" Vulis K"adaver" Of The Moment V From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Thu Jan 30 20:12:07 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 20:12:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment (fwd) Message-ID: <199701310413.WAA00226@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:46:57 -0500 (EST) > From: Declan McCullagh > > * The 1st Amendment does protect some lies. No, it protects speech. The Constitution is meant to protect citizens from a priori constraints on their speech, not the results of the content ex post facto. It is clearly not in the best interest of society to limit opinions or fiction. > If I say "Jim Choate is a > Venusian albatross," the statement is probably (?) a lie, No, for it to be a lie there must be a potentiality of its truth. A nonsense statement which happens to fit the syntactical rules of a language wouldn't qualify. A more apt situation would be, "Hey, , I saw in a public restroom blowing the President's pink torpedoe and was begging for more!". The statement should have to be transmitted to without the permission of . The legal standard should be that if you make statements purported to be true about a third party without their prior consent you should be held to a minimum standard of evidence demonstrating the actuality of your statement. A democratic society should have no tolerence for libel, slander, or other forms of lies. > but I doubt > you'll prevail in a libel suit. What damages do you have? That's the key, > I believe -- the statement has to lower you in the opinion of others. Which is exactly one aspect of the problem. Wrongs should not be based on quantity or opinion. By focusing on what others think trivializes the issue at hand, a untruth about a person has been passed off as a truth. > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of libel. > It is, they say, a rich man's game Exactly, instead of equal protection under the law we have a specieocracy. > -- if I'm libeled by the NYT, I'm > probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump can. Moreover, > if I don't have the resources to sue but the statement is libelous, it > creates a *presumption* in the minds of the readers that the article is > certainly true. (If it were not, I would have sued, right?) Another good example of why our system is broke. > * The concept you may be searching for is consensual speech, which I > believe a society should tolerate. Libelous speech isn't consensual, > though obscenity is. There is no such thing as 'obscenity' just as there is no such thing as 'community standard'. These are the results of mental masturbation to justify some power freaks alterior motives. No, what I should be permitted to say should not rest on what others may permit. If so then I should have a say in what they can say, which means I have a say in what they can say about what I can say, ... (got it yet?) What we need is a fundamental change in the legal system which focuses on first principles and results, not social status or wealth or the potential for gain. Perhaps what we need is a legal system where both the defence and prosecuting attornies are selected by lot. We already have such a system applied to the defence. If it is considered sufficient for a defence it should qualify as sufficient for prosecution. Each practicing attorney would receive a stipend allocated by the appropriate legislative body. The court and police (who should represent the people in general) would provide both parties the results of any tests and equal and simultaneous access to all evidence. If a person wants additional legal council they can buy it from their own pocket but the attorney is limited to act only as a adjunct to the appointed attorney (ie they would not be allowed to speak in court). In civil cases the plaintiff should place a bond, set at some percentage of the maximum permissible award, at the time the case is filed. This would at least cover the general costs of the court and limit nuisance cases. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 30 20:28:20 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 20:28:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: David E. Smith / Known Flamer In-Reply-To: <199701310211.SAA01422@toad.com> Message-ID: <32F19191.239B@sk.sympatico.ca> David E. Smith wrote: > My understanding was that the moderator is supposed to ONLY > filter out ads and utterly-content-free messages. That seems to be a very common misunderstanding--one which will remain without question on the censored list, since they have chosen to remain behind the ElectroMagnetic Curtain. > (Mind you, I took the smart out and subbed to cp-unedited, > so I'm in no place to judge.) You're in a far better place to judge than those who have chosen to remain spoon-fed their world-view. > Aha, a good point to be brought up: Sandy, are you autofiltering > anyone based on user name, or on certain keywords? Seems to > defeat the purpose of having a _human_ moderator. > You realize, of course, that your question is moot, since this post of yours was already thrown in the crapper/flame-list. It seems that questioning the process is a 'flame'. Toto From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 30 21:04:34 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:04:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Complying with the EAR [was: More Circumventing the ITAR] Message-ID: <199701310504.VAA04649@toad.com> At 11:14 AM 1/29/97 -0700, Michael Paul Johnson wrote: >On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Mark Rosen wrote: > >> I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically >> about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for > >You should check the exact text yourself, but the way I read the EAR, you >are not "exporting" strong cryptographic software without a license (exept >to Canada, which needs no license) if you do things "such as" >(1) have the guests to your site acknowledge that the EAR restricts >export, (2) have the guests affirm that they can legally get the software >(proper citizenship or residency & location), and (3) "check the address >of the destination computer to see if it is in the USA" or Canada. The >last one, I interpret rather loosely to mean that if the guest's email >address domain isn't one commonly used in the USA or Canada, then I deny >access. We all know that not all .com addresses are North American, but >chances are really good that if the address ends in .ru, then the >destination machine is probably not in North America. This is not a >perfect way to prevent export, of course, but it is what the regulations >say, as I read them. For a pointer to the regulations and to my access >request form and crypto site, see http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm ... An easy crack to that would be to request access from a hotmail, or similair, account. This account would show up as being on US soil while the account holder would not necessarily be so. In this way, someone with an account ending in your .ru would get through because h[is/er] e-mail request originated from inside the U.S. From vznuri at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 21:06:15 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:06:15 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701310506.VAA04697@toad.com> Sandy: >> >> 1. it is unconstitutional to put a crypto genie in a bottle >> in the first place. >> 2. it is unconstitutional to make laws against ringing crypto bells. > >We do not disagree except neither of the metaphors I gave suggest >anything about the "putting in the bag" part of the deal. In no >way does either suggest a right, power or even ability of anyone >to limit any freedom. They are mute on the subject. Their sole >meaning is that one CAN'T undo what is already done. In the >instant case, that means the wide-spread availability of strong >crypto. ability to use strong crypto is not "either or" but a matter of degree. the question is not "is strong crypto available", but, "how much harder would the NSA's peeping be if ITAR was relaxed? the real question is, do we have the right to use strong crypto, or don't we? if we don't then the government has the authority to regulate it to its heart's content, *regardless* of whether those laws are effective or not. cpunks seem to think that a govt can only have *effective* laws. but there is obviously no such constraint. I think we need to approach it from the point of view that we have the *right* to use strong crypto, and see if the supreme court agrees. hence I'm very interested in the bernstein etc. cases, which may be the ultimate breakthrough eventually.. there is no end to the blathering about genies, cats, or bells that can sway the govt, but a single supreme court decision can have a revolutionary effect. again I still think the genie/cat/bell metaphor is a disservice to the cause, but feel free to defy me. just one crackpot's opinion, YMMV From blancw at cnw.com Thu Jan 30 21:13:16 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:13:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: <01BC0EF3.011F46C0@king1-03.cnw.com> From: Phil Karn You have to admit that it is far more consistent to treat both the book and the floppy as a munition than to take the position DoS eventually took. Even if the more consistent position is a far more restrictive one that has even less chance of surviving a court challenge. ........................................................... In terms of consistency, if the government reserved the right to control printed source code (in the future), and books and floppys containing it are considered munitions, then cryptographers, who have it in their heads, would also be considered munitions. They would have to be prohibited from leaving the country and constrained not only from using the internet, but from any kind of communications medium. Ian Goldberg would not be allowed to visit Anguilla or participate in any more contests. :>) .. Blanc From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 30 21:26:52 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:26:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701310413.WAA00226@einstein> Message-ID: <199701310523.XAA13320@manifold.algebra.com> Jim Choate wrote: > > > Forwarded message: > > > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:46:57 -0500 (EST) > > From: Declan McCullagh > > > > * The 1st Amendment does protect some lies. > > No, it protects speech. The Constitution is meant to protect citizens from a > priori constraints on their speech, not the results of the content ex post > facto. > > It is clearly not in the best interest of society to limit opinions or > fiction. > > > If I say "Jim Choate is a > > Venusian albatross," the statement is probably (?) a lie, > > No, for it to be a lie there must be a potentiality of its truth. A nonsense > statement which happens to fit the syntactical rules of a language wouldn't > qualify. I can give you an example. ``Jim Choate invented an improved bubble sort method, called BSAM.'' This is undoubtedly false since you likely did not invent any sorting method. But you would not be able to get any damages (is that correct?) > The legal standard should be that if you make statements purported to be > true about a third party without their prior consent you should be held to > a minimum standard of evidence demonstrating the actuality of your statement. When you say "should", what do you mean? That the current law will hold you to a minimum standard of evidence? Or you mean that it would be nice if it were so? > A democratic society should have no tolerence for libel, slander, or other > forms of lies. Why? And who decides what is a lie? > > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of libel. > > It is, they say, a rich man's game > > Exactly, instead of equal protection under the law we have a specieocracy. ... and then 20 lines later: > In civil cases the plaintiff should place a bond, set at some percentage of > the maximum permissible award, at the time the case is filed. This would at > least cover the general costs of the court and limit nuisance cases. > You can either oppose "specieocracy" and inequality of rich and poor in libel litigation, or ask to place bonds that will make even harder for the poor to sue, BUT NOT BOTH, if you want to remain logical. - Igor. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 30 21:27:02 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:27:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701310527.VAA04959@toad.com> At 11:15 AM 1/30/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >What you're presented (included in its entirety below) is what I've come to >call an "AP story problem." I've worked through many of those myself; >their main problem is that they don't carefully describe why _each_ person >in the "play" you've described would be motivated to do what it's claim he >does, and why he DOES NOT do other things to fix the situation he's in. >Remember, I'm not merely talking about the main character, but also the ones >who are (apparently?) incidental. > >For just one example, you said: "conventional bodyguards could be >included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledgethat they will be >buried with the tyrant." > >What motivates these people? Are they hostages? If they're hostages, then >presumably that means they're motivated to seek the death of anyone who is >holding them. What about their relatives; don't they have any sympathy for >those who are taken? Why don't they donate to AP to see the lead guy dead? As I stated in the bottom, the children would be privaledged. They would merely be told that it is a great honor. It could very well be. Assuming that the tyrant did not die, these children would live in comparable luxery. They would be at risk only if the tyrant was. By keeping the children at hand, the parents would balk at taking action against the tyrant, not only their own action, but also that of others. The children would merely be there to thwart the attempts of others. The "Tiger Teams" would have to get through security on their own, takers on this offer would be very few unless the bounty were great, the defenses were weak, or the thrill level were high. An encounter with a bloodless thrill seaker might go like this "I hacked your system, here's proof, now pay up", remember, for some, it is the proof that a thing can be done that is the greatest thrill. Also, the tyrant would feel bound to keep h[is/er] word to avoid others deciding to take the challenge for the smaller sum. Remember also that 10% controls 90%, this means that each potential tyrant has on average 9% of the wealth, while the remaining 90% has about 1/90th of the remaining 10%. To match the wealth of the tyrant, these people would have to get together 90% of their numbers and commit everything. If 100 people were in the total population, and 1000 dollars in circulation, 10 people would be tyrants with about 90 dollars apiece, the remaining 90 people would each have 100/90 dollars, or 1.11 dollars each. It would take 81 of them together to match the wealth of one. With that many, they might as well attack outright because they would now include practically all of the population. If the tyrant had more than 9 of the peasants close to him, he would be at risk by conventional means. The real threat would not be the people, of limited means, using the system. But rather other tyrants using the system. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 30 21:42:21 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:42:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701310542.VAA05173@toad.com> At 03:43 PM 1/29/97 -0500, Mark Rogaski wrote: >If I had experience with Netscape plugins and spare time, I'd >try it myself. But here's my proposed solution. > >A plugin in Netscape intercepts all requests, encrypt the URL >with a pubkey algorithm, encode the string base64, send it as GET input to >a proxy server. > >The proxy server decodes and decrypts the URL, gets the requested page, >and returns it. This beats out URL-based filtering. > >Still need to figure out the specifics of key-exchange. If we use >40-bit encryption, it's exportable, and it still works in our threat >model (ie. we don't care if the watchers figure out the URL a few hours >later). > >To beat out dropping packets with unacceptable pattern in them, we >could use an SSL-based server as the proxy. > >The plugin could even have a nice little on/off switch and a list >list of available proxies. ... The above paragraph would be a problem, unless you wanted to update the program with a great regualrity. Each time the offending government got the software and blocked all of those sites, the software would be worthless. This would be no big deal if you could guarantee some means of someone getting the software, which would certainly be illegal, again and again. Better to have the user key in the proxy that h[is/er] cousin/uncle/best friend/boss/client/guest told h[im/er] about. Here is a similar idea. Have your plug-in replace the part of Netscape that checks the URL with INTERNIC or similar. Have the system accept your address for the proxy and send the requested URL to it, the server then FTP's the contents of the page (and if server time is readily available, its sub-pages), places them in a temporary directory on itself and allows your computer to see it there thinking that it is on a totally different machine. This way the proxy owner would not have to stay on top of the latest restricted material. The main problem would be that the system would absorb twice as much time, once for the download to itself, and once to show it to you. This is not terribly different to Netscape's caching of recently visited pages in memory on the off-chance that you will return. If you changed passwords at the same time that you changed addresses, and reported them together, the government wouldn't be able to keep up. When the government did its sweep of objectionable words, it would come to this site that would have no such data. Only by having the access password, would they be able to reveal that site as a proxy. If they knew the password then they would already know that that was a proxy site because they would have been given both the password and the address at the same time. You then try to maintain several different addressess at a time, each with a different password. As the Government blocks one, change its password and its address. The software would be either two-piece, assuming a dedicated client plug-in, or one-piece. The pieces would be as follows. The proxy, this software would be as small as possible and would only be a front end. Ideally this software should fit on one 3.5" disk. The address to this machine would be the address handed out. In the one-part scenario, this would be implemented as a web-page with a CGI script for the address. The user types in the request and this bot fetches it, placing it in a special directory for the use of this script, this directory would probably be erased after the allotted space was filled, though not before, (you don't stay logged in to the remote machine when using Netscape so erasing on hang-up would mean continually reloading the data.) The proxy would then refresh your client with the requested information. In the two piece scenario, this proxy would interact with the plug-in in much the same way, forgoing the CGI script. The client, the plug-in, if present, would take over the Location field and have a set up menu to type in the proxy's URL and password. In that way the user would see h[im/er]self as accessing the web page directly. Certainly more user friendly, once the client were configured, though not quite as flexible. In this system the government could make both accessing the proxy and possession of the client illegal. It would also be a problem for persons who use a machine to which they have no control. If the setup were un changeable or reset after power-down, this system would require the user to continually re set up the client. The proxy could be as simple as an opening screen with a field for the password and the URL. The proxy should re-link all external links into its own system so that the system can be transparent after the initial page. In other words, the links should be replaced with a second HTML document with the password and search-criteria inside in much the same way that search-engines relay your request to itself, in the URL. This would be a simple script that changed all occurances of "A HREF="HTTP://This.is.the/real/site.html"" to "A HREF="internal/directory.html Query?=HTTP://This.is.the/real/site.html+password"" From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 30 21:52:18 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 21:52:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701310552.VAA05346@toad.com> At 12:28 PM 1/30/97 -0600, William H. Geiger III wrote: ... >I would also want to make the ISP's liable for their users accessing this info. That way I >can intimidate them into doing all the work for me. (You can see >this approach in several areas of US law enforcemant. Arrest bartenders for >serving minors, arrest store clerks for selling cigaretts to minors, shut down of BBS for >users posting "dirty pictures", going after ISP's for pirated >software and other copyright infringments by their users.) ... I live in Oklahoma. Here at least, bartenders don't sell beer to minors, they sell it to persons who are clearly older. Older friends of the minors, and minors who finished puberty early. The bartenders only protection is to close up shop, depriving everyone of a drink. The same is true of tobacco products. About 8 months ago I had a girl who I barely knew, except that she was obviously in Junior High, recognize me, ask me if I was 18, to which I replied yes, and ask me to buy her a carton of cigerettes, to which I declined. Not for any law imeding me, but I consider suicide a right, but I will not help someone kill themselves. This girl, more than likely already hooked on the drug, had probably used this technique numerous times before without a glitch. The same would be true of blockingon-line content. If it were done right. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 30 22:24:32 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 22:24:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: <32F1AC90.799F@sk.sympatico.ca> 12251227 From foodie at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 22:26:30 1997 From: foodie at netcom.com (Jamie Lawrence) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 22:26:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701310506.VAA04697@toad.com> Message-ID: At 6:39 PM -0800 on 1/30/97, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > those laws are effective or not. cpunks seem to think that a govt > can only have *effective* laws. but there is obviously no such > constraint. No such constraint in the _making_ of laws, of course. We have laws on the books forbidding the utterance of "Oh boy", the carrying of an ice cream cone in one's pocket, and the act of driving without insurance, all functioning to varying degrees of effectiveness, 'on the books' in various states. The question Sandy seems to me to be raising is not whether a group of people can issue a decree, but rather whether the interaction of the law books, the interested parties on either side of the debate, and the mostly disinterested real world will intersect such that the laws passed can be used to effectively hamper the activities of the parties who wish to go about the business proscribed. This is not an either/or question, as you so aptly note (I hope Kirkegaard doesn't mind). Of course, methods of this nature specifically regarding the uses of privacy is what this list is all about. Not an argument; just a clarification. -j -- "This analogy is like lifting yourself by your own bootstraps." -Douglas R. Hofstadter _______________________________________________________________ Jamie Lawrence foodie at netcom.com From tien at well.com Thu Jan 30 23:04:12 1997 From: tien at well.com (Lee Tien) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:04:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: job opportunities Message-ID: I have no idea whether members of this list are interested in these kinds of jobs, but hey, can't hurt to ask. For the next 3 months (until April 30), Farallon Communications is trying to focus on filling several key engineering positions in the Netopia and LAN groups. (Netopia is a product line of ISDN devices) My wife works at Farallon in product marketing for Netopia stuff. They started out as a Macintosh networking company and have gone "Internet." Firmware Engineers: 3 for Netopia and 1 for LAN Hardware Engineers: 1 for Netopia and 1 for LAN There is some flexibility for the firmware positions to work either in Alameda or San Jose. I'm not sure about the job descriptions; I just looked at http://www.farallon.com/corp/jobs/index.html and this might accurately describe some of the positions mentioned above: Sr. Staff Engineer (WAN) -- San Jose and Alameda 4 Openings Senior member of the software development team responsible for architecture, design and implementation of embedded systems firmware on new and existing WAN products. Hands-on design position requiring a BSCS or a BSEE with advanced degree preferred. The ideal candidate will have 10+ years networking or telecommunications development experience and expert knowledge of multi-protocol routing and bridging. Expertise in networking layer technologies/protocols and data compression required. Lee Tien From azur at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 23:08:41 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:08:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Intelligence Update (fwd) Message-ID: >Update on Bugging Devices >================================================= > >0.902 - 0.928 ghz - Popular Commercial FH/DS Devices >1.710 - 1.755 ghz - DEA Audio/Video Bugs (over 1400 bugs purchased in 1995) >1.710 - 1.755 ghz - DOJ Audio/Video Bugs (.25 to .50 watts) >1.710 - 1.850 ghz - Treasury Video Surveillance Systems >2.400 - 2.484 ghz - Popular Commercial FH/DS Devices >4.635 - 4.660 ghz - Treasury Video Surveillance Systems > >Most recently purchased gvt microwave surveillance gear seems to be running >between 900mhz to 5ghz, with a few systems operating on the 7/8 ghz bands. > >Also, keep in mind that the pros love to use ultra low power devices which >use the power lines as the transmission medium/antenna (9khz to 300 mhz). >Devices typically operate below 10mw, often below 1mw. The devices >typically use Wide FM and use voice inversion encryption... VERY easy to >demodulate. > >Note: According to a recently obtained DOJ surveillance training manual: > >"The typical range for the 28 ghz devices is six miles, the typical range >of the 2.4 ghz is thirty miles, and the typical range for the 1.7ghz is 44 >miles." > >"... frequency modulated applications should operate below 3 ghz to take >advantage of the favorable frequency propagation characteristics of that >part of the spectrum." > >"...Frequency Hopping and Direct Sequence Devices spead spectrum devices >should operate above 1.5 ghz, this will prevent the emissions from being >detected by electronic countermeasures." > >The most popular surveillance reciever used covers 9khz (for CC/VLF) up to >9ghz, so be sure to cover AT LEAST those bands. > >================================================= > >All TSCM people have heard about AID devices, but few know the actual freq >they use, or what they look like. > >The devices are VERY popular with the law enforcement crowd, private >investigators and corporate security types. The equipment is VERY overpriced, >and the fairly easy to detect. > >AID bills itself as "The World's Largest Manufacturer of Electronic >Intelligence Equipment and Specialized Protective Systems" > >AID was founded in 1970, and was sold in 92/93 to Westinghouse (Westinghouse is >currently selling TONS of equipment to the DEA and State dept) > >AID - Westinghouse/Audio Intelligence Devices, Inc. Bug Freqs > >135 MHz - 150 MHz Special Order/Secondary Band >150 MHz - 174 MHz Standard/Primary Band (Most Popular) >216 MHz - 220 MHz Special Order >400 MHz - 470 MHz UHF Repeaters > > 21 MHz - 80 MHz Very Low Power WFM (.5mw - 10mw) Special Order Only > 36 MHz - 39 MHz Very Low Power WFM (.5mw - 50mw) ***Very Dangerous*** > 80 kHz - 200 kHz "Line Carrier" Microphone Systems ***Very Dangerous*** > 30 kHz - 700 kHz Spread Spectrum Current Carrier Devices > >1700MHz - 1900MHz 25-250mw Video and audio bugs (Mostly DEA/DOJ stuff) >2400MHz - 2484MHz 25-250mw Video and audio bugs > >If the signal is "scrambled" it is nothing more than simple voice inversion, >a circuit to "de-scramble" costs around $20. > >Note: AID devices are often re-tuned for outband channels... so be careful. > >The area of spectrum from 15MHz to 500MHz is the primary threat, 500MHz to 3GHz >is the secondary threat, a "line carrier" threat is from 30kHz to 750kHz. > >If the person planting the bug suspects that a TSCM inspection may be >conducted then AID suggests a frequency between 30MHz to 50MHz, >sensitivity of rcvr should be better than .18uv/-122dbm. The mode is >usually wideband FM. > >Also, keep in mind that AID devices are frequently used for illegal buggings, >so be familiar with their realistic specs, expect power outputs well under >50mw, and expect to see the AC power circuits being used as the antenna. > >Note: Mike Langley at NIA advises that AID/NIA/Westinghouse is totally >shutting down all TSCM training, at that they have cancelled the production >of all TSCM products effective 1 Jan 97. > >================================================= > >Several devices were recently found at a DOE facility on Long Island, >details are a bit sketchy, but initial information indicates that a >defecting middle-eastern FIS agent provided a list of locations within >several DOE facilties that were being targeted.TSCM inspection (not >performed by DOE) located several devices. Facility/lab working on designs >for triggering mechanisms... very interesting incident. > >================================================= > >HDS - Household Data Services > 50.000 - 750.000 kHz Carrier Current Audio System >120.000 - 400.000 kHz Carrier Current Audio System >138.000 - 174.000 MHz Wireless microphone/Body Wires (8KR Series .1 to 30 mw) >150.000 - 174.000 MHz Wireless microphone/Body Wires (ATX Series .1 to 30 mw) >174.000 - 230.000 MHz Wireless microphone/Body Wires >350.000 - 440.000 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters (360-440 popular) >470.000 - 608.000 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters >570.000 - 928.000 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters (Spread Spectrum Popular) > 1,000 - 1,500 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) > 1,425 - 1,450 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) > 1,700 - 2,700 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters 2.4-2.5 hot (10-100mw max) > 1,710 - 1,900 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters (10-100mw max) ** HOT ** > 6,425 - 7,125 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) > 8,100 - 8,700 MHz Audio/Video Transmitter, 8.2/8.5 popular (10-100mw max) >10,200 - 10,700 MHz Audio/Video Transmitter, 10.5 popular (10-100mw max) >17,700 - 19,700 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) >20,000 - 24,600 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) > >================================================= > >Sony - Wireless Microphones and Body Wires >470.000 - 489.000 MHz 2.5mw - 20mw, WFM (110kHz), Ultra low power >770.000 - 782.000 MHz 2.5mw - 10mw, Ultra low power - Chnl 64 >782.000 - 794.000 MHz 2.5mw - 10mw, Ultra low power - Chnl 66 >794.000 - 806.000 MHz 2.5mw - 10mw, Ultra low power - Chnl 68 >770.000 - 810.000 MHz 2.5mw - 20mw, WFM (110kHz), Ultra low power >902.000 - 928.000 MHz 2.5mw - 20mw, WFM (110kHz), Ultra low power >947.000 - 954.000 MHz 2.5mw - 20mw, WFM (110kHz), Ultra low power > 60.000 - 970.000 MHz 2.5mw - 10mw, WFM (300kHz) Audio Transmitter > >Note: These little low power devices have an adjustable freq deviation >which can be adjusted to as high as +/- 225khz... System also uses a >matched receiver. Entire system xmitter and cvr sell for under $2500. > >Imagine a 3mw transmitter operating at 782mhz (snuggled up to the audio of >the local TV xmitter) using a 100khz cue channel subcarrier. Life >expectancy at least 350 hours (using lithium cells). Reasonable range at >least 1500 feet indoors. > >================================================= > >Finished putting the final touches on a new page >concerning Mace and Personal Protection Sprays. > >Drop by and let me know what you think. > > http://www.tscm.com/mace > > >The ASP - Armament Systems and Procedures Web page is >now also online, the address follows: > > http://www.tscm.com/asp/ > >================================================= > >BMS manufactures a line of pro-grade products used primarly for the >Broadcast and Television markets, but their prices are cheap, very small, >low power, and a serious threat to our clients. > >Most of their voice/video/telem products (ie:BMT25-S) operates from >900mhz-4ghz, and are easily detectable at 10mw and 100mw. > >The major threat is from the X-Band, and Ku-Band devices which they sell >that operate up to 13.5ghz. > >Keep in mind the devices are as small as 1.0in x 1.0in x 3.3in, and can be >run from a 12vdc battery for days, if not weeks. > >Most of the devices utilize a variable frequency audio dual sub-carrier >between 4 to 9 mhz. > >They sell small omni directional, and highly directional antenna as well. > >================================================= > >Intel on Microwave surveillance system (made by AST in MD ??) > >Stock Devices >1.2 to 2.2 ghz >3.7 to 4.2 ghz >5.9 to 6.45 ghz > >Special Order Devices (1.4 ghz bands) >1.2 to 2.8 ghz - Justice just bought a bunch of these >2.2 to 3.8 ghz >3.2 to 4.8 ghz - State Department item >4.2 to 5.8 ghz >5.2 to 6.8 ghz > >Tech material mentions product available to 8.5/8.8 ghz > >All funtions (including freq) are software controlled, > >Direct Sequence output, 60 mhz window for spread spectrum > >Device designed to transmit FDM baseband signals from a PBX backplane using >QAM 64 or 256 modulation. > >The box I examined measured 1 * 3.5 * 3 and took power from 8 to 16 vdc (12 >pref). > >Output power fixed at 100mw > >================================================= > >Recently I did some work designing an experimental spread sprectrum >wireless microphone. > >The goal of the project was to see just how small, and how cheaply a >realistic device could be built. > >Initial goal was a device that would use the 47 CFR 15.247 for the ISM band >from 902 to 928 mhz and an enhancement (jumper change) mode to extend the >upper frequency range to 954 mhz. > >The device would have to have a range of at least 150 feet in a hotel >building and/or office building (parking lot monitoring). > >The device must be small enough to be "dropped in a pocket," concealed in >the seam of a drape, and placed into furniture. > >Device must use consumer (radio shack) batteries. > >Device must cost less $100 in materials to build > >I felt the above specs would reflect a realistic device. > >--------------- > >1) Battery used was 2ea EPX-76 cells which gave 2.5 to 3 hours of usable >audio, sub-ed a DL123A lithium which upped the time to over 4 days (and >still counting) > >2) Microphone was two surface mount Seimens hearing aid elements. > >3) Spread Spectrum controller was a surface mount WL-9010 from Wireless >Logic, the chip is a compact stand alone transmitter. > >4) Used a Mitsubishi codec chip commonly used in cellular telephone with a >noise cancelling circuit (this is why two microphones were used). > >5) Small pot was used to adjust the output power between .15mw to 65mw > >6) All components used where SMT versions, hot flow was used for assembly > >7) Entire circuit was assembled on a .30 by .25 inches square double sided >printed circuit board. > >8) PCB soldered directly to battery cap > >9) .5 inch long paper clip used as antenna > >10) Currently working on a telephone line version. > >11) Range at 50mw (legal power limit) tested usable and clear at 260 feet >(device placed in hotel room, and monitored in the parking lot) > >12) Device WAS NOT detectable with an AVCOM 65 until the antenna was within >8 inches of the device (until a hump started to slightly appear). > > >What doe this tell us? > >Spread spectrum devices can be real small, cheaply made, and low power >using off the shelf products. > >Watch that area between 800 mhz and 1 gig > >================================================= > >We are interested in purchasing old catalogs, training materials, and technical >documentation used by Audio Intelligence Devices, HDS, and other >surveillance companies. > >Specifically we are looking for: > > Old product catalogs > Sales materials picked up at trade shows (IE: NATIA) > Training Manuals from National Intelligence Academy > Textbooks from National Intelligence Academy > Product Owners Manuals > Product Service Manuals > >We are also interested in purchasing "generations" of materials, so if you >have ten years worth of old catalogs from the '70s were interested. > >Let us know what you've got, and we'll work out cash payment arrangements. > >The materials will be used for project that starts in January and will run >for at least six months. > >If you have materials from other technical intelligence schools or >surveillance we could also be interested. > >================================================= > >I recently had a chance to examine a new device made by Delft >Industries. > >It is very similar to the X-Band units I've examined, >except that the frequencies were higher and mods were much >more subtle. > >Small PCB was cemented into the rear of the unit, underneath the regular >PCB (black rubber covered 1.5 cm * 4cm * .8cm). > >Unit consited of a two microphones, compander circuits, >power supply/regulator, and modulator circuit. > >Compander circuit operated dual circuits around 120hz to 15khz. > >No external mods to case, only very small variation in power drain, >no internal battery, several large surface mount caps... > >Entire unit double sided surface mount PCB, looks like 4 layers, >2/3 digital circuitry, 1/3 analog and RF circuitry. > >The only mods to the alarm PCB was the cutting of several traces >on the back of the PCB (near the emitter circuit). > >The doppler alarm operated between 24 ghz and 24.25 ghz, intelligence >seems to be a 480k bit digital data stream using the alarm >signal as the carrier (QAM mod). > >Looks like one version of the product will also allow someone >to deactivate a specific sensor remotely upon on command. > >According to the factory, the units are being shipped into >Canada and Mexico in quanity, then transported into the >US in small quantities. > >Heavy usage in Texas, New Orleans, Florida, California, >and Pennsylvania. > >Device have already been offered for sale in several >"spy shops" in New York, and Miami. > >- Be Careful Out There > >======================================================== > >You may find it interesting to revist our web site in >the near future, during the last few months the site has > undergone incredible growth, copius additions, and changes.. > > http://www.tscm.com/ > >On January 2, 1997 we rolled out several new >product lines which increased the number of TSCM products >on our web page to over 1,000 TSCM and technical security >products. > >At the present time we have over 12,500 pages of >printed documents available for download. > >If you haven't reviewed it yet, be advised that we now >have a TDR tutorial page available online. > > http://www.tscm.com/riserbond.html > > >We've also updated the materials we have online >regarding the REI OSC-5000 > > http://www.tscm.com/reioscor.html > > > =============================================================== > >DOJ just took delivery of a large number of video transmitter modules > >Operating freqs between 8ghz and 11 ghz (PLL field programmable) > >10mw rf output (max), nominal 8.5mw > >power draw below 35ma > >baseband video trans, not SS > >all modules have audio inputs (solder tab), standard audio subcarrier, >audio section may be disabled to conserve power. > >Min. effective (flat array ant) range indicated as 2700 feet line of sight, >and 1500 rural. > >I would estimate the range to be below 500 ft with a unity gain antenna. > >A number of the units came preinstalled in fake squirel and >birds nests with a low light auto iris CCD camera (unk manuf, suspect >Kodak). I've seen similar units used by the DEA (installed under tree >bark). > >Both unity gain ant config (stub), and biconical flat pack. > >Power requirements seem to correlate to 9vdc lithium batteries. > >>From what I can see on the physical specs, looks like the transmitter, and >camera combined are 2/3 the size of a standard 9vdc battery. > >The document indicates gvt paid $874 per module (Xmit module only), >document also mentions req code for the "domestic counterterrorism" >program. > >I wonder if these are the "tree frogs" that the boys at Quantico were >trying to get bids on, back in September? > >It's only a matter of a few months before these devices start getting >"lost in the field " and start re-appearing in the private sector. > > =============================================================== > >I've heard from several engineers at TI that an unidentified gvt law >enforcement agency has them working on a super compact thermal imaging >system and video transmitter for covert surveillance. System utilizes an >electronic LCD chopper instead of the regular mechanical chopper. Device >contains integral microwave tranmitter (unk freq). From what I can gather, >these are going to be used for conducting long term thermal surveillance of >areas... I will advise as I obtain further intel. > > =============================================================== > >Just finished reading the 1997 Hewlett Packards optoelectronics designers >guide, and found several items of interest. > >Most of us are familiar with the low power 900nm I/R devices. > >But did you know that they also make CHEAP LED's for communications >that operate from 700nm to 1510nm?? > >700, 710, 875, 905, 940, 1100, and 1510nm are the most common products in >the HEMT line. > >Can be modulated (open air) from 0 to 750khz with no problem, and higher speeds >with some minor distortion. > >just a heads up > > =============================================================== > >We are taking delivery of the first 95S radio's and third generation MSS >units from Boeing... We are expecting initial shipments to customers mid to >end of Feb. > >The 95S is a stand alone wideband receiver designed for SIGINT and TSCM, >weighs in at just under 8 lbs (complete). Radio will retail for around >6,000 and 7,500 dollars (US) depending on config. > >While the unit is fully self contained, we will have a VME version avail >(we have them now). Coverage is a clean from 5khz to 8ghz (yes 8ghz), and >sensitivity is superior to anything Watkins Johnson makes. > >Reciever is being built into the new MSS-3500 briefcase system, which will >allow automated spectrum monitoring of 40ghz of spectrum in 8/9ghz >segments. > > =============================================================== > >Just finished playing with a nasty little Radio Shack (CM-421) >single channel VHF microphone. > >While the product is designed for use in the 160-220 range, it's designed >so that to be recrystalized and usable anywhere in the world. > >The product can be easily retuned from 90-300Mhz (by the book), power >output is variable via a pot from 5mw to 50mw. > >Current drain is around 40ma at 50mw, and much lower for 5mw output. > >Product is extremely stable, with adjustable deviations (to +/1 100khz) > >Integral tietack microphone > >Radio Shack will sell the xmitter only for around >50 bucks (I bought several to eval) > > =============================================================== > >Recently had access to some of the new fiber optic devices out there and >wanted to post some of the techniques by which they can be detected. > > >Subject device optics are made by Corning Glass, and consists of three >components. The "electronics" are manufactured by E-systems in Dallas, TX. > > >The entire installation kit fits into two 18 * 22 * 7 briefcases made by >SKB, the first case contains a battery powered automatic fusion >splicer/LID, equipment to test the installation, and a tool kit. The second >case contains the microphones, spools of "cable", optical modules, >controllers, and battery packs > > >1. "Front-End Microphone" is a small glass cylinder roughly 2.5mm wide x >5mm long with a small 1.5mm long pinhole tube on one end, and a 3 to 12 ft >50/125 fiber tail on the other. This part of the system is designed to be >installed "pinhole" style. Pigtail cable is routed to and fusion spliced >into a "Runner Cable". The microphone contains small barbs to keep it in >position with out the use of adhesives. A small 2.5mm needle drill bit is >used to drill the hole. > >2. The "Runner Cable" is a 50um/125um fiber optic bundle, typically 3 to 8 >fibers are combined to allow a single runner to support 6-8 devices. This >cable is flat and measures roughly 125um high, and .75 to 1mm wide. Cable >has a min. bend radius of 4cm, and is field terminated with a small >automated fusion splicer to the "Front-End Microphone". This cable can be >left loose or secured with an adhesive. Installation kit contains a small >flexible installation tube to assist in installing below carpet or behind >wood panelling. > >3. The "Repeater" consists of a disguised box roughly 15cm x 5cm x 5cm, >with an optional battery pack/power supply/trickle charger (15cm x 10cm x >5cm) or the device can be powered directly off of AC Mains. The repeater >can be easily installed and hidden in a cinder block or concrete on an >outside wall. It looks like the device is for long term installations, it >is totally sealed and the electronics have conformal coatings/potting. > >Device appears to emit a RF digital signal using 64/128/256 QAM Spread >Spectrum modulation on programmable frequencies between 1.5ghz and 8.5 ghz. >Modulator is contained into a "flat-pack" style antenna module. A 512kbps >baseband signal is supplied to the antenna (bit stream can go as high as >2mbps, the one I examined was set for 512). > >Note: The "repeater" supplies the antenna with a baseband signal, control >codes, and power. The modulator/transmitter is contained in the antenna. > >The device uses an RF guard channel that is used to deactivate all >emissions (Go Mute) upon remote command. > >The "repeater" utilizes 8 fiber outputs (it has 8 field replacable optical >modules), and one min. SMA connector for the baseband output. Suspect the >device can also be be uploaded with transmision times. It also contains >sufficent memory (32mb) to hold a good 4 hours or more of compressed audio. > >Repeater can also transmit (Spread Spectrum) over telco or power lines with >a small adapter (I was not able to secure the frequencies, but I suspect >somewhere between 200khz and 3 mhz). > > >Device Operation: > >System uses a 50/125 Raw fiber optic distribution system, the fiber is >coated, but not jacketed or buffered in any way. The fiber has a frequency >response between 1230 to 1550/1710? single mode. I suspect it is standard >single mode (1500nm) fiber strand. > >The "Repeater" contains a low power single mode solid state light source, a >duplexer/splitter (prism), and a light reciever. The light beam is >transmitted into the fiber, travels to the "Front-End" where it is is >reflected against an angled vibrating membrane. The membrane causes a >slight frequency shift in the light beam, which is reflected back to the >"Repeater" where it is "picked" off with a prism and solid state detector. >(typical fiber optic microphone). > > >Counter-Measures: > >There is NO METAL in the microphone or fiber distribution system, and they >CANNOT be detected by a Non-Lin (no non-linear junctions). Nor can they be >detected with metal detectors, and no electro-magnetic field is present on >the "Front End". > >The "Repeater" section is fairly to detect with a non lin, but since it is >supposed installed into the outside wall it tends not to be practical. The >ideal way to detect is to sweep the exterior of the building for RF >emissions. Also, the unit tends to run VERY hot (110-135 degrees), and >should be visible as a thermal anomally. > >Also, the system can be detected by looking for minute amounts of light >"leaking" from both the microphone, fusion couplings, and fiber >distribution system. > >The pinhole for the microphone can be detected with a IR visual search >around 440 to 450nm (you'll need a light source with at least 500,00 candle >power, the Blue Light Ultra works well, or an Omnichrome). > >Once a suspect pinhole is found it can be tested for IR with a conventional >Spectrum Analyser with a IR front end (the Tektronix SA-42 or SA-46 works >well). There is always a small amount or IR leakage with this system. > >Once the microphone is detected it is a fairly simple matter to trace the >line back to the controller module or "Repeater" > >Keep in mind that the system is designed to use 3 to 8 microphones. > > >I am going to get a look at an OC-12 clamp-on fiber optic tapping system in >a few weeks and will advise. > > =============================================================== > > >As always, >Please treat this information as highly confidential and >please do not redistribute, Thank You > > >Regards, > >-jma > > =============================================================== > Train, Observe, Detect, Protect, Defend, Repel > =============================================================== > James M. Atkinson > Granite Island Group - TSCM.COM > 127 Eastern Avenue #291 http://www.tscm.com/ > Gloucester, MA 01931-8008 jmatk at tscm.com > =============================================================== > The First, The Largest, The Most Popular, and the Most > Complete TSCM Counterintelligence Site on the Internet > =============================================================== > From brettc at tritro.com.au Thu Jan 30 23:16:47 1997 From: brettc at tritro.com.au (Brett Carswell) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:16:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: [noise] RE: Shave the Whales Message-ID: >I've just started clipping and saving the characters w/o the text >that accompanies them. I've got a dozen so far, so check back in >a week or so and I'll forward a set to anyone who wants. Unless, >of course, someone has a bucket of them now. > >I've got an almost complete collection dating back to 10 Dec. I always knew >thist stuff would become a collector item. > From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com Thu Jan 30 23:23:58 1997 From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl') Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:23:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Log File a security hole? Message-ID: <199701310746.CAA27896@unix.asb.com> Is there a way to disable the \WINDOWS\PGPW_32.LOG? In subtle ways it's a security hole if left to accumulate over time, since it keeps records of which keys you encrypted messages to. (Imagine somebody using an anonymous remailer but g-d forbid is unaware of this log file, and somebody discovers that messages were encrypted to such a beast...) I understand in certain group/corporate environs one would want logging; in others, one doesn't need it or should have the option (in an easily found place) to wipe it every once in a while. ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Thu Jan 30 23:30:45 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:30:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter In-Reply-To: <199701301237.MAA26312@mailhub.amaranth.com> Message-ID: <32F1BC58.4A8C@sk.sympatico.ca> William H. Geiger III wrote: > Whenever I did decide to prosecute someone I would make it a big public show > for everyone to see with very stiff penalties. Like unsubscribing Dr. Vulis. > After several of these trails the "sheep > factor" will keep 99% of the population in line (US Crypto policy is a prime example). The cypherpunks-censored list is another example. > The point I am trying to make is that for the censor his set-up does not need to be that > sophisticated as fear and intimidation will keep 99% of the > rank-and-file in line. As for the other 1%, well they already know who they are and new > laws will only help take care of that "problem". No one seems to be calling Sandy's moderation overly sophisticated. Toto From WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com Thu Jan 30 23:41:40 1997 From: WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com (Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl') Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:41:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Log File a security hole? Message-ID: <199701310741.XAA06887@toad.com> Is there a way to disable the \WINDOWS\PGPW_32.LOG? In subtle ways it's a security hole if left to accumulate over time, since it keeps records of which keys you encrypted messages to. (Imagine somebody using an anonymous remailer but g-d forbid is unaware of this log file, and somebody discovers that messages were encrypted to such a beast...) I understand in certain group/corporate environs one would want logging; in others, one doesn't need it or should have the option (in an easily found place) to wipe it every once in a while. ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From blancw at cnw.com Thu Jan 30 23:43:42 1997 From: blancw at cnw.com (blanc) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:43:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Machine readable form (was:RE: [DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #7) Message-ID: <199701310743.XAA06952@toad.com> From: Phil Karn You have to admit that it is far more consistent to treat both the book and the floppy as a munition than to take the position DoS eventually took. Even if the more consistent position is a far more restrictive one that has even less chance of surviving a court challenge. ........................................................... In terms of consistency, if the government reserved the right to control printed source code (in the future), and books and floppys containing it are considered munitions, then cryptographers, who have it in their heads, would also be considered munitions. They would have to be prohibited from leaving the country and constrained not only from using the internet, but from any kind of communications medium. Ian Goldberg would not be allowed to visit Anguilla or participate in any more contests. :>) .. Blanc From root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net Thu Jan 30 23:43:44 1997 From: root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net (Ben Byer) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:43:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: DES challenge status? Message-ID: <199701310743.XAA06953@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Ben Byer wrote: > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > > > What exactly is the status of RSA's DES contest? I understand that at > > least two of the smaller contests have already been cracked, but I > > haven't seen much beyond theoretical discussion on the list on the > > topic of the DES contest. > > > > Two? The only publicized solution so far is the > RC5/32/12/5 solution from Ian Goldberg at Berkeley > (and independently from Germano Caronni at ETH Z|rich). > > Are you saying that you know that the 48 bit RC5 > contest is solved already, or are you just counting Ian's > and Germano's solutions separately? Ooops! Mea culpa. That's what I meant. - -- Ben Byer root at bushing.plastic.crosslink.net I am not a bushing -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMvFohbD5/Q37XXHFAQFBIQL+IiN8gFqyjvxhvJ6C0hN4KecTbD82Vwmp nD0w79LxR0fX+E4unJf/QvEdVh8FkrMqwO39MtYB3dIXqepljOlKDjs7DveRv+Fp eGtCSl7OayCdgtKUe32ELr+px0Y8Rsqj =UZps -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From foodie at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 23:43:58 1997 From: foodie at netcom.com (Jamie Lawrence) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:43:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701310743.XAA06964@toad.com> At 6:39 PM -0800 on 1/30/97, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > those laws are effective or not. cpunks seem to think that a govt > can only have *effective* laws. but there is obviously no such > constraint. No such constraint in the _making_ of laws, of course. We have laws on the books forbidding the utterance of "Oh boy", the carrying of an ice cream cone in one's pocket, and the act of driving without insurance, all functioning to varying degrees of effectiveness, 'on the books' in various states. The question Sandy seems to me to be raising is not whether a group of people can issue a decree, but rather whether the interaction of the law books, the interested parties on either side of the debate, and the mostly disinterested real world will intersect such that the laws passed can be used to effectively hamper the activities of the parties who wish to go about the business proscribed. This is not an either/or question, as you so aptly note (I hope Kirkegaard doesn't mind). Of course, methods of this nature specifically regarding the uses of privacy is what this list is all about. Not an argument; just a clarification. -j -- "This analogy is like lifting yourself by your own bootstraps." -Douglas R. Hofstadter _______________________________________________________________ Jamie Lawrence foodie at netcom.com From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 30 23:44:03 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:44:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Workaround for filtering/cybersitter Message-ID: <199701310744.XAA06972@toad.com> At 12:28 PM 1/30/97 -0600, William H. Geiger III wrote: ... >I would also want to make the ISP's liable for their users accessing this info. That way I >can intimidate them into doing all the work for me. (You can see >this approach in several areas of US law enforcemant. Arrest bartenders for >serving minors, arrest store clerks for selling cigaretts to minors, shut down of BBS for >users posting "dirty pictures", going after ISP's for pirated >software and other copyright infringments by their users.) ... I live in Oklahoma. Here at least, bartenders don't sell beer to minors, they sell it to persons who are clearly older. Older friends of the minors, and minors who finished puberty early. The bartenders only protection is to close up shop, depriving everyone of a drink. The same is true of tobacco products. About 8 months ago I had a girl who I barely knew, except that she was obviously in Junior High, recognize me, ask me if I was 18, to which I replied yes, and ask me to buy her a carton of cigerettes, to which I declined. Not for any law imeding me, but I consider suicide a right, but I will not help someone kill themselves. This girl, more than likely already hooked on the drug, had probably used this technique numerous times before without a glitch. The same would be true of blockingon-line content. If it were done right. From tien at well.com Thu Jan 30 23:44:20 1997 From: tien at well.com (Lee Tien) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:44:20 -0800 (PST) Subject: job opportunities Message-ID: <199701310744.XAA06980@toad.com> I have no idea whether members of this list are interested in these kinds of jobs, but hey, can't hurt to ask. For the next 3 months (until April 30), Farallon Communications is trying to focus on filling several key engineering positions in the Netopia and LAN groups. (Netopia is a product line of ISDN devices) My wife works at Farallon in product marketing for Netopia stuff. They started out as a Macintosh networking company and have gone "Internet." Firmware Engineers: 3 for Netopia and 1 for LAN Hardware Engineers: 1 for Netopia and 1 for LAN There is some flexibility for the firmware positions to work either in Alameda or San Jose. I'm not sure about the job descriptions; I just looked at http://www.farallon.com/corp/jobs/index.html and this might accurately describe some of the positions mentioned above: Sr. Staff Engineer (WAN) -- San Jose and Alameda 4 Openings Senior member of the software development team responsible for architecture, design and implementation of embedded systems firmware on new and existing WAN products. Hands-on design position requiring a BSCS or a BSEE with advanced degree preferred. The ideal candidate will have 10+ years networking or telecommunications development experience and expert knowledge of multi-protocol routing and bridging. Expertise in networking layer technologies/protocols and data compression required. Lee Tien From ichudov at algebra.com Thu Jan 30 23:44:40 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (ichudov at algebra.com) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:44:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment (fwd) Message-ID: <199701310744.XAA06988@toad.com> Jim Choate wrote: > > > Forwarded message: > > > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:46:57 -0500 (EST) > > From: Declan McCullagh > > > > * The 1st Amendment does protect some lies. > > No, it protects speech. The Constitution is meant to protect citizens from a > priori constraints on their speech, not the results of the content ex post > facto. > > It is clearly not in the best interest of society to limit opinions or > fiction. > > > If I say "Jim Choate is a > > Venusian albatross," the statement is probably (?) a lie, > > No, for it to be a lie there must be a potentiality of its truth. A nonsense > statement which happens to fit the syntactical rules of a language wouldn't > qualify. I can give you an example. ``Jim Choate invented an improved bubble sort method, called BSAM.'' This is undoubtedly false since you likely did not invent any sorting method. But you would not be able to get any damages (is that correct?) > The legal standard should be that if you make statements purported to be > true about a third party without their prior consent you should be held to > a minimum standard of evidence demonstrating the actuality of your statement. When you say "should", what do you mean? That the current law will hold you to a minimum standard of evidence? Or you mean that it would be nice if it were so? > A democratic society should have no tolerence for libel, slander, or other > forms of lies. Why? And who decides what is a lie? > > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of libel. > > It is, they say, a rich man's game > > Exactly, instead of equal protection under the law we have a specieocracy. ... and then 20 lines later: > In civil cases the plaintiff should place a bond, set at some percentage of > the maximum permissible award, at the time the case is filed. This would at > least cover the general costs of the court and limit nuisance cases. > You can either oppose "specieocracy" and inequality of rich and poor in libel litigation, or ask to place bonds that will make even harder for the poor to sue, BUT NOT BOTH, if you want to remain logical. - Igor. From roach_s at alph.swosu.edu Thu Jan 30 23:44:54 1997 From: roach_s at alph.swosu.edu (Sean Roach) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:44:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701310744.XAA06999@toad.com> At 11:15 AM 1/30/97 -0800, jim bell wrote: >What you're presented (included in its entirety below) is what I've come to >call an "AP story problem." I've worked through many of those myself; >their main problem is that they don't carefully describe why _each_ person >in the "play" you've described would be motivated to do what it's claim he >does, and why he DOES NOT do other things to fix the situation he's in. >Remember, I'm not merely talking about the main character, but also the ones >who are (apparently?) incidental. > >For just one example, you said: "conventional bodyguards could be >included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledgethat they will be >buried with the tyrant." > >What motivates these people? Are they hostages? If they're hostages, then >presumably that means they're motivated to seek the death of anyone who is >holding them. What about their relatives; don't they have any sympathy for >those who are taken? Why don't they donate to AP to see the lead guy dead? As I stated in the bottom, the children would be privaledged. They would merely be told that it is a great honor. It could very well be. Assuming that the tyrant did not die, these children would live in comparable luxery. They would be at risk only if the tyrant was. By keeping the children at hand, the parents would balk at taking action against the tyrant, not only their own action, but also that of others. The children would merely be there to thwart the attempts of others. The "Tiger Teams" would have to get through security on their own, takers on this offer would be very few unless the bounty were great, the defenses were weak, or the thrill level were high. An encounter with a bloodless thrill seaker might go like this "I hacked your system, here's proof, now pay up", remember, for some, it is the proof that a thing can be done that is the greatest thrill. Also, the tyrant would feel bound to keep h[is/er] word to avoid others deciding to take the challenge for the smaller sum. Remember also that 10% controls 90%, this means that each potential tyrant has on average 9% of the wealth, while the remaining 90% has about 1/90th of the remaining 10%. To match the wealth of the tyrant, these people would have to get together 90% of their numbers and commit everything. If 100 people were in the total population, and 1000 dollars in circulation, 10 people would be tyrants with about 90 dollars apiece, the remaining 90 people would each have 100/90 dollars, or 1.11 dollars each. It would take 81 of them together to match the wealth of one. With that many, they might as well attack outright because they would now include practically all of the population. If the tyrant had more than 9 of the peasants close to him, he would be at risk by conventional means. The real threat would not be the people, of limited means, using the system. But rather other tyrants using the system. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Thu Jan 30 23:45:00 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:45:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment (fwd) Message-ID: <199701310745.XAA07005@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 10:46:57 -0500 (EST) > From: Declan McCullagh > > * The 1st Amendment does protect some lies. No, it protects speech. The Constitution is meant to protect citizens from a priori constraints on their speech, not the results of the content ex post facto. It is clearly not in the best interest of society to limit opinions or fiction. > If I say "Jim Choate is a > Venusian albatross," the statement is probably (?) a lie, No, for it to be a lie there must be a potentiality of its truth. A nonsense statement which happens to fit the syntactical rules of a language wouldn't qualify. A more apt situation would be, "Hey, , I saw in a public restroom blowing the President's pink torpedoe and was begging for more!". The statement should have to be transmitted to without the permission of . The legal standard should be that if you make statements purported to be true about a third party without their prior consent you should be held to a minimum standard of evidence demonstrating the actuality of your statement. A democratic society should have no tolerence for libel, slander, or other forms of lies. > but I doubt > you'll prevail in a libel suit. What damages do you have? That's the key, > I believe -- the statement has to lower you in the opinion of others. Which is exactly one aspect of the problem. Wrongs should not be based on quantity or opinion. By focusing on what others think trivializes the issue at hand, a untruth about a person has been passed off as a truth. > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of libel. > It is, they say, a rich man's game Exactly, instead of equal protection under the law we have a specieocracy. > -- if I'm libeled by the NYT, I'm > probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump can. Moreover, > if I don't have the resources to sue but the statement is libelous, it > creates a *presumption* in the minds of the readers that the article is > certainly true. (If it were not, I would have sued, right?) Another good example of why our system is broke. > * The concept you may be searching for is consensual speech, which I > believe a society should tolerate. Libelous speech isn't consensual, > though obscenity is. There is no such thing as 'obscenity' just as there is no such thing as 'community standard'. These are the results of mental masturbation to justify some power freaks alterior motives. No, what I should be permitted to say should not rest on what others may permit. If so then I should have a say in what they can say, which means I have a say in what they can say about what I can say, ... (got it yet?) What we need is a fundamental change in the legal system which focuses on first principles and results, not social status or wealth or the potential for gain. Perhaps what we need is a legal system where both the defence and prosecuting attornies are selected by lot. We already have such a system applied to the defence. If it is considered sufficient for a defence it should qualify as sufficient for prosecution. Each practicing attorney would receive a stipend allocated by the appropriate legislative body. The court and police (who should represent the people in general) would provide both parties the results of any tests and equal and simultaneous access to all evidence. If a person wants additional legal council they can buy it from their own pocket but the attorney is limited to act only as a adjunct to the appointed attorney (ie they would not be allowed to speak in court). In civil cases the plaintiff should place a bond, set at some percentage of the maximum permissible award, at the time the case is filed. This would at least cover the general costs of the court and limit nuisance cases. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From azur at netcom.com Thu Jan 30 23:45:42 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:45:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Intelligence Update (fwd) Message-ID: <199701310745.XAA07140@toad.com> >Update on Bugging Devices >================================================= > >0.902 - 0.928 ghz - Popular Commercial FH/DS Devices >1.710 - 1.755 ghz - DEA Audio/Video Bugs (over 1400 bugs purchased in 1995) >1.710 - 1.755 ghz - DOJ Audio/Video Bugs (.25 to .50 watts) >1.710 - 1.850 ghz - Treasury Video Surveillance Systems >2.400 - 2.484 ghz - Popular Commercial FH/DS Devices >4.635 - 4.660 ghz - Treasury Video Surveillance Systems > >Most recently purchased gvt microwave surveillance gear seems to be running >between 900mhz to 5ghz, with a few systems operating on the 7/8 ghz bands. > >Also, keep in mind that the pros love to use ultra low power devices which >use the power lines as the transmission medium/antenna (9khz to 300 mhz). >Devices typically operate below 10mw, often below 1mw. The devices >typically use Wide FM and use voice inversion encryption... VERY easy to >demodulate. > >Note: According to a recently obtained DOJ surveillance training manual: > >"The typical range for the 28 ghz devices is six miles, the typical range >of the 2.4 ghz is thirty miles, and the typical range for the 1.7ghz is 44 >miles." > >"... frequency modulated applications should operate below 3 ghz to take >advantage of the favorable frequency propagation characteristics of that >part of the spectrum." > >"...Frequency Hopping and Direct Sequence Devices spead spectrum devices >should operate above 1.5 ghz, this will prevent the emissions from being >detected by electronic countermeasures." > >The most popular surveillance reciever used covers 9khz (for CC/VLF) up to >9ghz, so be sure to cover AT LEAST those bands. > >================================================= > >All TSCM people have heard about AID devices, but few know the actual freq >they use, or what they look like. > >The devices are VERY popular with the law enforcement crowd, private >investigators and corporate security types. The equipment is VERY overpriced, >and the fairly easy to detect. > >AID bills itself as "The World's Largest Manufacturer of Electronic >Intelligence Equipment and Specialized Protective Systems" > >AID was founded in 1970, and was sold in 92/93 to Westinghouse (Westinghouse is >currently selling TONS of equipment to the DEA and State dept) > >AID - Westinghouse/Audio Intelligence Devices, Inc. Bug Freqs > >135 MHz - 150 MHz Special Order/Secondary Band >150 MHz - 174 MHz Standard/Primary Band (Most Popular) >216 MHz - 220 MHz Special Order >400 MHz - 470 MHz UHF Repeaters > > 21 MHz - 80 MHz Very Low Power WFM (.5mw - 10mw) Special Order Only > 36 MHz - 39 MHz Very Low Power WFM (.5mw - 50mw) ***Very Dangerous*** > 80 kHz - 200 kHz "Line Carrier" Microphone Systems ***Very Dangerous*** > 30 kHz - 700 kHz Spread Spectrum Current Carrier Devices > >1700MHz - 1900MHz 25-250mw Video and audio bugs (Mostly DEA/DOJ stuff) >2400MHz - 2484MHz 25-250mw Video and audio bugs > >If the signal is "scrambled" it is nothing more than simple voice inversion, >a circuit to "de-scramble" costs around $20. > >Note: AID devices are often re-tuned for outband channels... so be careful. > >The area of spectrum from 15MHz to 500MHz is the primary threat, 500MHz to 3GHz >is the secondary threat, a "line carrier" threat is from 30kHz to 750kHz. > >If the person planting the bug suspects that a TSCM inspection may be >conducted then AID suggests a frequency between 30MHz to 50MHz, >sensitivity of rcvr should be better than .18uv/-122dbm. The mode is >usually wideband FM. > >Also, keep in mind that AID devices are frequently used for illegal buggings, >so be familiar with their realistic specs, expect power outputs well under >50mw, and expect to see the AC power circuits being used as the antenna. > >Note: Mike Langley at NIA advises that AID/NIA/Westinghouse is totally >shutting down all TSCM training, at that they have cancelled the production >of all TSCM products effective 1 Jan 97. > >================================================= > >Several devices were recently found at a DOE facility on Long Island, >details are a bit sketchy, but initial information indicates that a >defecting middle-eastern FIS agent provided a list of locations within >several DOE facilties that were being targeted.TSCM inspection (not >performed by DOE) located several devices. Facility/lab working on designs >for triggering mechanisms... very interesting incident. > >================================================= > >HDS - Household Data Services > 50.000 - 750.000 kHz Carrier Current Audio System >120.000 - 400.000 kHz Carrier Current Audio System >138.000 - 174.000 MHz Wireless microphone/Body Wires (8KR Series .1 to 30 mw) >150.000 - 174.000 MHz Wireless microphone/Body Wires (ATX Series .1 to 30 mw) >174.000 - 230.000 MHz Wireless microphone/Body Wires >350.000 - 440.000 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters (360-440 popular) >470.000 - 608.000 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters >570.000 - 928.000 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters (Spread Spectrum Popular) > 1,000 - 1,500 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) > 1,425 - 1,450 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) > 1,700 - 2,700 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters 2.4-2.5 hot (10-100mw max) > 1,710 - 1,900 MHz Audio/Video Transmitters (10-100mw max) ** HOT ** > 6,425 - 7,125 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) > 8,100 - 8,700 MHz Audio/Video Transmitter, 8.2/8.5 popular (10-100mw max) >10,200 - 10,700 MHz Audio/Video Transmitter, 10.5 popular (10-100mw max) >17,700 - 19,700 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) >20,000 - 24,600 MHz Low Power Audio/Video Transmitter (10-100mw max) > >================================================= > >Sony - Wireless Microphones and Body Wires >470.000 - 489.000 MHz 2.5mw - 20mw, WFM (110kHz), Ultra low power >770.000 - 782.000 MHz 2.5mw - 10mw, Ultra low power - Chnl 64 >782.000 - 794.000 MHz 2.5mw - 10mw, Ultra low power - Chnl 66 >794.000 - 806.000 MHz 2.5mw - 10mw, Ultra low power - Chnl 68 >770.000 - 810.000 MHz 2.5mw - 20mw, WFM (110kHz), Ultra low power >902.000 - 928.000 MHz 2.5mw - 20mw, WFM (110kHz), Ultra low power >947.000 - 954.000 MHz 2.5mw - 20mw, WFM (110kHz), Ultra low power > 60.000 - 970.000 MHz 2.5mw - 10mw, WFM (300kHz) Audio Transmitter > >Note: These little low power devices have an adjustable freq deviation >which can be adjusted to as high as +/- 225khz... System also uses a >matched receiver. Entire system xmitter and cvr sell for under $2500. > >Imagine a 3mw transmitter operating at 782mhz (snuggled up to the audio of >the local TV xmitter) using a 100khz cue channel subcarrier. Life >expectancy at least 350 hours (using lithium cells). Reasonable range at >least 1500 feet indoors. > >================================================= > >Finished putting the final touches on a new page >concerning Mace and Personal Protection Sprays. > >Drop by and let me know what you think. > > http://www.tscm.com/mace > > >The ASP - Armament Systems and Procedures Web page is >now also online, the address follows: > > http://www.tscm.com/asp/ > >================================================= > >BMS manufactures a line of pro-grade products used primarly for the >Broadcast and Television markets, but their prices are cheap, very small, >low power, and a serious threat to our clients. > >Most of their voice/video/telem products (ie:BMT25-S) operates from >900mhz-4ghz, and are easily detectable at 10mw and 100mw. > >The major threat is from the X-Band, and Ku-Band devices which they sell >that operate up to 13.5ghz. > >Keep in mind the devices are as small as 1.0in x 1.0in x 3.3in, and can be >run from a 12vdc battery for days, if not weeks. > >Most of the devices utilize a variable frequency audio dual sub-carrier >between 4 to 9 mhz. > >They sell small omni directional, and highly directional antenna as well. > >================================================= > >Intel on Microwave surveillance system (made by AST in MD ??) > >Stock Devices >1.2 to 2.2 ghz >3.7 to 4.2 ghz >5.9 to 6.45 ghz > >Special Order Devices (1.4 ghz bands) >1.2 to 2.8 ghz - Justice just bought a bunch of these >2.2 to 3.8 ghz >3.2 to 4.8 ghz - State Department item >4.2 to 5.8 ghz >5.2 to 6.8 ghz > >Tech material mentions product available to 8.5/8.8 ghz > >All funtions (including freq) are software controlled, > >Direct Sequence output, 60 mhz window for spread spectrum > >Device designed to transmit FDM baseband signals from a PBX backplane using >QAM 64 or 256 modulation. > >The box I examined measured 1 * 3.5 * 3 and took power from 8 to 16 vdc (12 >pref). > >Output power fixed at 100mw > >================================================= > >Recently I did some work designing an experimental spread sprectrum >wireless microphone. > >The goal of the project was to see just how small, and how cheaply a >realistic device could be built. > >Initial goal was a device that would use the 47 CFR 15.247 for the ISM band >from 902 to 928 mhz and an enhancement (jumper change) mode to extend the >upper frequency range to 954 mhz. > >The device would have to have a range of at least 150 feet in a hotel >building and/or office building (parking lot monitoring). > >The device must be small enough to be "dropped in a pocket," concealed in >the seam of a drape, and placed into furniture. > >Device must use consumer (radio shack) batteries. > >Device must cost less $100 in materials to build > >I felt the above specs would reflect a realistic device. > >--------------- > >1) Battery used was 2ea EPX-76 cells which gave 2.5 to 3 hours of usable >audio, sub-ed a DL123A lithium which upped the time to over 4 days (and >still counting) > >2) Microphone was two surface mount Seimens hearing aid elements. > >3) Spread Spectrum controller was a surface mount WL-9010 from Wireless >Logic, the chip is a compact stand alone transmitter. > >4) Used a Mitsubishi codec chip commonly used in cellular telephone with a >noise cancelling circuit (this is why two microphones were used). > >5) Small pot was used to adjust the output power between .15mw to 65mw > >6) All components used where SMT versions, hot flow was used for assembly > >7) Entire circuit was assembled on a .30 by .25 inches square double sided >printed circuit board. > >8) PCB soldered directly to battery cap > >9) .5 inch long paper clip used as antenna > >10) Currently working on a telephone line version. > >11) Range at 50mw (legal power limit) tested usable and clear at 260 feet >(device placed in hotel room, and monitored in the parking lot) > >12) Device WAS NOT detectable with an AVCOM 65 until the antenna was within >8 inches of the device (until a hump started to slightly appear). > > >What doe this tell us? > >Spread spectrum devices can be real small, cheaply made, and low power >using off the shelf products. > >Watch that area between 800 mhz and 1 gig > >================================================= > >We are interested in purchasing old catalogs, training materials, and technical >documentation used by Audio Intelligence Devices, HDS, and other >surveillance companies. > >Specifically we are looking for: > > Old product catalogs > Sales materials picked up at trade shows (IE: NATIA) > Training Manuals from National Intelligence Academy > Textbooks from National Intelligence Academy > Product Owners Manuals > Product Service Manuals > >We are also interested in purchasing "generations" of materials, so if you >have ten years worth of old catalogs from the '70s were interested. > >Let us know what you've got, and we'll work out cash payment arrangements. > >The materials will be used for project that starts in January and will run >for at least six months. > >If you have materials from other technical intelligence schools or >surveillance we could also be interested. > >================================================= > >I recently had a chance to examine a new device made by Delft >Industries. > >It is very similar to the X-Band units I've examined, >except that the frequencies were higher and mods were much >more subtle. > >Small PCB was cemented into the rear of the unit, underneath the regular >PCB (black rubber covered 1.5 cm * 4cm * .8cm). > >Unit consited of a two microphones, compander circuits, >power supply/regulator, and modulator circuit. > >Compander circuit operated dual circuits around 120hz to 15khz. > >No external mods to case, only very small variation in power drain, >no internal battery, several large surface mount caps... > >Entire unit double sided surface mount PCB, looks like 4 layers, >2/3 digital circuitry, 1/3 analog and RF circuitry. > >The only mods to the alarm PCB was the cutting of several traces >on the back of the PCB (near the emitter circuit). > >The doppler alarm operated between 24 ghz and 24.25 ghz, intelligence >seems to be a 480k bit digital data stream using the alarm >signal as the carrier (QAM mod). > >Looks like one version of the product will also allow someone >to deactivate a specific sensor remotely upon on command. > >According to the factory, the units are being shipped into >Canada and Mexico in quanity, then transported into the >US in small quantities. > >Heavy usage in Texas, New Orleans, Florida, California, >and Pennsylvania. > >Device have already been offered for sale in several >"spy shops" in New York, and Miami. > >- Be Careful Out There > >======================================================== > >You may find it interesting to revist our web site in >the near future, during the last few months the site has > undergone incredible growth, copius additions, and changes.. > > http://www.tscm.com/ > >On January 2, 1997 we rolled out several new >product lines which increased the number of TSCM products >on our web page to over 1,000 TSCM and technical security >products. > >At the present time we have over 12,500 pages of >printed documents available for download. > >If you haven't reviewed it yet, be advised that we now >have a TDR tutorial page available online. > > http://www.tscm.com/riserbond.html > > >We've also updated the materials we have online >regarding the REI OSC-5000 > > http://www.tscm.com/reioscor.html > > > =============================================================== > >DOJ just took delivery of a large number of video transmitter modules > >Operating freqs between 8ghz and 11 ghz (PLL field programmable) > >10mw rf output (max), nominal 8.5mw > >power draw below 35ma > >baseband video trans, not SS > >all modules have audio inputs (solder tab), standard audio subcarrier, >audio section may be disabled to conserve power. > >Min. effective (flat array ant) range indicated as 2700 feet line of sight, >and 1500 rural. > >I would estimate the range to be below 500 ft with a unity gain antenna. > >A number of the units came preinstalled in fake squirel and >birds nests with a low light auto iris CCD camera (unk manuf, suspect >Kodak). I've seen similar units used by the DEA (installed under tree >bark). > >Both unity gain ant config (stub), and biconical flat pack. > >Power requirements seem to correlate to 9vdc lithium batteries. > >>From what I can see on the physical specs, looks like the transmitter, and >camera combined are 2/3 the size of a standard 9vdc battery. > >The document indicates gvt paid $874 per module (Xmit module only), >document also mentions req code for the "domestic counterterrorism" >program. > >I wonder if these are the "tree frogs" that the boys at Quantico were >trying to get bids on, back in September? > >It's only a matter of a few months before these devices start getting >"lost in the field " and start re-appearing in the private sector. > > =============================================================== > >I've heard from several engineers at TI that an unidentified gvt law >enforcement agency has them working on a super compact thermal imaging >system and video transmitter for covert surveillance. System utilizes an >electronic LCD chopper instead of the regular mechanical chopper. Device >contains integral microwave tranmitter (unk freq). From what I can gather, >these are going to be used for conducting long term thermal surveillance of >areas... I will advise as I obtain further intel. > > =============================================================== > >Just finished reading the 1997 Hewlett Packards optoelectronics designers >guide, and found several items of interest. > >Most of us are familiar with the low power 900nm I/R devices. > >But did you know that they also make CHEAP LED's for communications >that operate from 700nm to 1510nm?? > >700, 710, 875, 905, 940, 1100, and 1510nm are the most common products in >the HEMT line. > >Can be modulated (open air) from 0 to 750khz with no problem, and higher speeds >with some minor distortion. > >just a heads up > > =============================================================== > >We are taking delivery of the first 95S radio's and third generation MSS >units from Boeing... We are expecting initial shipments to customers mid to >end of Feb. > >The 95S is a stand alone wideband receiver designed for SIGINT and TSCM, >weighs in at just under 8 lbs (complete). Radio will retail for around >6,000 and 7,500 dollars (US) depending on config. > >While the unit is fully self contained, we will have a VME version avail >(we have them now). Coverage is a clean from 5khz to 8ghz (yes 8ghz), and >sensitivity is superior to anything Watkins Johnson makes. > >Reciever is being built into the new MSS-3500 briefcase system, which will >allow automated spectrum monitoring of 40ghz of spectrum in 8/9ghz >segments. > > =============================================================== > >Just finished playing with a nasty little Radio Shack (CM-421) >single channel VHF microphone. > >While the product is designed for use in the 160-220 range, it's designed >so that to be recrystalized and usable anywhere in the world. > >The product can be easily retuned from 90-300Mhz (by the book), power >output is variable via a pot from 5mw to 50mw. > >Current drain is around 40ma at 50mw, and much lower for 5mw output. > >Product is extremely stable, with adjustable deviations (to +/1 100khz) > >Integral tietack microphone > >Radio Shack will sell the xmitter only for around >50 bucks (I bought several to eval) > > =============================================================== > >Recently had access to some of the new fiber optic devices out there and >wanted to post some of the techniques by which they can be detected. > > >Subject device optics are made by Corning Glass, and consists of three >components. The "electronics" are manufactured by E-systems in Dallas, TX. > > >The entire installation kit fits into two 18 * 22 * 7 briefcases made by >SKB, the first case contains a battery powered automatic fusion >splicer/LID, equipment to test the installation, and a tool kit. The second >case contains the microphones, spools of "cable", optical modules, >controllers, and battery packs > > >1. "Front-End Microphone" is a small glass cylinder roughly 2.5mm wide x >5mm long with a small 1.5mm long pinhole tube on one end, and a 3 to 12 ft >50/125 fiber tail on the other. This part of the system is designed to be >installed "pinhole" style. Pigtail cable is routed to and fusion spliced >into a "Runner Cable". The microphone contains small barbs to keep it in >position with out the use of adhesives. A small 2.5mm needle drill bit is >used to drill the hole. > >2. The "Runner Cable" is a 50um/125um fiber optic bundle, typically 3 to 8 >fibers are combined to allow a single runner to support 6-8 devices. This >cable is flat and measures roughly 125um high, and .75 to 1mm wide. Cable >has a min. bend radius of 4cm, and is field terminated with a small >automated fusion splicer to the "Front-End Microphone". This cable can be >left loose or secured with an adhesive. Installation kit contains a small >flexible installation tube to assist in installing below carpet or behind >wood panelling. > >3. The "Repeater" consists of a disguised box roughly 15cm x 5cm x 5cm, >with an optional battery pack/power supply/trickle charger (15cm x 10cm x >5cm) or the device can be powered directly off of AC Mains. The repeater >can be easily installed and hidden in a cinder block or concrete on an >outside wall. It looks like the device is for long term installations, it >is totally sealed and the electronics have conformal coatings/potting. > >Device appears to emit a RF digital signal using 64/128/256 QAM Spread >Spectrum modulation on programmable frequencies between 1.5ghz and 8.5 ghz. >Modulator is contained into a "flat-pack" style antenna module. A 512kbps >baseband signal is supplied to the antenna (bit stream can go as high as >2mbps, the one I examined was set for 512). > >Note: The "repeater" supplies the antenna with a baseband signal, control >codes, and power. The modulator/transmitter is contained in the antenna. > >The device uses an RF guard channel that is used to deactivate all >emissions (Go Mute) upon remote command. > >The "repeater" utilizes 8 fiber outputs (it has 8 field replacable optical >modules), and one min. SMA connector for the baseband output. Suspect the >device can also be be uploaded with transmision times. It also contains >sufficent memory (32mb) to hold a good 4 hours or more of compressed audio. > >Repeater can also transmit (Spread Spectrum) over telco or power lines with >a small adapter (I was not able to secure the frequencies, but I suspect >somewhere between 200khz and 3 mhz). > > >Device Operation: > >System uses a 50/125 Raw fiber optic distribution system, the fiber is >coated, but not jacketed or buffered in any way. The fiber has a frequency >response between 1230 to 1550/1710? single mode. I suspect it is standard >single mode (1500nm) fiber strand. > >The "Repeater" contains a low power single mode solid state light source, a >duplexer/splitter (prism), and a light reciever. The light beam is >transmitted into the fiber, travels to the "Front-End" where it is is >reflected against an angled vibrating membrane. The membrane causes a >slight frequency shift in the light beam, which is reflected back to the >"Repeater" where it is "picked" off with a prism and solid state detector. >(typical fiber optic microphone). > > >Counter-Measures: > >There is NO METAL in the microphone or fiber distribution system, and they >CANNOT be detected by a Non-Lin (no non-linear junctions). Nor can they be >detected with metal detectors, and no electro-magnetic field is present on >the "Front End". > >The "Repeater" section is fairly to detect with a non lin, but since it is >supposed installed into the outside wall it tends not to be practical. The >ideal way to detect is to sweep the exterior of the building for RF >emissions. Also, the unit tends to run VERY hot (110-135 degrees), and >should be visible as a thermal anomally. > >Also, the system can be detected by looking for minute amounts of light >"leaking" from both the microphone, fusion couplings, and fiber >distribution system. > >The pinhole for the microphone can be detected with a IR visual search >around 440 to 450nm (you'll need a light source with at least 500,00 candle >power, the Blue Light Ultra works well, or an Omnichrome). > >Once a suspect pinhole is found it can be tested for IR with a conventional >Spectrum Analyser with a IR front end (the Tektronix SA-42 or SA-46 works >well). There is always a small amount or IR leakage with this system. > >Once the microphone is detected it is a fairly simple matter to trace the >line back to the controller module or "Repeater" > >Keep in mind that the system is designed to use 3 to 8 microphones. > > >I am going to get a look at an OC-12 clamp-on fiber optic tapping system in >a few weeks and will advise. > > =============================================================== > > >As always, >Please treat this information as highly confidential and >please do not redistribute, Thank You > > >Regards, > >-jma > > =============================================================== > Train, Observe, Detect, Protect, Defend, Repel > =============================================================== > James M. Atkinson > Granite Island Group - TSCM.COM > 127 Eastern Avenue #291 http://www.tscm.com/ > Gloucester, MA 01931-8008 jmatk at tscm.com > =============================================================== > The First, The Largest, The Most Popular, and the Most > Complete TSCM Counterintelligence Site on the Internet > =============================================================== > From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Thu Jan 30 23:59:49 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:59:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail 4.5 Released! Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970130233603.02f98a2c@mail.teleport.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- PGPMail 4.5 is now available for ordering from PGP Inc. If you have Digicash or a credit card, you can order from the home page. (I would not recommend the credit card option though. The form claims that it is encrypted with SSL, but the info will be sent in the clear. Someone needs to have a talk with their web master... This is not the first security problem with their pages.) In using the betas, I have been pretty impressed. It works with Eudora seamlessly. (Enough that I did not notice that it had installed itself automatically instead of having to do a seperate install as the documentation claimed.) The program beats out any of the plug-ins and front-ends for integrating PGP and e-mail that I have seen yet. And for $29.95 for PGP 2.6.2 users, well worth the price... Disclaimer: I have no financial stake in PGP Inc, not do I have controling interest in the financial affairs of Mr. Zimmerman, liens on the souls of the damned, control of the Aluminum Bavariati, eyes as big as my stomach, or the rites to reproduce the descriptions of major league baseball games without permission of the commisioner of Gotham City. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMvGgneQCP3v30CeZAQH6Twf9HiZQKt7j0SaB+bNRfrZv/zM3/K7F019Y BfLE/OipkeWQQQNDm4KNbz36y58lBhZdXPTuJuyPoICrR3ixNbTz1+DVi3We3ARz 9OspLf74X9hGCw+oJxLTpG2zznBARH6rQ2Bsjh7orvrnvYLlmhjhnEkrShb2BhW6 WuDSdmBfz7yk9iUFVzK6TAcxDv/gLH/hjS6PoTFtwoPKDp9aca4jPzr9scLUhETo 66qPdtLF8TYwzc5+G5/m6w7PJTCf/uyba7OyJ0EYqBDKR4AzqTaL4ZPMUQ8gw1DN F0O/RhbaJMfRDtTQMNaMjR8tZXtO8fFrnQg9SC0jeoZ0/rhOy+0BnA== =0TfD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 31 00:22:45 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 00:22:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701292343.PAA16370@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970131001044.002e58b8@popd.ix.netcom.com> > "When I talk to other governments," [David L. Aaron] said, > "they still don't feel that the cat is out of the bag." Aaron's denying that the cat is out of the bag? He was fashionably dressed in a Lion Tamer's outfit, waving a whip, and trying to herd hundreds of small furry mammals to jump through a hoop and back into a clawed-up army duffel-bag! "Cats? Haven't seen any cats around here! Pay no attention to these,umm, Siberian Hamsters that I'm evaluating for export approval." > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export allowance. > They said it was going to undermine their national security." On this point, the other governments are correct. It really _is_ tougher to maintain a nation-state when your former subjects can have private conversations with each other and with other governments' former subjects...... And even 56 bits is a start. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From alan at ctrl-alt-del.com Fri Jan 31 00:33:12 1997 From: alan at ctrl-alt-del.com (Alan Olsen) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 00:33:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail 4.5 Released! Message-ID: <199701310833.AAA08421@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- PGPMail 4.5 is now available for ordering from PGP Inc. If you have Digicash or a credit card, you can order from the home page. (I would not recommend the credit card option though. The form claims that it is encrypted with SSL, but the info will be sent in the clear. Someone needs to have a talk with their web master... This is not the first security problem with their pages.) In using the betas, I have been pretty impressed. It works with Eudora seamlessly. (Enough that I did not notice that it had installed itself automatically instead of having to do a seperate install as the documentation claimed.) The program beats out any of the plug-ins and front-ends for integrating PGP and e-mail that I have seen yet. And for $29.95 for PGP 2.6.2 users, well worth the price... Disclaimer: I have no financial stake in PGP Inc, not do I have controling interest in the financial affairs of Mr. Zimmerman, liens on the souls of the damned, control of the Aluminum Bavariati, eyes as big as my stomach, or the rites to reproduce the descriptions of major league baseball games without permission of the commisioner of Gotham City. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMvGgneQCP3v30CeZAQH6Twf9HiZQKt7j0SaB+bNRfrZv/zM3/K7F019Y BfLE/OipkeWQQQNDm4KNbz36y58lBhZdXPTuJuyPoICrR3ixNbTz1+DVi3We3ARz 9OspLf74X9hGCw+oJxLTpG2zznBARH6rQ2Bsjh7orvrnvYLlmhjhnEkrShb2BhW6 WuDSdmBfz7yk9iUFVzK6TAcxDv/gLH/hjS6PoTFtwoPKDp9aca4jPzr9scLUhETo 66qPdtLF8TYwzc5+G5/m6w7PJTCf/uyba7OyJ0EYqBDKR4AzqTaL4ZPMUQ8gw1DN F0O/RhbaJMfRDtTQMNaMjR8tZXtO8fFrnQg9SC0jeoZ0/rhOy+0BnA== =0TfD -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 00:36:23 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 00:36:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP Mail Message-ID: <32F1CB6B.6D47@sk.sympatico.ca> Does anyone know if PGP Mail works well with Netscape? I remember hearing about some problems, but don't recall seeing anything indicating they were fixed. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 00:36:27 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 00:36:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cocksucker Message-ID: <32F1CBC4.6BB3@sk.sympatico.ca> cocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercoc ksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksu ckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckercocksuckershit From nobody at REPLAY.COM Fri Jan 31 02:00:08 1997 From: nobody at REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:00:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: misc. security url Message-ID: <199701310959.KAA03668@basement.replay.com> forwarded message... In> Subject: Computer Crime and Investigations Center In> I have put together a Computer Crime and Investigations Center In> URL: http://www.ovnet.com/~dckinder/crime.htm In> This page points you to sources of information pertaining to various In> issues relevant to Computer Crime and Security. In> Topics covered include: In> What Problems Can Arise In> An Ounce of Prevention... In> How it is done In> Detecting whether you have a problem In> Search and Seizure of Computer Equipment In> Is Big Brother Watching You? In> The Enigma of Encryption In> Viruses In> NT Security In> What issues are specific to the World Wide Web? In> Law Reviews In> General Sites In> Duncan Kinder In> dckinder at ovnet.com From bubba at rom.dos Fri Jan 31 02:19:49 1997 From: bubba at rom.dos (Bubba Rom Dos) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:19:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: Karma Message-ID: <32F1E3E3.7C19@rom.dos> "He who shits on the road, will meet flies upon his return." From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 02:23:32 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:23:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: (no subject) Message-ID: <32F1E4FC.929@sk.sympatico.ca> From mohanjm at emirates.net.ae Fri Jan 31 02:32:51 1997 From: mohanjm at emirates.net.ae (Don Juan De Marco) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:32:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html Message-ID: <199701311032.OAA02718@ns2.emirates.net.ae> >jim bell wrote: > >> I wonder what these people will think when organizations like Teledesic and >> Iridium start operating (low-earth-orbit satellites) to allow >> totally-wireless connectivity. It seems to me that there will be a market >> for services that allow anonymous browsing, perhaps with encrypted requests >> that return otherwise-unidentified data on a publicly-accessible airwaves. > > Think of the possibility of satellite-fed 'roving' InterNet sites. > What will be the 'export' implications of sending crypto to a place >such as site.nowhere, site.somewhere, and site.intheUS-hee-hee. > >Toto > > >Is there anyway to aviod the proxy??? please reply!! > > >Don Juan > > > > From digitalis at alias.cyberpass.net Fri Jan 31 02:48:33 1997 From: digitalis at alias.cyberpass.net (digitalis at alias.cyberpass.net) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 02:48:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail Log File Message-ID: <199701311023.CAA26008@sirius.infonex.com> At 02:22 AM 1/31/97 +0000, "Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl'" < WlkngOwl at unix.asb.comwrote: > Is there a way to disable the \WINDOWS\PGPW_32.LOG? > In subtle ways it's a security hole if left to accumulate over time, > since it keeps records of which keys you encrypted messages to. > (Imagine somebody using an anonymous remailer but g-d forbid is > unaware of this log file, and somebody discovers that messages were > encrypted to such a beast...) > I understand in certain group/corporate environs one would want > logging; in others, one doesn't need it or should have the option (in > an easily found place) to wipe it every once in a while. This is a damn good question. I do NOT have the "write to a log file" option slected in the misc. tab and it STILL writes a log file. How DO we disable this? From farber at cis.upenn.edu Fri Jan 31 03:29:28 1997 From: farber at cis.upenn.edu (David Farber) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:29:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail 4.5 Released! Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970131062916.007577fc@linc.cis.upenn.edu> And what happened to the $29 discount price they proposed for 2.6.3 users and viuacrypt users!!!!!!!!!!!! At 11:36 PM 1/30/97 -0800, Alan Olsen wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >PGPMail 4.5 is now available for ordering from PGP Inc. > >If you have Digicash or a credit card, you can order from the home page. (I >would not recommend the credit card option though. The form claims that it >is encrypted with SSL, but the info will be sent in the clear. Someone needs >to have a talk with their web master... This is not the first security >problem with their pages.) > >In using the betas, I have been pretty impressed. It works with Eudora >seamlessly. (Enough that I did not notice that it had installed itself >automatically instead of having to do a seperate install as the documentation >claimed.) The program beats out any of the plug-ins and front-ends for >integrating PGP and e-mail that I have seen yet. And for $29.95 for PGP >2.6.2 users, well worth the price... > >Disclaimer: >I have no financial stake in PGP Inc, not do I have controling interest in >the financial affairs of Mr. Zimmerman, liens on the souls of the damned, >control of the Aluminum Bavariati, eyes as big as my stomach, or the rites to >reproduce the descriptions of major league baseball games without permission >of the commisioner of Gotham City. > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: 4.5 > >iQEVAwUBMvGgneQCP3v30CeZAQH6Twf9HiZQKt7j0SaB+bNRfrZv/zM3/K7F019Y >BfLE/OipkeWQQQNDm4KNbz36y58lBhZdXPTuJuyPoICrR3ixNbTz1+DVi3We3ARz >9OspLf74X9hGCw+oJxLTpG2zznBARH6rQ2Bsjh7orvrnvYLlmhjhnEkrShb2BhW6 >WuDSdmBfz7yk9iUFVzK6TAcxDv/gLH/hjS6PoTFtwoPKDp9aca4jPzr9scLUhETo >66qPdtLF8TYwzc5+G5/m6w7PJTCf/uyba7OyJ0EYqBDKR4AzqTaL4ZPMUQ8gw1DN >F0O/RhbaJMfRDtTQMNaMjR8tZXtO8fFrnQg9SC0jeoZ0/rhOy+0BnA== >=0TfD >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >--- >| If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | >|"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | >| mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | >|`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| >| http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| > > > From frissell at panix.com Fri Jan 31 03:45:58 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 03:45:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701292343.PAA16370@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970131064629.018195c0@panix.com> At 12:10 AM 1/31/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >On this point, the other governments are correct. >It really _is_ tougher to maintain a nation-state when your >former subjects can have private conversations with each other >and with other governments' former subjects...... >And even 56 bits is a start. You don't have to be nice to nation states you meet on the way up if you're not coming back down. DCF From harka at nycmetro.com Fri Jan 31 04:27:25 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 04:27:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: permanent e-mail adress.. Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, to get a list of more than 50 permanent e-mail adress services (a la hotmail) send a _blank_ message to ... Have fun :) Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMuyaBzltEBIEF0MBAQH3kgf9EZUZnjv12RzGstwMbz0+1TnPUyPPM94e B6xuj1GAiFnabsLsDrc7yq3US+jnkDXz6kp7fCmLgP2m1ULYza8uNLSbYMBoHGJz SutSmhZrM3U220ZAnNiqVgMCVgma0Tj260bpnktZKWJtE5HhtNEz0VSmj4pusJ2K jWhc1BMhzYBhekMsxnyFyDsusjrHBumDTYoHG5ehqV2wDHzPUxvv9/4HDjrEaROT LcMA/J9JoKkDY6yLCjQ4q5/3aq58vBxbGlm7KilbjccffuyJRqWurwAaIBolLIqB X9mh8De6ubC/E2KfHVii+eXjDgliShQRt+8Fr4EfJeOLJu4qanIZHg== =1Ulw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 04:59:19 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 04:59:19 -0800 (PST) Subject: Supporting JackBoots Message-ID: <32F2018F.1EDA@sk.sympatico.ca> Webmaster, I would like to know if all of the material on your website is as suspect as that which concerns John Gilmore. The current jackboot censorship of what he has now declared to be his own private cypherpunks list has marked him as a laughable hypocrite. Is the EFF a joke, as well? Toto From attila at primenet.com Fri Jan 31 05:04:22 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:04:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: Geiger and long, unreadable lines Message-ID: <199701311303.GAA01678@infowest.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- If Geiger's software works as well as his ongoing comprehension of the problem 90 to 100 character long mail message lines cause, we are all in trouble. mail which might be forwarded, commented a few times, etc. really works best with 72-74 characters maximum per line. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMvHtjr04kQrCC2kFAQHEeQP/UbYtlFD34UbhHhVbFIXjDxv4KjIb6tD7 y9pkoixaMHw3x2RABC6xjRcRGQ1pLo3ySLS/xbfEmAcR/kjKd2z2SpCSibspXi4n HZ41PnSaPYi2zptR4hQ4mG3d/7EjidVOF4RnMaWB+a0089GvGzYP2xK8YIGiIQBW lToR9lyqDGQ= =fSkd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 05:55:45 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:55:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP Mail Message-ID: <199701311355.FAA14138@toad.com> Does anyone know if PGP Mail works well with Netscape? I remember hearing about some problems, but don't recall seeing anything indicating they were fixed. Toto From frissell at panix.com Fri Jan 31 05:56:01 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:56:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701311356.FAA14178@toad.com> At 12:10 AM 1/31/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >On this point, the other governments are correct. >It really _is_ tougher to maintain a nation-state when your >former subjects can have private conversations with each other >and with other governments' former subjects...... >And even 56 bits is a start. You don't have to be nice to nation states you meet on the way up if you're not coming back down. DCF From nobody at replay.com Fri Jan 31 05:56:07 1997 From: nobody at replay.com (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:56:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: misc. security url Message-ID: <199701311356.FAA14199@toad.com> forwarded message... In> Subject: Computer Crime and Investigations Center In> I have put together a Computer Crime and Investigations Center In> URL: http://www.ovnet.com/~dckinder/crime.htm In> This page points you to sources of information pertaining to various In> issues relevant to Computer Crime and Security. In> Topics covered include: In> What Problems Can Arise In> An Ounce of Prevention... In> How it is done In> Detecting whether you have a problem In> Search and Seizure of Computer Equipment In> Is Big Brother Watching You? In> The Enigma of Encryption In> Viruses In> NT Security In> What issues are specific to the World Wide Web? In> Law Reviews In> General Sites In> Duncan Kinder In> dckinder at ovnet.com From mohanjm at emirates.net.ae Fri Jan 31 05:56:13 1997 From: mohanjm at emirates.net.ae (Don Juan De Marco) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:56:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: uae_1.html Message-ID: <199701311356.FAA14208@toad.com> >jim bell wrote: > >> I wonder what these people will think when organizations like Teledesic and >> Iridium start operating (low-earth-orbit satellites) to allow >> totally-wireless connectivity. It seems to me that there will be a market >> for services that allow anonymous browsing, perhaps with encrypted requests >> that return otherwise-unidentified data on a publicly-accessible airwaves. > > Think of the possibility of satellite-fed 'roving' InterNet sites. > What will be the 'export' implications of sending crypto to a place >such as site.nowhere, site.somewhere, and site.intheUS-hee-hee. > >Toto > > >Is there anyway to aviod the proxy??? please reply!! > > >Don Juan > > > > From attila at primenet.com Fri Jan 31 05:56:17 1997 From: attila at primenet.com (Attila T. Hun) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:56:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Geiger and long, unreadable lines Message-ID: <199701311356.FAA14212@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- If Geiger's software works as well as his ongoing comprehension of the problem 90 to 100 character long mail message lines cause, we are all in trouble. mail which might be forwarded, commented a few times, etc. really works best with 72-74 characters maximum per line. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: Encrypted with 2.6.3i. Requires 2.6 or later. iQCVAwUBMvHtjr04kQrCC2kFAQHEeQP/UbYtlFD34UbhHhVbFIXjDxv4KjIb6tD7 y9pkoixaMHw3x2RABC6xjRcRGQ1pLo3ySLS/xbfEmAcR/kjKd2z2SpCSibspXi4n HZ41PnSaPYi2zptR4hQ4mG3d/7EjidVOF4RnMaWB+a0089GvGzYP2xK8YIGiIQBW lToR9lyqDGQ= =fSkd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From harka at nycmetro.com Fri Jan 31 05:56:21 1997 From: harka at nycmetro.com (harka at nycmetro.com) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:56:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: permanent e-mail adress.. Message-ID: <199701311356.FAA14225@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, to get a list of more than 50 permanent e-mail adress services (a la hotmail) send a _blank_ message to ... Have fun :) Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE ...more info at */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! --> http://www.eff.org */ /* E-mail: harka at nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail preferred) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMuyaBzltEBIEF0MBAQH3kgf9EZUZnjv12RzGstwMbz0+1TnPUyPPM94e B6xuj1GAiFnabsLsDrc7yq3US+jnkDXz6kp7fCmLgP2m1ULYza8uNLSbYMBoHGJz SutSmhZrM3U220ZAnNiqVgMCVgma0Tj260bpnktZKWJtE5HhtNEz0VSmj4pusJ2K jWhc1BMhzYBhekMsxnyFyDsusjrHBumDTYoHG5ehqV2wDHzPUxvv9/4HDjrEaROT LcMA/J9JoKkDY6yLCjQ4q5/3aq58vBxbGlm7KilbjccffuyJRqWurwAaIBolLIqB X9mh8De6ubC/E2KfHVii+eXjDgliShQRt+8Fr4EfJeOLJu4qanIZHg== =1Ulw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption... From farber at cis.upenn.edu Fri Jan 31 05:56:32 1997 From: farber at cis.upenn.edu (David Farber) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:56:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail 4.5 Released! Message-ID: <199701311356.FAA14241@toad.com> And what happened to the $29 discount price they proposed for 2.6.3 users and viuacrypt users!!!!!!!!!!!! At 11:36 PM 1/30/97 -0800, Alan Olsen wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >PGPMail 4.5 is now available for ordering from PGP Inc. > >If you have Digicash or a credit card, you can order from the home page. (I >would not recommend the credit card option though. The form claims that it >is encrypted with SSL, but the info will be sent in the clear. Someone needs >to have a talk with their web master... This is not the first security >problem with their pages.) > >In using the betas, I have been pretty impressed. It works with Eudora >seamlessly. (Enough that I did not notice that it had installed itself >automatically instead of having to do a seperate install as the documentation >claimed.) The program beats out any of the plug-ins and front-ends for >integrating PGP and e-mail that I have seen yet. And for $29.95 for PGP >2.6.2 users, well worth the price... > >Disclaimer: >I have no financial stake in PGP Inc, not do I have controling interest in >the financial affairs of Mr. Zimmerman, liens on the souls of the damned, >control of the Aluminum Bavariati, eyes as big as my stomach, or the rites to >reproduce the descriptions of major league baseball games without permission >of the commisioner of Gotham City. > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: 4.5 > >iQEVAwUBMvGgneQCP3v30CeZAQH6Twf9HiZQKt7j0SaB+bNRfrZv/zM3/K7F019Y >BfLE/OipkeWQQQNDm4KNbz36y58lBhZdXPTuJuyPoICrR3ixNbTz1+DVi3We3ARz >9OspLf74X9hGCw+oJxLTpG2zznBARH6rQ2Bsjh7orvrnvYLlmhjhnEkrShb2BhW6 >WuDSdmBfz7yk9iUFVzK6TAcxDv/gLH/hjS6PoTFtwoPKDp9aca4jPzr9scLUhETo >66qPdtLF8TYwzc5+G5/m6w7PJTCf/uyba7OyJ0EYqBDKR4AzqTaL4ZPMUQ8gw1DN >F0O/RhbaJMfRDtTQMNaMjR8tZXtO8fFrnQg9SC0jeoZ0/rhOy+0BnA== >=0TfD >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >--- >| If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | >|"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | >| mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | >|`finger -l alano at teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| >| http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan at ctrl-alt-del.com| > > > From digitalis at alias.cyberpass.net Fri Jan 31 05:57:54 1997 From: digitalis at alias.cyberpass.net (digitalis at alias.cyberpass.net) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:57:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail Log File Message-ID: <199701311357.FAA14263@toad.com> At 02:22 AM 1/31/97 +0000, "Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl'" < WlkngOwl at unix.asb.comwrote: > Is there a way to disable the \WINDOWS\PGPW_32.LOG? > In subtle ways it's a security hole if left to accumulate over time, > since it keeps records of which keys you encrypted messages to. > (Imagine somebody using an anonymous remailer but g-d forbid is > unaware of this log file, and somebody discovers that messages were > encrypted to such a beast...) > I understand in certain group/corporate environs one would want > logging; in others, one doesn't need it or should have the option (in > an easily found place) to wipe it every once in a while. This is a damn good question. I do NOT have the "write to a log file" option slected in the misc. tab and it STILL writes a log file. How DO we disable this? From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 31 05:57:56 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 05:57:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701311357.FAA14264@toad.com> > "When I talk to other governments," [David L. Aaron] said, > "they still don't feel that the cat is out of the bag." Aaron's denying that the cat is out of the bag? He was fashionably dressed in a Lion Tamer's outfit, waving a whip, and trying to herd hundreds of small furry mammals to jump through a hoop and back into a clawed-up army duffel-bag! "Cats? Haven't seen any cats around here! Pay no attention to these,umm, Siberian Hamsters that I'm evaluating for export approval." > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export allowance. > They said it was going to undermine their national security." On this point, the other governments are correct. It really _is_ tougher to maintain a nation-state when your former subjects can have private conversations with each other and with other governments' former subjects...... And even 56 bits is a start. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From whgiii at amaranth.com Fri Jan 31 06:37:56 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:37:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Geiger and long, unreadable lines In-Reply-To: <199701311303.GAA01678@infowest.com> Message-ID: <199701310839.IAA05412@mailhub.amaranth.com> In <199701311303.GAA01678 at infowest.com>, on 01/31/97 at 12:58 PM, "Attila T. Hun" said: > If Geiger's software works as well as his ongoing comprehension of > the problem 90 to 100 character long mail message lines cause, we > are all in trouble. > mail which might be forwarded, commented a few times, etc. really > works best with 72-74 characters maximum per line. Well considering that we are approaching the 21st Century I think it is a little silly that one should have to worry about the line length in an e-mail message. Even the dos based programs from the 80's could handle wordwraping of displayed text. for the benifit of those misfortunate enough to be still working on dumb terminals I have disabled my PGP script until I have time to add a word wrap routine to it. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: One man's Windows are another man's walls. From bigboy at gte.net Fri Jan 31 06:58:21 1997 From: bigboy at gte.net (Ernie Steefan) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 06:58:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [[[ Free Worldwide Computer Based Business ! ]]] Message-ID: If you have a PC and want to achieve real Financial Independence then you MUST take a look at our Powerful Computer Based Business. No matter who you are or where you live, Our Business is Universal. We distribute software and information all over the world through E-Mail and the Internet. Our program called PC-SUPER-MLM is the most simple and powerful MONEY MAKING software in the world!. of course, you don't have to believe me until you see the actual program. You can receive a FREE copy of the PC-SUPER-MLM by going to http://home1.gte.net/bigboy/pc Have a great day !. From whgiii at amaranth.com Fri Jan 31 07:10:56 1997 From: whgiii at amaranth.com (William H. Geiger III) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:10:56 -0800 (PST) Subject: Geiger and long, unreadable lines Message-ID: <199701311510.HAA15741@toad.com> In <199701311303.GAA01678 at infowest.com>, on 01/31/97 at 12:58 PM, "Attila T. Hun" said: > If Geiger's software works as well as his ongoing comprehension of > the problem 90 to 100 character long mail message lines cause, we > are all in trouble. > mail which might be forwarded, commented a few times, etc. really > works best with 72-74 characters maximum per line. Well considering that we are approaching the 21st Century I think it is a little silly that one should have to worry about the line length in an e-mail message. Even the dos based programs from the 80's could handle wordwraping of displayed text. for the benifit of those misfortunate enough to be still working on dumb terminals I have disabled my PGP script until I have time to add a word wrap routine to it. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii at amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: One man's Windows are another man's walls. From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Fri Jan 31 07:41:50 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Mutatis Mutantdis) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 07:41:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail Log File Message-ID: <199701311603.LAA07122@unix.asb.com> On 31 Jan 1997 09:27:45 -0500, you wrote: >At 02:22 AM 1/31/97 +0000, "Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl'" >< WlkngOwl at unix.asb.comwrote: >> Is there a way to disable the \WINDOWS\PGPW_32.LOG? >> In subtle ways it's a security hole if left to accumulate over time, >> since it keeps records of which keys you encrypted messages to. >> [..] >> I understand in certain group/corporate environs one would want >> logging; in others, one doesn't need it or should have the option (in >> an easily found place) to wipe it every once in a while. >This is a damn good question. I do NOT have the "write to a log file" >option slected in the misc. tab and it STILL writes a log file. How DO >we disable this? Well, I just found that option to uncheck it (thanks to your message) so I'll try it w/the log file unchecked and see what happens. (Duh!) Rob From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 31 08:26:54 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:26:54 -0800 (PST) Subject: Supporting JackBoots In-Reply-To: <32F2018F.1EDA@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <9LJe2D1w165w@bwalk.dm.com> Toto writes: > Webmaster, > I would like to know if all of the material on your website is as > suspect as that which concerns John Gilmore. > The current jackboot censorship of what he has now declared to be > his own private cypherpunks list has marked him as a laughable > hypocrite. > Is the EFF a joke, as well? Sure EFF is a joke. It's designed to syphon time and resources from worthwhile projects and to create fear, uncertainty, and doubt. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 31 08:34:09 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:34:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: Disappearing articles? Message-ID: <1ZJe2D2w165w@bwalk.dm.com> We already know that Sandy's bot automatically discards submissions from people he doesn't like, irrespective of contents. In the past the rejected articles were tossed to the "flames" list. Now Sandy has gone one step further. The following article criticized the product Sandy is paid to peddle. It showed up on the 'unedited' list, but Sandy hated its contents so much that it hasn't made it to EITHER censored or the 'flames' list! This is the beginning of the censored article: To: cypherpunks at toad.com Subject: Security alert!!! From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Comments: All power to the ZOG! Message-Id: Date: Thu, 30 Jan 97 16:15:21 EST Organization: Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y. Sender: owner-cypherpunks at toad.com Precedence: bulk WARNING: There's a rogue trojan horse out there on the internet known as the "stronghold web server". It's actually a hacked-up version of Apache with a backdoor, which allows hackers (or whoever knows the backdoor) to steal credit card numbers and other confidentil information on the Internet. Be careful! Always use encryption. Do not send confidential information 9such as passwords and credit card numbers) to any site running the trojan horse "stronghold". In general, beware of "snake oil" security products and hacked-up versions of free software. Please repost this warning to all relevant computer security forums. (rest snipped to save bandwidth) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From declan at well.com Fri Jan 31 08:41:39 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:41:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: Georgia court hears testimony in anonymity case, from TNNN Message-ID: ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:33:44 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Georgia court hears testimony, future of free speech, from TNNN The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ Brick By Brick by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com) January 31, 1997 ATLANTA, Ga.-- A federal judge heard testimony yesterday in a landmark case challenging a Georgia law that forbids anonymity online. The ACLU filed the lawsuit -- the first-ever challenge to a state Net-censorship statute -- last September on behalf of 14 plaintiffs, arguing that the statute is unconstitutional. The law also criminalizes the "unauthorized" use of company names online. It is so broadly written, the ACLU claims, that America Online screen names could be considered illegal. Yesterday's hearing was designed to educate U.S. District Court Judge Marvin Shoob about the Net, in much the same way that lawyers educated a three-judge panel that struck down the Communications Decency Act in Philadelphia in June 1996. It began with a Georgia Tech professor who painstakingly demonstrated how the Internet works. "This pointing device in the middle of the screen is the cursor," he said. The lawsuit is one of many that will shape the future of free expression in cyberspace -- and new media. The Georgia challenge seems straightforward, but in truth is a key part of the ACLU's strategy to cement a foundation of legal precedents that will build on one another, brick by statutory brick, and solidify into a framework for free speech on the Internet. The most fierce battlefield, however, will be in state capitols and courtrooms like these. More than 20 states already have launched various offensives against the Net, but the ACLU is choosing its battles carefully. Depending on how Judge Shoob rules, near-perfect anonymous speech may, for the first time in history, be completely legal -- at least in one federal district. In a move that could derail congressional attempts to rehabilitate the CDA if the high court strikes it down, the ACLU assailed a New York State law banning sexual images that are "harmful to minors." The organization also is planning to sue in Virginia, Florida and California, highlighting a different legal point in each case. True, the decisions won't be binding on other courts -- unlike, say, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling -- but in such a new area of the law, judges will grasp at even district court precedents. "You can't underestimate the importance," said ACLU attorney Chris Hansen. "The law works through precedent. Each case builds on the one before it." Key to the strategy is the argument that states can't regulate speech on the Internet at all. It's a nuclear bomb of a legal theory, which relies on the Constitution's commerce clause and on Supreme Court cases that bar states from controlling "commerce that takes place wholly outside of the state's borders." The coalition's brief offers Usenet newsgroups as an example: "The posting of this message in California, therefore, may subject the California author to prosecution in Georgia under the Act." The state countered that local standards should always apply. Daniel Formby, Georgia's deputy attorney general, said yesterday: "You do not have to enter a state to violate its laws." Free-speech victories in states such as Georgia would permit netizens to bypass the strict controls on television and radio that ban the transmission of "indecent" words or images. When the Internet starts carrying movies and soaps, the stronger free-speech standards of cyberspace will extend to those broadcasts. "We gain stronger First Amendment rights for other media when they converge, as the Internet absorbs other technologies," said ACLU attorney Ann Beeson. Sitting quietly in the rear of the Atlanta courtroom throughout the hearing was State Rep. Don Parsons, who with the Democratic leadership introduced the Georgia law last spring. Parsons insists the ACLU's challenge is wrongheaded. Does the law ban anonymous speech? "Certainly not! Absolutely not!" he claimed. So what was the purpose behind the the law? To prevent fraud, said Parsons. But that's not what I found. The genesis of the bizarre Georgia law lies not in policies as much as in rank statehouse politics. I went looking for Georgia's Speaker of the House and found him in his office. He leaned back in his chair and chewed on a cigar. A 72-year old Democrat, Thomas Murphy has reigned over the state House of Representatives for 24 years from an office studded with stuffed rabbits and bobcats and conveniently adjacent to the House floor. Yesterday, he declined to discuss the measure. "I can't tell you anything about it because I don't know anything about it or computers or the Internet or anything like that," he said. But he knows politics, and his enemies, especially Rep. Mitchell Kaye, a fellow who fancies himself the Newt Gingrich of the Georgia legislature. Like Gingrich, Kaye is a technocratic Republican hailing from bluenose Cobb County, and like pre-1994 Gingrich, he sees himself as waging guerrilla warfare against a corrupt and entrenched Democratic majority. Dem leaders are equally uncomplimentary. "None of us likes Mr. Kaye... No manners towards anyone. He tries to cause all the confusion he can," Speaker Murphy grumbled. Indeed, the whole statutory mess began shortly after Kaye created his own web site, www.gahouse.com, which he uses to post legislation, contact information and some partisan pages for his conservative caucus. It proved popular, drawing thousands of visitors a week -- and the wrath of lawmakers such as Speaker Murphy, longtime veterans of traditional machine politics. It was Kaye's use of the state seal on his site -- even with appropriate disclaimers -- that handed Democrats a way to muzzle him through the law the ACLU has challenged. The irony is, of course, that the Georgia Democrats never intended to ban all anonymous and pseudonymous discussions. They never believed they'd be attacked in court by a team of New York City lawyers. But by punishing anyone who "uses any individual name... to falsely identify the person" -- even without intent to deceive -- their law censors not just Mitchell Kaye, but netizens as well. "The last thing they want is sunshine on this case," said the upstart Republican, who joined the suit as one of the plaintiffs. "They pass a lot of unconstitutional legislation around here." ### From jmr at shopmiami.com Fri Jan 31 08:45:17 1997 From: jmr at shopmiami.com (Jim Ray) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:45:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Secret" Postal Device stolen Message-ID: <3.0.16.19970131114410.4507d89e@pop.gate.net> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- from http://www.herald.com/dade/digdocs/021949.htm Postal Service offers $25,000 reward for stolen . . . something By ARNOLD MARKOWITZ Herald Staff Writer U.S. mail carriers carry more than just the U.S. mail. They carry something else so secret that nobody outside the Postal Service knows about it -- except four crooks who steal them from letter carriers on the streets of Miami. There's a $25,000 reward for tips producing capture and conviction. ... Comments? Please direct any replies for the list to me also, as I am still on Ray's FCPUNX, which I suppose makes this list double-filtered for me now, if a little delayed. :-) Typically, I now care what the mystery device is, since the occasionally-disgruntled ones don't want me to know. JMR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEPAwUBMvIhGzUhsGSn1j2pAQEp5wfPQ1YsiZviksusdbdVQHBz9yKMOSt5z3Ue Utlmxzx8RExqjaTc/cSLORf55pBWbJiDFB+a+ev09I2iZujq7nlNNCZNI0NaHw2L RObAjBQ4YT7sekWYMw81y08zH9x49OmAhh7CCh2qzh5ZyQ0qc3YdFzmc8F00+jdW J9ZsXSvJaBS+Jvh/eIPH+IlD873hyk6T4Nrayt0xt2z6Ajvst0XK5vOLkeJobZg3 +x8IyS26/bcrWGkKD/4rK81/QDmLIyHG7oWzaJAR1q6UKCad0C1w6/i2dwWtWV1v RyXfyYTgXi8XPbieBL7RZmP0j3A0xqlCr4PASMuZskBa+g== =Kspp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Regards, Jim Ray DNRC Minister of Encryption Advocacy One of the "legitimate concerns of law enforcement" seems to be that I was born innocent until proven guilty and not the other way around. -- me http://shopmiami.com/prs/jimray/ PGP id.A7D63DA9 98 1F 39 BA 93 86 B4 F5 57 52 64 0E DA BA 2C 71 From mikej2 at Exabyte.COM Fri Jan 31 08:46:11 1997 From: mikej2 at Exabyte.COM (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:46:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Complying with the EAR [was: More Circumventing the ITAR] In-Reply-To: <199701310337.UAA01985@firewall.Exabyte.COM> Message-ID: On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Sean Roach wrote: > At 11:14 AM 1/29/97 -0700, Michael Paul Johnson wrote: > >On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Mark Rosen wrote: > > > >> I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically > >> about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for > > > >You should check the exact text yourself, but the way I read the EAR, you > >are not "exporting" strong cryptographic software without a license (exept > >to Canada, which needs no license) if you do things "such as" > >(1) have the guests to your site acknowledge that the EAR restricts > >export, (2) have the guests affirm that they can legally get the software > >(proper citizenship or residency & location), and (3) "check the address > >of the destination computer to see if it is in the USA" or Canada. The > >last one, I interpret rather loosely to mean that if the guest's email > >address domain isn't one commonly used in the USA or Canada, then I deny > >access. We all know that not all .com addresses are North American, but > >chances are really good that if the address ends in .ru, then the > >destination machine is probably not in North America. This is not a > >perfect way to prevent export, of course, but it is what the regulations > >say, as I read them. For a pointer to the regulations and to my access > >request form and crypto site, see http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm > ... > An easy crack to that would be to request access from a hotmail, or > similair, account. This account would show up as being on US soil while the > account holder would not necessarily be so. In this way, someone with an > account ending in your .ru would get through because h[is/er] e-mail request > originated from inside the U.S. If that is the only chink in the armor you see, then you aren't looking very hard. The point of this system is not to prevent exports, but to (1) comply with the letter of the law by discouraging export in the specified manner, (2) to comply with the spirit of the law by reducing the number of exports of cryptographic software from the USA, while (3) making publication of strong cryptographic software in North America easy and safe from legal persecution. Without point (3), the national security of the USA would be harmed, IMHO, by the fact that proportionally more dishonest people (the ones the NSA and FBI are quict to draw attention to) than honest ones (the majority of the people who want to use strong cryptography to protect their privacy and business interests from the dishonest folks) would use strong cryptography. The only reason I can think of that the U. S. Commander-in-Chief and President of the United States of America and his staff have determined that export of strong cryptographic software can harm "national security" even when such software already is available outside of the USA, is that they are really more concerned about the numbers of people that use such software regularly, and therefore, they want to limit the total bandwidth of distribution capacity and ease of retrieval of such software. Export controls can effectively do both, even if they cannot realistically prevent export. Think about it. It was a pain to set up the EAR-compliant site that I set up compared to a simple site for global distribution, and few people would go through the hassle. Many major information services and ftp sites simply disallow strong cryptographic software rather than go through the hassle. Because of this, it is probably true that fewer people find, download, and use strong cryptographic software. Until more people set up more strong cryptographic software distribution sites and write more good, secure, robust, easy-to-use cryptographic software such that it is about as easy to find and use it as not to, the Feds win. Their point is proven. Fewer people use strong cryptography than would otherwise, and some small (but, to them, significant) percentage of those people who were discouraged from using strong cryptographic software might have used that software in a criminal activity. Too bad about the good guys who could have prevented computer crime or worse with the same technology, huh? http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm Michael Paul Johnson Opinions herein are not necessarily Exabyte's. Work: mpj at exabyte.com http://www.exabyte.com Personal: mpj at csn.net http://www.csn.net/~mpj BBS 303-772-1062 From nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu Fri Jan 31 08:46:52 1997 From: nobody at zifi.genetics.utah.edu (Anonymous) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:46:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: [STEGO] Blowfish Message-ID: <199701311646.JAA01101@zifi.genetics.utah.edu> Timmy C[rook] Maytag's abysmal grammar, atrocious spelling and feeble responses clearly identify him as a product of the American education system. /\ \ / /\ //\\ .. //\\ Timmy C[rook] Maytag //\(( ))/\\ / < `' > \ From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 08:49:37 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:49:37 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: [big snip] >If every time someone made a mistake they got >punished, without the opportunity to understand the error and without the >opportunity to make corrections, they would be a psychological wreck. Yes, you have certainly pointed out a property of AP, insofar as teaching is concerned. The reality of the physical world is that some mistakes, for example steping off a cliff, are immediately punished by a fall and possibly death. The 'student' may or may not learn for the experience but other students who are witness most certainly will. >If every time someone made mistake they got assassinated, not only would no >one wish to do anything for fear of losing their lives, creating a >"society" of timid sheep, there probably wouldn't be many people remaining >to savor the triumph of being superior. I sincerely doubt that many would use AP to right small slights, anymore than many now kill others for the same reasons. The world has always been inhabited by bullies and tyrants who cared little of what harm they caused others. An AP system would quickly eliminate bullies and tyrants. > >AP is just another form of war. You can bet that if assassinations >increased a hundred fold as a result of your method, not only "governments" >but some very bright people would get together to figure out a defense >against it, for they also would be "at risk". I think the reaction of the society as a whole to AP would depend on what its perceived overall results were. If assassinations of scum and tyrants increased a hundred fold it would hardly be noticed on any political radar screen, except the bullies and tyrants. --Steve From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 08:50:46 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:50:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: >> Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the > > BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming >that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs >to the community IS theft. I work, and as the result of that work something is >created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that >work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those >shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved. Tell this to the Native Americans. --Steve From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Fri Jan 31 08:56:22 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Mutatis Mutantdis) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:56:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail Log File Message-ID: <199701311656.IAA17725@toad.com> On 31 Jan 1997 09:27:45 -0500, you wrote: >At 02:22 AM 1/31/97 +0000, "Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl'" >< WlkngOwl at unix.asb.comwrote: >> Is there a way to disable the \WINDOWS\PGPW_32.LOG? >> In subtle ways it's a security hole if left to accumulate over time, >> since it keeps records of which keys you encrypted messages to. >> [..] >> I understand in certain group/corporate environs one would want >> logging; in others, one doesn't need it or should have the option (in >> an easily found place) to wipe it every once in a while. >This is a damn good question. I do NOT have the "write to a log file" >option slected in the misc. tab and it STILL writes a log file. How DO >we disable this? Well, I just found that option to uncheck it (thanks to your message) so I'll try it w/the log file unchecked and see what happens. (Duh!) Rob From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 09:00:32 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:00:32 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor Message-ID: <199701311700.JAA17860@toad.com> [big snip] >If every time someone made a mistake they got >punished, without the opportunity to understand the error and without the >opportunity to make corrections, they would be a psychological wreck. Yes, you have certainly pointed out a property of AP, insofar as teaching is concerned. The reality of the physical world is that some mistakes, for example steping off a cliff, are immediately punished by a fall and possibly death. The 'student' may or may not learn for the experience but other students who are witness most certainly will. >If every time someone made mistake they got assassinated, not only would no >one wish to do anything for fear of losing their lives, creating a >"society" of timid sheep, there probably wouldn't be many people remaining >to savor the triumph of being superior. I sincerely doubt that many would use AP to right small slights, anymore than many now kill others for the same reasons. The world has always been inhabited by bullies and tyrants who cared little of what harm they caused others. An AP system would quickly eliminate bullies and tyrants. > >AP is just another form of war. You can bet that if assassinations >increased a hundred fold as a result of your method, not only "governments" >but some very bright people would get together to figure out a defense >against it, for they also would be "at risk". I think the reaction of the society as a whole to AP would depend on what its perceived overall results were. If assassinations of scum and tyrants increased a hundred fold it would hardly be noticed on any political radar screen, except the bullies and tyrants. --Steve From mikej2 at exabyte.com Fri Jan 31 09:06:26 1997 From: mikej2 at exabyte.com (Michael Paul Johnson) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:06:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Complying with the EAR [was: More Circumventing the ITAR] Message-ID: <199701311706.JAA17979@toad.com> On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Sean Roach wrote: > At 11:14 AM 1/29/97 -0700, Michael Paul Johnson wrote: > >On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Mark Rosen wrote: > > > >> I'm curious as to exactly what the ITAR/EAR/Whatever says specifically > >> about "unrestricted FTP sites." My program, Kremlin, is available for > > > >You should check the exact text yourself, but the way I read the EAR, you > >are not "exporting" strong cryptographic software without a license (exept > >to Canada, which needs no license) if you do things "such as" > >(1) have the guests to your site acknowledge that the EAR restricts > >export, (2) have the guests affirm that they can legally get the software > >(proper citizenship or residency & location), and (3) "check the address > >of the destination computer to see if it is in the USA" or Canada. The > >last one, I interpret rather loosely to mean that if the guest's email > >address domain isn't one commonly used in the USA or Canada, then I deny > >access. We all know that not all .com addresses are North American, but > >chances are really good that if the address ends in .ru, then the > >destination machine is probably not in North America. This is not a > >perfect way to prevent export, of course, but it is what the regulations > >say, as I read them. For a pointer to the regulations and to my access > >request form and crypto site, see http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm > ... > An easy crack to that would be to request access from a hotmail, or > similair, account. This account would show up as being on US soil while the > account holder would not necessarily be so. In this way, someone with an > account ending in your .ru would get through because h[is/er] e-mail request > originated from inside the U.S. If that is the only chink in the armor you see, then you aren't looking very hard. The point of this system is not to prevent exports, but to (1) comply with the letter of the law by discouraging export in the specified manner, (2) to comply with the spirit of the law by reducing the number of exports of cryptographic software from the USA, while (3) making publication of strong cryptographic software in North America easy and safe from legal persecution. Without point (3), the national security of the USA would be harmed, IMHO, by the fact that proportionally more dishonest people (the ones the NSA and FBI are quict to draw attention to) than honest ones (the majority of the people who want to use strong cryptography to protect their privacy and business interests from the dishonest folks) would use strong cryptography. The only reason I can think of that the U. S. Commander-in-Chief and President of the United States of America and his staff have determined that export of strong cryptographic software can harm "national security" even when such software already is available outside of the USA, is that they are really more concerned about the numbers of people that use such software regularly, and therefore, they want to limit the total bandwidth of distribution capacity and ease of retrieval of such software. Export controls can effectively do both, even if they cannot realistically prevent export. Think about it. It was a pain to set up the EAR-compliant site that I set up compared to a simple site for global distribution, and few people would go through the hassle. Many major information services and ftp sites simply disallow strong cryptographic software rather than go through the hassle. Because of this, it is probably true that fewer people find, download, and use strong cryptographic software. Until more people set up more strong cryptographic software distribution sites and write more good, secure, robust, easy-to-use cryptographic software such that it is about as easy to find and use it as not to, the Feds win. Their point is proven. Fewer people use strong cryptography than would otherwise, and some small (but, to them, significant) percentage of those people who were discouraged from using strong cryptographic software might have used that software in a criminal activity. Too bad about the good guys who could have prevented computer crime or worse with the same technology, huh? http://www.sni.net/~mpj/crypto.htm Michael Paul Johnson Opinions herein are not necessarily Exabyte's. Work: mpj at exabyte.com http://www.exabyte.com Personal: mpj at csn.net http://www.csn.net/~mpj BBS 303-772-1062 From declan at well.com Fri Jan 31 09:07:51 1997 From: declan at well.com (Declan McCullagh) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:07:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: Georgia court hears testimony in anonymity case, from TNNN Message-ID: <199701311707.JAA17988@toad.com> ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 08:33:44 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh To: fight-censorship at vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Georgia court hears testimony, future of free speech, from TNNN The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ Brick By Brick by Declan McCullagh (declan at well.com) January 31, 1997 ATLANTA, Ga.-- A federal judge heard testimony yesterday in a landmark case challenging a Georgia law that forbids anonymity online. The ACLU filed the lawsuit -- the first-ever challenge to a state Net-censorship statute -- last September on behalf of 14 plaintiffs, arguing that the statute is unconstitutional. The law also criminalizes the "unauthorized" use of company names online. It is so broadly written, the ACLU claims, that America Online screen names could be considered illegal. Yesterday's hearing was designed to educate U.S. District Court Judge Marvin Shoob about the Net, in much the same way that lawyers educated a three-judge panel that struck down the Communications Decency Act in Philadelphia in June 1996. It began with a Georgia Tech professor who painstakingly demonstrated how the Internet works. "This pointing device in the middle of the screen is the cursor," he said. The lawsuit is one of many that will shape the future of free expression in cyberspace -- and new media. The Georgia challenge seems straightforward, but in truth is a key part of the ACLU's strategy to cement a foundation of legal precedents that will build on one another, brick by statutory brick, and solidify into a framework for free speech on the Internet. The most fierce battlefield, however, will be in state capitols and courtrooms like these. More than 20 states already have launched various offensives against the Net, but the ACLU is choosing its battles carefully. Depending on how Judge Shoob rules, near-perfect anonymous speech may, for the first time in history, be completely legal -- at least in one federal district. In a move that could derail congressional attempts to rehabilitate the CDA if the high court strikes it down, the ACLU assailed a New York State law banning sexual images that are "harmful to minors." The organization also is planning to sue in Virginia, Florida and California, highlighting a different legal point in each case. True, the decisions won't be binding on other courts -- unlike, say, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling -- but in such a new area of the law, judges will grasp at even district court precedents. "You can't underestimate the importance," said ACLU attorney Chris Hansen. "The law works through precedent. Each case builds on the one before it." Key to the strategy is the argument that states can't regulate speech on the Internet at all. It's a nuclear bomb of a legal theory, which relies on the Constitution's commerce clause and on Supreme Court cases that bar states from controlling "commerce that takes place wholly outside of the state's borders." The coalition's brief offers Usenet newsgroups as an example: "The posting of this message in California, therefore, may subject the California author to prosecution in Georgia under the Act." The state countered that local standards should always apply. Daniel Formby, Georgia's deputy attorney general, said yesterday: "You do not have to enter a state to violate its laws." Free-speech victories in states such as Georgia would permit netizens to bypass the strict controls on television and radio that ban the transmission of "indecent" words or images. When the Internet starts carrying movies and soaps, the stronger free-speech standards of cyberspace will extend to those broadcasts. "We gain stronger First Amendment rights for other media when they converge, as the Internet absorbs other technologies," said ACLU attorney Ann Beeson. Sitting quietly in the rear of the Atlanta courtroom throughout the hearing was State Rep. Don Parsons, who with the Democratic leadership introduced the Georgia law last spring. Parsons insists the ACLU's challenge is wrongheaded. Does the law ban anonymous speech? "Certainly not! Absolutely not!" he claimed. So what was the purpose behind the the law? To prevent fraud, said Parsons. But that's not what I found. The genesis of the bizarre Georgia law lies not in policies as much as in rank statehouse politics. I went looking for Georgia's Speaker of the House and found him in his office. He leaned back in his chair and chewed on a cigar. A 72-year old Democrat, Thomas Murphy has reigned over the state House of Representatives for 24 years from an office studded with stuffed rabbits and bobcats and conveniently adjacent to the House floor. Yesterday, he declined to discuss the measure. "I can't tell you anything about it because I don't know anything about it or computers or the Internet or anything like that," he said. But he knows politics, and his enemies, especially Rep. Mitchell Kaye, a fellow who fancies himself the Newt Gingrich of the Georgia legislature. Like Gingrich, Kaye is a technocratic Republican hailing from bluenose Cobb County, and like pre-1994 Gingrich, he sees himself as waging guerrilla warfare against a corrupt and entrenched Democratic majority. Dem leaders are equally uncomplimentary. "None of us likes Mr. Kaye... No manners towards anyone. He tries to cause all the confusion he can," Speaker Murphy grumbled. Indeed, the whole statutory mess began shortly after Kaye created his own web site, www.gahouse.com, which he uses to post legislation, contact information and some partisan pages for his conservative caucus. It proved popular, drawing thousands of visitors a week -- and the wrath of lawmakers such as Speaker Murphy, longtime veterans of traditional machine politics. It was Kaye's use of the state seal on his site -- even with appropriate disclaimers -- that handed Democrats a way to muzzle him through the law the ACLU has challenged. The irony is, of course, that the Georgia Democrats never intended to ban all anonymous and pseudonymous discussions. They never believed they'd be attacked in court by a team of New York City lawyers. But by punishing anyone who "uses any individual name... to falsely identify the person" -- even without intent to deceive -- their law censors not just Mitchell Kaye, but netizens as well. "The last thing they want is sunshine on this case," said the upstart Republican, who joined the suit as one of the plaintiffs. "They pass a lot of unconstitutional legislation around here." ### From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 09:16:11 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 09:16:11 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199701311716.JAA18173@toad.com> >> Its worth noting that the origin of property is theft. In the case of the > > BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming >that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs >to the community IS theft. I work, and as the result of that work something is >created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that >work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those >shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved. Tell this to the Native Americans. --Steve From alano at teleport.com Fri Jan 31 10:01:47 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:01:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail 4.5 Released! In-Reply-To: <3.0.1.32.19970131062916.007577fc@linc.cis.upenn.edu> Message-ID: On Fri, 31 Jan 1997, David Farber wrote: > And what happened to the $29 discount price they proposed for 2.6.3 users and viuacrypt users!!!!!!!!!!!! I have not heard anything about the discount for 2.6.3 users. There is an upgrade price (about $25) for Viacrypt users. None of the discount or upgrade prices are included on their on-line form. (And sales said they would have to "have someone call me back" this morning when I tried to order.) From zachb at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 10:42:04 1997 From: zachb at netcom.com (Z.B.) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:42:04 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Security Question Message-ID: My computer went into the shop a few days ago, and I was unable to take my PGP keys off it before it went in. What are the security risks here? If the repairman chooses to snoop through the files, what would he be able to do with my key pair? Will I need to revoke the key and make a new one, or will I be relatively safe since he doesn't have my passphrase? Zach Babayco zachb at netcom.com <-------finger for PGP public key If you need to know how to set up a mail filter or defend against emailbombs, send me a message with the words "get helpfile" (without the " marks) in the SUBJECT: header, *NOT THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE!* I have several useful FAQs and documents available. From frissell at panix.com Fri Jan 31 10:54:43 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:54:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail 4.5 Released! In-Reply-To: <199701311356.FAA14241@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970131135938.00778750@panix.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 06:29 AM 1/31/97 -0500, you wrote: >And what happened to the $29 discount price they proposed for 2.6.3 users and viuacrypt users!!!!!!!!!!!! > I just email PGP sales with that question. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMvJBCIVO4r4sgSPhAQEZ4wP/RWERsyjzsVURKR5rBZx3DKoj6dDDRvIP vNGbE3UnI/hqiRaZSf6P/36MnM2dQ8yIbbmlvsWV3N4m9moBUnvY6hy3elbwFTkE P+cICHcm3S0uW68aZ/vKK4sasg+WJgd+YLBwdQWkZc8GBn8Ut6mJE7sVXEiJWNMC WgFjwMALh7A= =j4+j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From minow at apple.com Fri Jan 31 10:55:50 1997 From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 10:55:50 -0800 (PST) Subject: Constitutional Right to Annoy? Message-ID: Today's New York Times web page's Cybertimes section has an article on a new lawsuit that claims a constitutional right to annoy. Among other things, annoy.com will provide a way to "send anonymous e-mail messages to public figures." They're suing the CDA. http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/013197annoy.html (Assuming I retyped it correctly.) Martin Minow minow at apple.com From sorkin at crl.com Fri Jan 31 11:22:44 1997 From: sorkin at crl.com (Yuri Sorkin) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:22:44 -0800 (PST) Subject: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved. Who gets a credit? Message-ID: <32F24768.1117@crl.com> stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:37:57 -0800 At 09:55 PM 1/28/97 +0100, Germano Caronni wrote: >challenge: RC5-32/12/5 >time: from start of contest until Tue Jan 28 21:54:58 1997 >method: massive distributed coordinated keysearch, details later which was a bit slower than Ian Goldberg's crack, but pretty close. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Huh!? Goldbeg's announce states that he spent about 3.5 hours, i.e. a solution came not earlier than 12.30 PST, while Caronni got it at 11.55 am PST. Yuri Sorkin From sameer at c2.net Fri Jan 31 11:28:00 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:28:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701311357.FAA14264@toad.com> Message-ID: <199701311950.LAA10870@gabber.c2.net> > > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export allowance. > > They said it was going to undermine their national security." > > On this point, the other governments are correct. > It really _is_ tougher to maintain a nation-state when your > former subjects can have private conversations with each other > and with other governments' former subjects...... > And even 56 bits is a start. Full strength crypto is already available worldwide. It makes not one iota of difference. -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From jya at pipeline.com Fri Jan 31 11:55:55 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:55:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: CAST Message-ID: <199701311955.LAA21244@toad.com> For a paper on CAST see: http://www.nortel.com/entprods/entrust/cast.html "Constructing Symmetric Ciphers Using the CAST Design Procedure" By Carlisle M. Adams From ngps at pacific.net.sg Fri Jan 31 11:55:59 1997 From: ngps at pacific.net.sg (Ng Pheng Siong) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:55:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: CAST Message-ID: <199701311955.LAA21251@toad.com> Hi, Attended a presentation by Milkyway, vendor of the BlackHole firewall, which also does VPN. Supposedly the symmetric cipher used in the VPN is called CAST. Anyone has any info on it? TIA. Cheers. -- Ng Pheng Siong * Pacific Internet Pte Ltd * Singapore PGP: send mail with subject "send pgp key". From minow at apple.com Fri Jan 31 11:56:06 1997 From: minow at apple.com (Martin Minow) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:56:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Constitutional Right to Annoy? Message-ID: <199701311956.LAA21259@toad.com> Today's New York Times web page's Cybertimes section has an article on a new lawsuit that claims a constitutional right to annoy. Among other things, annoy.com will provide a way to "send anonymous e-mail messages to public figures." They're suing the CDA. http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/013197annoy.html (Assuming I retyped it correctly.) Martin Minow minow at apple.com From jmr at shopmiami.com Fri Jan 31 11:56:36 1997 From: jmr at shopmiami.com (Jim Ray) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 11:56:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Secret" Postal Device stolen Message-ID: <199701311956.LAA21284@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- from http://www.herald.com/dade/digdocs/021949.htm Postal Service offers $25,000 reward for stolen . . . something By ARNOLD MARKOWITZ Herald Staff Writer U.S. mail carriers carry more than just the U.S. mail. They carry something else so secret that nobody outside the Postal Service knows about it -- except four crooks who steal them from letter carriers on the streets of Miami. There's a $25,000 reward for tips producing capture and conviction. ... Comments? Please direct any replies for the list to me also, as I am still on Ray's FCPUNX, which I suppose makes this list double-filtered for me now, if a little delayed. :-) Typically, I now care what the mystery device is, since the occasionally-disgruntled ones don't want me to know. JMR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEPAwUBMvIhGzUhsGSn1j2pAQEp5wfPQ1YsiZviksusdbdVQHBz9yKMOSt5z3Ue Utlmxzx8RExqjaTc/cSLORf55pBWbJiDFB+a+ev09I2iZujq7nlNNCZNI0NaHw2L RObAjBQ4YT7sekWYMw81y08zH9x49OmAhh7CCh2qzh5ZyQ0qc3YdFzmc8F00+jdW J9ZsXSvJaBS+Jvh/eIPH+IlD873hyk6T4Nrayt0xt2z6Ajvst0XK5vOLkeJobZg3 +x8IyS26/bcrWGkKD/4rK81/QDmLIyHG7oWzaJAR1q6UKCad0C1w6/i2dwWtWV1v RyXfyYTgXi8XPbieBL7RZmP0j3A0xqlCr4PASMuZskBa+g== =Kspp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Regards, Jim Ray DNRC Minister of Encryption Advocacy One of the "legitimate concerns of law enforcement" seems to be that I was born innocent until proven guilty and not the other way around. -- me http://shopmiami.com/prs/jimray/ PGP id.A7D63DA9 98 1F 39 BA 93 86 B4 F5 57 52 64 0E DA BA 2C 71 From frissell at panix.com Fri Jan 31 12:01:58 1997 From: frissell at panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:01:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail 4.5 Released! Message-ID: <199701312001.MAA21361@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 06:29 AM 1/31/97 -0500, you wrote: >And what happened to the $29 discount price they proposed for 2.6.3 users and viuacrypt users!!!!!!!!!!!! > I just email PGP sales with that question. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQCVAgUBMvJBCIVO4r4sgSPhAQEZ4wP/RWERsyjzsVURKR5rBZx3DKoj6dDDRvIP vNGbE3UnI/hqiRaZSf6P/36MnM2dQ8yIbbmlvsWV3N4m9moBUnvY6hy3elbwFTkE P+cICHcm3S0uW68aZ/vKK4sasg+WJgd+YLBwdQWkZc8GBn8Ut6mJE7sVXEiJWNMC WgFjwMALh7A= =j4+j -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From sameer at c2.net Fri Jan 31 12:02:34 1997 From: sameer at c2.net (sameer) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:02:34 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701312002.MAA21377@toad.com> > > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export allowance. > > They said it was going to undermine their national security." > > On this point, the other governments are correct. > It really _is_ tougher to maintain a nation-state when your > former subjects can have private conversations with each other > and with other governments' former subjects...... > And even 56 bits is a start. Full strength crypto is already available worldwide. It makes not one iota of difference. -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-986-8770 President FAX: 510-986-8777 C2Net http://www.c2.net/ sameer at c2.net From zachb at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 12:02:38 1997 From: zachb at netcom.com (Z.B.) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:02:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Security Question Message-ID: <199701312002.MAA21383@toad.com> My computer went into the shop a few days ago, and I was unable to take my PGP keys off it before it went in. What are the security risks here? If the repairman chooses to snoop through the files, what would he be able to do with my key pair? Will I need to revoke the key and make a new one, or will I be relatively safe since he doesn't have my passphrase? Zach Babayco zachb at netcom.com <-------finger for PGP public key If you need to know how to set up a mail filter or defend against emailbombs, send me a message with the words "get helpfile" (without the " marks) in the SUBJECT: header, *NOT THE BODY OF THE MESSAGE!* I have several useful FAQs and documents available. From ckuethe at gpu.srv.ualberta.ca Fri Jan 31 12:03:28 1997 From: ckuethe at gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (C. Kuethe) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:03:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: CAST Message-ID: <199701312003.MAA21433@toad.com> On Fri, 31 Jan 1997, Ng Pheng Siong wrote: > Hi, > > Attended a presentation by Milkyway, vendor of the BlackHole firewall, which also does VPN. > Supposedly the symmetric cipher used in the VPN is called CAST. Anyone has any info on it? > TIA. Cheers. It's a canadian cipher. It's inventors have the initials C.A. and S.T. pure coincidence they say. it's got a little write-up in Appl. Crypto 2, and I'll post anything I can about it as soon as I get home. I don't have my copy of ac2 on me... I do remember that it's patented, and you have to talk to these folks for licences I believe.... more to come later. PLUR chris -- Chris Kuethe LPGV Electronics and Controls http://www.ualberta.ca/~ckuethe/ RSA in 2 lines of PERL lives at http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0 > "When I talk to other governments," [David L. Aaron] said, > "they still don't feel that the cat is out of the bag." Aaron's denying that the cat is out of the bag? He was fashionably dressed in a Lion Tamer's outfit, waving a whip, and trying to herd hundreds of small furry mammals to jump through a hoop and back into a clawed-up army duffel-bag! "Cats? Haven't seen any cats around here! Pay no attention to these,umm, Siberian Hamsters that I'm evaluating for export approval." > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export allowance. > They said it was going to undermine their national security." On this point, the other governments are correct. It really _is_ tougher to maintain a nation-state when your former subjects can have private conversations with each other and with other governments' former subjects...... And even 56 bits is a start. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From vznuri at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 12:51:38 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:51:38 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701311201.HAA14977@upaya.multiverse.com> Message-ID: <199701312051.MAA25208@netcom18.netcom.com> PJ wrote me in email: >A slight correction. The ``bernstein etc.'' cases are not about the >right to have strong crypto. There is no United States law forbidding >one from having or using crypto, hard, soft, or squishy. Those cases >challenge regulations that keep one from publishing information about >crypto including cryptographic software. Even if it were made illegal >to use hard crypto, it would still be a violation of the First >Amendment for the government to require a license before one is >allowed to publish information about crypto or anything else. I consider it a violation of free speech if the government made "hard crypto" illegal. yes, these cases are generally challenging the publishing aspects of crypto in the US, but this is not what I consider the most important constitutional ingredient in favor of crypto. crypto is essentially a kind of speech, or communication. hence restricting it would be like outlawing a certain foreign language that the government doesn't understand. in my opinion, this is the most important, root case to be made for the use of crypto in this country. publishing crypto algorithms is only a side issue compared to this, imho. so the bottom line is this: crypto regulations can be challenged under the idea that they are restricting freedom of the press, i.e. for academics to discuss algorithms, or it can be challenged under freedom of speech issues, i.e. everyone has the right to use codes for whatever purpose. currently because the regulations prohibit the "export" of crypto code, the first route is the basic challenge that makes the most sense. but I'd like to see the ITAR challenged on the second grounds as well, i.e. as a free speech issue. there's less reason when the gov't is not trying to regulate domestic crypto, but it might be a relevant angle in the export debate. BTW, I understand that there are cases being made by Karn, Junger, and Bernstein, is that correct? with Junger being the most recent? does anyone have web pages dedicated to each one of these? thanks; From chadr at brttech.com Fri Jan 31 12:55:18 1997 From: chadr at brttech.com (Chad Robinson) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:55:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Quick question Message-ID: <199701312055.MAA22559@toad.com> How does the current Linux IPSEC release work? Is it a kernel patch or module? A daemon? I'd love to try this out on a local LAN here to see it in action, but don't have too much time these days. Best regards, Chad --------------------------[ Chad Robinson (Task) ]---------------------------- Senior Systems Analyst chadr at brttech.com BRT Technical Services Corporation http://www.brttech.com/~chadr -----------------[ Why is `abbreviation' such a long word? ]------------------ From sorkin at crl.crl.com Fri Jan 31 12:57:58 1997 From: sorkin at crl.crl.com (Yuri Sorkin) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:57:58 -0800 (PST) Subject: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved. Who gets a credit? Message-ID: <199701312057.MAA22639@toad.com> stewarts at ix.netcom.com Tue, 28 Jan 1997 21:37:57 -0800 At 09:55 PM 1/28/97 +0100, Germano Caronni wrote: >challenge: RC5-32/12/5 >time: from start of contest until Tue Jan 28 21:54:58 1997 >method: massive distributed coordinated keysearch, details later which was a bit slower than Ian Goldberg's crack, but pretty close. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Huh!? Goldbeg's announce states that he spent about 3.5 hours, i.e. a solution came not earlier than 12.30 PST, while Caronni got it at 11.55 am PST. Yuri Sorkin From markm at voicenet.com Fri Jan 31 13:25:57 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:25:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment In-Reply-To: <199701310745.XAA07005@toad.com> Message-ID: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of libel. > > It is, they say, a rich man's game > > Exactly, instead of equal protection under the law we have a specieocracy. Anyone can afford a contingency-free attorney as long as the plaintiff has a good chance of being awarded damages. This has the benefit that the legal system doesn't get overcrowded with frivolous cases. > > -- if I'm libeled by the NYT, I'm > > probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump can. Moreover, > > if I don't have the resources to sue but the statement is libelous, it > > creates a *presumption* in the minds of the readers that the article is > > certainly true. (If it were not, I would have sued, right?) > > Another good example of why our system is broke. If the legal concept of libel is abandoned, this presumption will largely disappear. People will have to rely on the credibility of the source, instead of whether or not the victim of libel has sued. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMvJkASzIPc7jvyFpAQESzAf+Km41fJ4vhavBizPODBuzM8OpolOHFUIy N45inFeUGtsaPH5BBz0T4blAlfgKoYU7N72E/nxbLx+QHZ42oQxcsvtoxiS/zjW8 ilygkVyVxsokueexwLo1QbBn87XIYHbyJBX2Tom31I5iw67caMAfKibnQoVEb1/r 8wlLe00CVB/rkob3QMO1VpT+FLl68+qjo+xfvCNe/GyyvJe0soppnh+croNSWA7R uksNa18XENdntBmy5UDqyCrTfLI40rZkd4wYoTkOy7K2eq1cz2uSO9J2BJOpHnh6 zh4JtXI5UVYOvj3BMbYe0v7Cs/V+1e/eLtqyMNvFGNM2jdl2f39G6w== =lYDr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From alano at teleport.com Fri Jan 31 13:30:22 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 13:30:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail 4.5 Released! In-Reply-To: <199701312001.MAA21361@toad.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 31 Jan 1997, Duncan Frissell wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > At 06:29 AM 1/31/97 -0500, you wrote: > >And what happened to the $29 discount price they proposed for 2.6.3 users and viuacrypt users!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > I just email PGP sales with that question. I just got off the phone with PGP sales. Currently PGPMail is only available off if the web site for download. The version on disk will be available sometime mid February. So it looks like if you want it now it is going to cost you $149. If you wait until mid February, you can get it at the lower price (plus $10 shipping and handling). BTW, it does use SSL on the order form, though I have my doubts about the security of sending form data from an insecure page to a secure form cgi. From alano at teleport.com Fri Jan 31 14:12:03 1997 From: alano at teleport.com (Alan) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:12:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGPMail 4.5 Released! Message-ID: <199701312212.OAA24353@toad.com> On Fri, 31 Jan 1997, Duncan Frissell wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > At 06:29 AM 1/31/97 -0500, you wrote: > >And what happened to the $29 discount price they proposed for 2.6.3 users and viuacrypt users!!!!!!!!!!!! > > > > I just email PGP sales with that question. I just got off the phone with PGP sales. Currently PGPMail is only available off if the web site for download. The version on disk will be available sometime mid February. So it looks like if you want it now it is going to cost you $149. If you wait until mid February, you can get it at the lower price (plus $10 shipping and handling). BTW, it does use SSL on the order form, though I have my doubts about the security of sending form data from an insecure page to a secure form cgi. From vznuri at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 14:12:12 1997 From: vznuri at netcom.com (Vladimir Z. Nuri) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:12:12 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199701312212.OAA24367@toad.com> PJ wrote me in email: >A slight correction. The ``bernstein etc.'' cases are not about the >right to have strong crypto. There is no United States law forbidding >one from having or using crypto, hard, soft, or squishy. Those cases >challenge regulations that keep one from publishing information about >crypto including cryptographic software. Even if it were made illegal >to use hard crypto, it would still be a violation of the First >Amendment for the government to require a license before one is >allowed to publish information about crypto or anything else. I consider it a violation of free speech if the government made "hard crypto" illegal. yes, these cases are generally challenging the publishing aspects of crypto in the US, but this is not what I consider the most important constitutional ingredient in favor of crypto. crypto is essentially a kind of speech, or communication. hence restricting it would be like outlawing a certain foreign language that the government doesn't understand. in my opinion, this is the most important, root case to be made for the use of crypto in this country. publishing crypto algorithms is only a side issue compared to this, imho. so the bottom line is this: crypto regulations can be challenged under the idea that they are restricting freedom of the press, i.e. for academics to discuss algorithms, or it can be challenged under freedom of speech issues, i.e. everyone has the right to use codes for whatever purpose. currently because the regulations prohibit the "export" of crypto code, the first route is the basic challenge that makes the most sense. but I'd like to see the ITAR challenged on the second grounds as well, i.e. as a free speech issue. there's less reason when the gov't is not trying to regulate domestic crypto, but it might be a relevant angle in the export debate. BTW, I understand that there are cases being made by Karn, Junger, and Bernstein, is that correct? with Junger being the most recent? does anyone have web pages dedicated to each one of these? thanks; From markm at voicenet.com Fri Jan 31 14:13:55 1997 From: markm at voicenet.com (Mark M.) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:13:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment Message-ID: <199701312213.OAA24431@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thu, 30 Jan 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > * Many 1st Amendment experts don't believe in the legal concept of libel. > > It is, they say, a rich man's game > > Exactly, instead of equal protection under the law we have a specieocracy. Anyone can afford a contingency-free attorney as long as the plaintiff has a good chance of being awarded damages. This has the benefit that the legal system doesn't get overcrowded with frivolous cases. > > -- if I'm libeled by the NYT, I'm > > probably not going t be able to sue them, but Donald Trump can. Moreover, > > if I don't have the resources to sue but the statement is libelous, it > > creates a *presumption* in the minds of the readers that the article is > > certainly true. (If it were not, I would have sued, right?) > > Another good example of why our system is broke. If the legal concept of libel is abandoned, this presumption will largely disappear. People will have to rely on the credibility of the source, instead of whether or not the victim of libel has sued. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMvJkASzIPc7jvyFpAQESzAf+Km41fJ4vhavBizPODBuzM8OpolOHFUIy N45inFeUGtsaPH5BBz0T4blAlfgKoYU7N72E/nxbLx+QHZ42oQxcsvtoxiS/zjW8 ilygkVyVxsokueexwLo1QbBn87XIYHbyJBX2Tom31I5iw67caMAfKibnQoVEb1/r 8wlLe00CVB/rkob3QMO1VpT+FLl68+qjo+xfvCNe/GyyvJe0soppnh+croNSWA7R uksNa18XENdntBmy5UDqyCrTfLI40rZkd4wYoTkOy7K2eq1cz2uSO9J2BJOpHnh6 zh4JtXI5UVYOvj3BMbYe0v7Cs/V+1e/eLtqyMNvFGNM2jdl2f39G6w== =lYDr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 31 14:56:16 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 14:56:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Denial of service attack Message-ID: <199701312256.OAA24117@mailmasher.com> Dimwit Virus K[arcinogen]OfTheMonth styles his facial hair to look more like pubic hair. \|/ @ @ -oOO-(_)-OOo- Dimwit Virus K[arcinogen]OfTheMonth From ubs at mci2000.com Fri Jan 31 15:49:47 1997 From: ubs at mci2000.com (ubs at mci2000.com) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 15:49:47 -0800 (PST) Subject: How to get MORE ORDERS for ANYTHING YOU sell! Message-ID: <01IEVFHJONGE9EGKC0@MAIL-CLUSTER.PCY.MCI.NET> Hello,^Morons, Hello! As an Entrepreneur you may be interested in a LEADING marketing plan! This plan has worked for many successful entrepreneurs. For more information, please inquire at: REPLY TO: UBS at QualityService.com SUBJECT LINE: "Marketing Plan" This file could mean the online marketing difference between scintillating success and frustrating failure! From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 16:20:01 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:20:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32F29DFD.1CD@sk.sympatico.ca> Steve Schear wrote: > > BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming > >that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs > >to the community IS theft. I work, and as the result of that work something is > >created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that > >work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those > >shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved. > Tell this to the Native Americans. Steve, Slam-dunk, dude! Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 16:20:03 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:20:03 -0800 (PST) Subject: Complying with the EAR [was: More Circumventing the ITAR] In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32F29CF4.5AD2@sk.sympatico.ca> Michael Paul Johnson wrote: > If that is the only chink in the armor you see, then you aren't looking > very hard. The point of this system is Michael, Enjoyed your post. The motivations underlying U.S. crypto policy are indeed multi-faceted, and it is always good to have a variety of well-thought out opinions as to some of the various impetus' behind the machinations of the different governmental departments, etc., which encompass the wide range of those involved in setting and enforcing crypto policy. No matter what the original motivations or pre-conceived plans behind the initial impetus towards the regulation of crypto, once 'policy' enters the governmental maze it takes on a life of its own, subject to whims and vagarities of departments and individuals which reflect a confusing kalidescope of concerns which are both parallel and tangent to the starting vector. I would imagine that, 1,000 years from now, students might well be taught that Phil Zimmerman was responsible for World War III, with the CypherPunks bearing much of the blame, as well. Toto "Fighting for peace, and fucking for virginity." From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 16:20:08 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:20:08 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Security Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <32F2A1B3.FC4@sk.sympatico.ca> Z.B. wrote: > > My computer went into the shop a few days ago, and I was unable to take > my PGP keys off it before it went in. What are the security risks here? > If the repairman chooses to snoop through the files, what would he be > able to do with my key pair? Will I need to revoke the key and make a > new one, or will I be relatively safe since he doesn't have my > passphrase? If the repairman has your pubring and secring files, you can now consider them in the same light as a 'busted flush'. Chances are, he has neither the capability nor the interest in popping open your deep, dark secrets. On the other hand, if he returns your computer with a 'shit-eating grin', you may be in for a world-of-hurt. My advice would be for you to check your 'paranoia level' and, if you are a quart low, then read Phil Zimmerman's PGP documentation once again, and make your decision based on the reality of the possibilities involved. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 16:21:48 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:21:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fwd:[Yet another -onics..] In-Reply-To: <9701311810.AA09508@banshee.BASISinc.com> Message-ID: <32F29E8B.1FA@sk.sympatico.ca> Mike Denney wrote: > > ----- Begin Included Message ----- > > >From sysgu-1 at PaloAlto01.pop.internex.net Thu Jan 30 14:31 PST 1997 > Subject: Fwd:[Yet another -onics..] > To: "Sonni Zambino" , "Mike Denney" , > "Jim Staudenheimer" > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > ***************************** > "GEEKONICS" IS JUST A BEGINNING > by John Woestendiek > Philadelphia Inquirer > Wed., January 8, 1997 > ***************************** > > NEWS BULLETIN: Saying it will improve the education of children who > have grown up immersed in computer lingo, the school board in San > Jose, Calif., has officially designated computer English, or > "Geekonics", as a second language. > > The historic vote on Geekonics - a combination of the word "geek" and > the word "phonics" - came just weeks after the Oakland school board > recognized black English, or Ebonics, as a distinct language. > > "This entirely reconfigures our parameters," Milton "Floppy" > Macintosh, chairman of Geekonics Unlimited, said after the school > board became the first in the nation to recognize Geekonics. > "No longer are we preformatted for failure," Macintosh said during a > celebration that saw many Geekonics backers come dangerously close to > smiling. "Today, we are rebooting, implementing a program to process > the data we need to interface with all units of humanity." > > Controversial and widely misunderstood, the Geekonics movement was > spawned in California's Silicon Valley, where many children have grown > up in households headed by computer technicians, programmers, engineers > and scientists who have lost ability to speak plain English and have > inadvertently passed on their high-tech vernacular to their children. > > HELPING THE TRANSITION > > While schools will not teach the language, increased teacher awareness > of Geekonics, proponents say, will help children make the transition > to standard English. Those students, in turn, could possibly help > their parents learn to speak in a manner that would lead listeners to > believe that they have actual blood coursing through their veins. > > "Bit by bit, byte by byte, with the proper system development, with > nonpreemptive multitasking, I see no reason why we can't download the > data we need to modulate our oral output," Macintosh said. The > designation of Ebonics and Geekonics as languages reflects a growing > awareness of our nation's lingual diversity, experts say. Other groups > pushing for their own languages and/or vernaculars to be declared > official viewed the Geekonics vote as a step in the right direction. > > "This is just, like, OK, you know, the most totally kewl thing, like, > ever," said Jennifer Notat-Albright, chairwoman of the Committee for > the Advancement of Valleyonics, headquartered in Southern California. > "I mean, like, you know?" she added. > > THEY'RE HAPPY IN DIXIE > > Yeee-hah," said Buford "Kudzu" Davis, president of the Dixionics > Coalition. "Y'all gotta know I'm as happy as a tick on a sleeping > bloodhound about this." Spokesmen for several subchapters of Dixionics > - including Alabonics, Tennesonics and Louisionics - also said they > approved of the decision. Bill Flack, public information officer for > the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Bureaucratonics said that his > organization would not comment on the San Jose vote until it convened > a summit meeting, studied the impact, assessed the feasibility, > finalized a report and drafted a comprehensive action plan, > which, once it clears the appropriate subcommittees and is voted on, > will be made public to those who submit the proper information-request > forms. > > Proponents of Ebonics heartily endorsed the designation of Geekonics > as an official language. > > "I ain't got no problem wif it," said Earl E. Byrd, president of the > Ebonics Institute. "You ever try talkin' wif wunna dem computer dudes? > Don't matter if it be a white computer dude or a black computer dude; > it's like you be talkin' to a robot - RAM, DOS, undelete, MegaHertZ. > Ain't nobody understands. But dey keep talkin' anyway. 'Sup wif dat?" > Those involved in the lingual diversity movement believe that only by > enacting many different English languages, in addition to all the > foreign ones practiced here, can we all end up happily speaking the > same boring one, becoming a nation that is both unified in its > diversity, and diversified in its unity. Others say that makes no > sense at all. In any language. > > ----- End Included Message ----- From hacker at pe.net Fri Jan 31 16:26:22 1997 From: hacker at pe.net (XaViUs@pe.net) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:26:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNSCRIBE Message-ID: <199702010026.QAA01149@pe.net> UNSCRIBE From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Fri Jan 31 16:27:17 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:27:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment (fwd) Message-ID: <199702010028.SAA02024@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:28:56 -0500 (EST) > From: "Mark M." > > Anyone can afford a contingency-free attorney as long as the plaintiff has a > good chance of being awarded damages. This has the benefit that the legal > system doesn't get overcrowded with frivolous cases. Really? And what if the out come is nothing more than a public statement in the local newspaper that the original statement was not true and paying the court costs? I doubt you will find a single attorney who will take the case because there is no profit for them. > If the legal concept of libel is abandoned, this presumption will largely > disappear. People will have to rely on the credibility of the source, instead > of whether or not the victim of libel has sued. Really? And just exactly do you base this assumption on? Historicaly it would seem that people want to believe the dirty grit about people. If they didn't they wouldn't make the National Inquirer as successful as it is. No, in general people don't give a crap about the real truth or falsity of the statement unless it directly impacts them in some manner. What they are interested in is entertainment, something the law should not provide. The real issue is whether a Democracy can exist in an environment where there is no requirement of honesty and truth from its citizens. I would contend that it can't since the democratic process itself is representative of those people and their beliefs. If you really and truly belive a democratic society can exist with no recognition of and protection for reputation we will just have to respectfuly disagree. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From hua at chromatic.com Fri Jan 31 16:32:10 1997 From: hua at chromatic.com (Ernest Hua) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:32:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: News: Panic! Internet is full of terrorists! Message-ID: <199702010031.QAA11517@ohio.chromatic.com> I'm really sick and tired of this hypocritical bullshit from our executive branch. On one hand, we have FBI + CIA + NSA crying terrorists and child pornographers can get away with their crimes if networks are secured with cryptography. On the other hand, we also have presidential panels crying that our networks are vulnerable to terrorists if we don't do some serious security overhauls. What the *#@!! do they want? If you outlaw security software, then stop whining that the networks aren't secure! If you want secure networks, stop whining about the encryption "problem". Either the network is secure or it isn't. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS! Ern -------- QUOTED ARTICLE FROM: San Jose Mercury (Jan 31, 1997) PRESIDENTIAL PANEL WARNS OF CYBERATTACK THREAT Critics charge danger overstated, could lead to unwarranted intrusion on Net Published: Jan. 31, 1997 BY RORY J. O'CONNOR Mercury News Washington Bureau WASHINGTON -- The United States faces a serious risk of cyberattacks against vital computer-controlled networks, attacks that could threaten the nation's security or economy, according to a presidential commission evaluating the threat. [SNIP] -------- Ernest Hua, Software Sanitation Engineer Chromatic Research, 615 Tasman Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94089-1707 Phone: 408 752-9375, Fax: 408 752-9301, E-Mail: hua at chromatic.com From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Fri Jan 31 17:01:35 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 17:01:35 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment (fwd) Message-ID: <199702010102.TAA02060@einstein> Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:23:18 -0600 (CST) > From: ichudov at algebra.com > > I can give you an example. > > ``Jim Choate invented an improved bubble sort method, called BSAM.'' > > This is undoubtedly false since you likely did not invent any sorting > method. But you would not be able to get any damages (is that correct?) Under the present system? Yes, it would not be worth a lawyers time to process the appropriate paperwork unless I were a computer scientist and the statement was published in a reputable magazine by something like the ACM or IEEE. Under the system I propose you would be forced to publish a public recantation in the local press as well as paying the legal fees for the trial at least. Provided of course it was worth the cost of the bond to me. After all it is my reputation. The only person who should make decisions about how important my reputation is to me is me, most definitely not you or any other third party. I suspect you would not allow me to decide your reputation either. > When you say "should", what do you mean? That the current law will > hold you to a minimum standard of evidence? > Or you mean that it would be nice if it were so? Neither, the currrent requirements of the law are irrelevant. My premise is that such current laws are broke, why would I want to promote them? Answer, I wouldn't. As to 'nice', what is nice isn't an issue. What is necessary is the recognition that for a democratic society to exist in a world where business is done based on reputations by parties who may never make more contact than a email and EFT making statements about such reputations which are not backed by verifiable evidence should be discouraged strongly. > > A democratic society should have no tolerence for libel, slander, or other > > forms of lies. > > Why? And who decides what is a lie? This is almost too silly to even respond to. A lie is a statement which could be true but isn't. In the context of the current discussion this would mean that a statement made by one party about another party which was told to a third party and was not verifiable with evidence. Why should anyone tolerate a liar? Responsible and reasonable people don't tolerate liars. Who decides? The same group who decides now, the jury. > > In civil cases the plaintiff should place a bond, set at some percentage of > > the maximum permissible award, at the time the case is filed. This would at > > least cover the general costs of the court and limit nuisance cases. > > > > You can either oppose "specieocracy" and inequality of rich and > poor in libel litigation, or ask to place bonds that will make even > harder for the poor to sue, BUT NOT BOTH, if you want to remain logical. This is another clever attempt at a smoke screen. Nice try but 'Brrrrrttt', you loose the bet. I would suggest you don't play poker, your bluffs are truly amateurish. If the plaintiff pays up front or at the end is irrelevant. If the plaintiff loses they pay the cost of the court. If they win then the defendant pays the court costs, reimbursment of the bond, and the penalites awarded by the jury/court. The only reason to require anything up front is to act as a verification that the plaintiff can pay the court costs (which they get back if they win and must pay anyway if they loose) up front. The reason being that it would be possible without this for people to skip out on the court costs if they loose, which would cause another more expensive cost, a criminal trial, that the people in general would have to carry. The end result would be that the taxes we would have to pay would be higher just like your credit card costs are more expensive than they need to be because of fraud by other card holders. I would never attempt to speak for you but I pay too much tax now taking care of deadbeats and similar sorts. Further more, the bond would not have to be extravagant. If it were a simple case of libel with no punitive damages involved it would be resolved by a small claims court and might require no more than $25 - $50 as a bond. The point of the bond is to make the plaintiff think twice, not hinder them if that is what they truly feel is their due. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From rshea at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 17:12:09 1997 From: rshea at netcom.com (rex) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 17:12:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater In-Reply-To: Message-ID: Black Unicorn wrote: >If you want to look at it a different way, if you are involved with a drug >offense and are not using a weapon, you'll get a lower sentence than a >full fledged drug crime. It's a step in the right direction - i.e. away >from manadatory sentencing of a flat time period for a crime regardless of >circumstances. But Putra got the same sentence she would have gotten had she been convicted on both charges. The fact that she was acquitted meant nothing. UNITED STATES v. VERNON WATTS UNITED STATES v. CHERYL PUTRA on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 95-1906. Decided January 6, 1997 Per Curiam. In these two cases, two panels of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that sentencing courts could not consider conduct of the defendants underlying charges of which they had been acquitted. United States v. Watts, 67 F. 3d 790 (CA9 1995) (-Watts-); United States v. Putra, 78 F. 3d 1386 (CA9 1996) (-Putra-). [...] Because the panels' holdings conflict with the clear implications of 18 U. S. C. 3661, the Sentencing Guidelines, and this Court's decisions, particularly Witte v. United States, 515 U. S. ___ (1995), we grant the petition and reverse in both cases. [...] Justice Stevens, dissenting. The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 revolutionized the manner in which district courts sentence persons convicted of federal crimes. Burns v. United States, 501 U. S. 129, 132 (1991). The goals of rehabilitation and fairness served by individualized sentencing that formerly justified vesting judges with virtually unreviewable sentencing discretion have been replaced by the impersonal interest in uniformity and retribution. [...] II The issue of law raised by the sentencing of Cheryl Putra involved the identification of the offense level that determined the range within which the judge could exercise discretion. Because she was a first offender with no criminal history, that range was based entirely on the offense or offenses for which she was to be punished. She was found guilty of aiding and abetting the intended distribution of one ounce of cocaine on May 8, 1992, but not guilty of participating in a similar transaction involving five ounces of cocaine on May 9, 1992. United States v. Putra, 78 F. 3d 1386, 1387 (CA9 1996). If the guilty verdict provided the only basis for imposing punishment on Ms. Putra, the Guidelines would have required the judge to impose a sentence of no less than 15 months in prison and would have prohibited him from imposing a sentence longer than 21 months. If Putra had been found guilty of also participating in the 5 ounce transaction on May 9, 1992, the Guidelines would have required that both the minimum and the maximum sentences be increased; the range would have been between 27 and 33 months. As the District Court applied the Guidelines, precisely the same range resulted from the acquittal as would have been dictated by a conviction. Notwithstanding the absence of sufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the alleged offense on May 9 led to the imposition of a sentence six months longer than the maximum permitted for the only crime that provided any basis for punishment. In my judgment neither our prior cases nor the text of the statute warrants this perverse result. And the vigor of the debate among judges in the courts of appeals on this basic issue belies the ease with which the Court addresses it, without hearing oral argument or allowing the parties to fully brief the issues. [...] Even more than Williams, this Court, like all of the Circuits that have adopted the same approach as the District Courts in these cases, relies primarily on the misguided five-to-four decision in McMillan v. Pennsylvania, 477 U. S. 79 (1986). For the reasons stated in my dissent in that case, id., at 95-104, I continue to believe that it was incorrectly decided and that its holding should be reconsidered. Even accepting its holding that the Constitution does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt to establish a sentencing factor that increases the minimum sentence without altering the maximum, however, there are at least two reasons why McMillan does not dictate the outcome of these cases. In McMillan, as in these cases, the defendant's minimum sentence was enhanced on the basis of a fact proved by a preponderance of the evidence. But in McMillan, the maximum was unchanged; the sentence actually imposed was within the range that would have been available to the judge even if the enhancing factor had not been proved. In these cases, however, the sentences actually imposed were higher than the Guidelines would have allowed without evidence of the additional offenses. The McMillan opinion pointedly noted that the Pennsylvania statute had not altered the maximum penalty for the crime committed and operated solely to limit the sentencing courts' discretion in selecting a penalty within the range already available to it without the special finding of visible possession of a firearm. Id., at 87-88. Given the Court's acknowledged inability to lay down any `bright line' test that would define the limits of its holding, id., at 91, and its apparent assumption that a sentencing factor should not be allowed to serve as a tail which wags the dog of the substantive offense, id., at 88, see also ante, at 7, n. 2, the holding should not be extended to allow a fact proved by only a preponderance to increase the entire range of penalties within which the sentencing judge may lawfully exercise discretion. [...] In my opinion the statute should be construed in the light of the traditional requirement that criminal charges must be sustained by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That requirement has always applied to charges involving multiple offenses as well as a single offense. Whether an allegation of criminal conduct is the sole basis for punishment or merely one of several bases for punishment, we should presume that Congress intended the new sentencing Guidelines that it authorized in 1984 to adhere to longstanding procedural requirements enshrined in our constitutional jurisprudence. The notion that a charge that cannot be sustained by proof beyond a reasonable doubt may give rise to the same punishment as if it had been so proved is repugnant to that jurisprudence. From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 17:15:00 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 17:15:00 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNSCRIBE In-Reply-To: <199702010026.QAA01149@pe.net> Message-ID: <32F2AF22.5B1E@sk.sympatico.ca> XaViUs at pe.net wrote: > > UNSCRIBE Your message has been received by the CypherPunks list, and we will shortly be sending a rabbi and a surgeon to UNSCRIBE you. In the meantime, please try to keep your foreskin cleansed and hygenic, in order to prevent infection. Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 17:41:07 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 17:41:07 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd) Message-ID: <199702010141.RAA29217@toad.com> Steve Schear wrote: > > BULLSHIT. BULL FUCKING SHIT. The origin of property is labor. Claiming > >that _my_ property is the result of ME stealing, and hence what I OWN belongs > >to the community IS theft. I work, and as the result of that work something is > >created. That something is MINE to do with as I will. If I choose to sell that > >work for money, that money is mine. If I trade that money for shoes, those > >shoes are mine. THere is no theft involved. > Tell this to the Native Americans. Steve, Slam-dunk, dude! Toto From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 17:43:36 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 17:43:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Complying with the EAR [was: More Circumventing the ITAR] Message-ID: <199702010143.RAA29295@toad.com> Michael Paul Johnson wrote: > If that is the only chink in the armor you see, then you aren't looking > very hard. The point of this system is Michael, Enjoyed your post. The motivations underlying U.S. crypto policy are indeed multi-faceted, and it is always good to have a variety of well-thought out opinions as to some of the various impetus' behind the machinations of the different governmental departments, etc., which encompass the wide range of those involved in setting and enforcing crypto policy. No matter what the original motivations or pre-conceived plans behind the initial impetus towards the regulation of crypto, once 'policy' enters the governmental maze it takes on a life of its own, subject to whims and vagarities of departments and individuals which reflect a confusing kalidescope of concerns which are both parallel and tangent to the starting vector. I would imagine that, 1,000 years from now, students might well be taught that Phil Zimmerman was responsible for World War III, with the CypherPunks bearing much of the blame, as well. Toto "Fighting for peace, and fucking for virginity." From jeremey at veriweb.com Fri Jan 31 17:49:09 1997 From: jeremey at veriweb.com (Jeremey Barrett) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 17:49:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: pgpfingerd Message-ID: <199702010149.RAA27079@descartes.veriweb.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For what it's worth, I wrote a very short fingerd that fetches _only_ a user's .pgpplan file, should it exist. Else it just exits. Someone may have already done this, so be it. This was mostly for my own use, but if anyone wants the code, feel free to use it. It's available from my home page ( http://www.veriweb.com/people/jeremey/ ). After calling getpwnam() on the username supplied, it calls setuid() with the uid of the user being fingered. It ignores any finger options and attempts to parse them out. It's possible I missed some. After setuid(), it attempts to open a file called .pgpplan in the directory (pw_dir) returned by getpwnam(). If this is not a _regular_ file, it exits, i.e. no symlinks. Then it shoves the file out over stdout (this assumes it was invoked by inetd). That's it. I've only compiled it on Linux and BSDI, but it doesn't do anything very odd, so it should compile fine on other Unix platforms. - -- =-----------------------------------------------------------------------= Jeremey Barrett VeriWeb Internet Corp. Senior Software Engineer http://www.veriweb.com/ PGP Key fingerprint = 3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80 DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64 =-----------------------------------------------------------------------= -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBMvKgyy/fy+vkqMxNAQHqKgQAqxKiAzcOUDx9ThN5D6OHwuyUE1WlCtXr EVjg0d19fhafiTGO3HwAFbk8zxtzs/YMtSJ4a5nbALQTUxVBF/749DboXU+IS37l urB7MjBb0mB7+4IDmmR/iFEJa/U/mlTWZiLZ7JOq2Y7GtuqDmGgN3Z/T+K0loQvl 7Qn1x8aHXlI= =RxZM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 18:01:30 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:01:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Security Question Message-ID: <199702010201.SAA29739@toad.com> Z.B. wrote: > > My computer went into the shop a few days ago, and I was unable to take > my PGP keys off it before it went in. What are the security risks here? > If the repairman chooses to snoop through the files, what would he be > able to do with my key pair? Will I need to revoke the key and make a > new one, or will I be relatively safe since he doesn't have my > passphrase? If the repairman has your pubring and secring files, you can now consider them in the same light as a 'busted flush'. Chances are, he has neither the capability nor the interest in popping open your deep, dark secrets. On the other hand, if he returns your computer with a 'shit-eating grin', you may be in for a world-of-hurt. My advice would be for you to check your 'paranoia level' and, if you are a quart low, then read Phil Zimmerman's PGP documentation once again, and make your decision based on the reality of the possibilities involved. Toto From hua at chromatic.com Fri Jan 31 18:01:31 1997 From: hua at chromatic.com (Ernest Hua) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:01:31 -0800 (PST) Subject: News: Panic! Internet is full of terrorists! Message-ID: <199702010201.SAA29740@toad.com> I'm really sick and tired of this hypocritical bullshit from our executive branch. On one hand, we have FBI + CIA + NSA crying terrorists and child pornographers can get away with their crimes if networks are secured with cryptography. On the other hand, we also have presidential panels crying that our networks are vulnerable to terrorists if we don't do some serious security overhauls. What the *#@!! do they want? If you outlaw security software, then stop whining that the networks aren't secure! If you want secure networks, stop whining about the encryption "problem". Either the network is secure or it isn't. YOU CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS! Ern -------- QUOTED ARTICLE FROM: San Jose Mercury (Jan 31, 1997) PRESIDENTIAL PANEL WARNS OF CYBERATTACK THREAT Critics charge danger overstated, could lead to unwarranted intrusion on Net Published: Jan. 31, 1997 BY RORY J. O'CONNOR Mercury News Washington Bureau WASHINGTON -- The United States faces a serious risk of cyberattacks against vital computer-controlled networks, attacks that could threaten the nation's security or economy, according to a presidential commission evaluating the threat. [SNIP] -------- Ernest Hua, Software Sanitation Engineer Chromatic Research, 615 Tasman Drive, Sunnyvale, CA 94089-1707 Phone: 408 752-9375, Fax: 408 752-9301, E-Mail: hua at chromatic.com From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Fri Jan 31 18:01:36 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:01:36 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment (fwd) Message-ID: <199702010201.SAA29748@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 16:28:56 -0500 (EST) > From: "Mark M." > > Anyone can afford a contingency-free attorney as long as the plaintiff has a > good chance of being awarded damages. This has the benefit that the legal > system doesn't get overcrowded with frivolous cases. Really? And what if the out come is nothing more than a public statement in the local newspaper that the original statement was not true and paying the court costs? I doubt you will find a single attorney who will take the case because there is no profit for them. > If the legal concept of libel is abandoned, this presumption will largely > disappear. People will have to rely on the credibility of the source, instead > of whether or not the victim of libel has sued. Really? And just exactly do you base this assumption on? Historicaly it would seem that people want to believe the dirty grit about people. If they didn't they wouldn't make the National Inquirer as successful as it is. No, in general people don't give a crap about the real truth or falsity of the statement unless it directly impacts them in some manner. What they are interested in is entertainment, something the law should not provide. The real issue is whether a Democracy can exist in an environment where there is no requirement of honesty and truth from its citizens. I would contend that it can't since the democratic process itself is representative of those people and their beliefs. If you really and truly belive a democratic society can exist with no recognition of and protection for reputation we will just have to respectfuly disagree. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From toto at sk.sympatico.ca Fri Jan 31 18:02:17 1997 From: toto at sk.sympatico.ca (Toto) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:02:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fwd:[Yet another -onics..] Message-ID: <199702010202.SAA29766@toad.com> Mike Denney wrote: > > ----- Begin Included Message ----- > > >From sysgu-1 at PaloAlto01.pop.internex.net Thu Jan 30 14:31 PST 1997 > Subject: Fwd:[Yet another -onics..] > To: "Sonni Zambino" , "Mike Denney" , > "Jim Staudenheimer" > Mime-Version: 1.0 > > ***************************** > "GEEKONICS" IS JUST A BEGINNING > by John Woestendiek > Philadelphia Inquirer > Wed., January 8, 1997 > ***************************** > > NEWS BULLETIN: Saying it will improve the education of children who > have grown up immersed in computer lingo, the school board in San > Jose, Calif., has officially designated computer English, or > "Geekonics", as a second language. > > The historic vote on Geekonics - a combination of the word "geek" and > the word "phonics" - came just weeks after the Oakland school board > recognized black English, or Ebonics, as a distinct language. > > "This entirely reconfigures our parameters," Milton "Floppy" > Macintosh, chairman of Geekonics Unlimited, said after the school > board became the first in the nation to recognize Geekonics. > "No longer are we preformatted for failure," Macintosh said during a > celebration that saw many Geekonics backers come dangerously close to > smiling. "Today, we are rebooting, implementing a program to process > the data we need to interface with all units of humanity." > > Controversial and widely misunderstood, the Geekonics movement was > spawned in California's Silicon Valley, where many children have grown > up in households headed by computer technicians, programmers, engineers > and scientists who have lost ability to speak plain English and have > inadvertently passed on their high-tech vernacular to their children. > > HELPING THE TRANSITION > > While schools will not teach the language, increased teacher awareness > of Geekonics, proponents say, will help children make the transition > to standard English. Those students, in turn, could possibly help > their parents learn to speak in a manner that would lead listeners to > believe that they have actual blood coursing through their veins. > > "Bit by bit, byte by byte, with the proper system development, with > nonpreemptive multitasking, I see no reason why we can't download the > data we need to modulate our oral output," Macintosh said. The > designation of Ebonics and Geekonics as languages reflects a growing > awareness of our nation's lingual diversity, experts say. Other groups > pushing for their own languages and/or vernaculars to be declared > official viewed the Geekonics vote as a step in the right direction. > > "This is just, like, OK, you know, the most totally kewl thing, like, > ever," said Jennifer Notat-Albright, chairwoman of the Committee for > the Advancement of Valleyonics, headquartered in Southern California. > "I mean, like, you know?" she added. > > THEY'RE HAPPY IN DIXIE > > Yeee-hah," said Buford "Kudzu" Davis, president of the Dixionics > Coalition. "Y'all gotta know I'm as happy as a tick on a sleeping > bloodhound about this." Spokesmen for several subchapters of Dixionics > - including Alabonics, Tennesonics and Louisionics - also said they > approved of the decision. Bill Flack, public information officer for > the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Bureaucratonics said that his > organization would not comment on the San Jose vote until it convened > a summit meeting, studied the impact, assessed the feasibility, > finalized a report and drafted a comprehensive action plan, > which, once it clears the appropriate subcommittees and is voted on, > will be made public to those who submit the proper information-request > forms. > > Proponents of Ebonics heartily endorsed the designation of Geekonics > as an official language. > > "I ain't got no problem wif it," said Earl E. Byrd, president of the > Ebonics Institute. "You ever try talkin' wif wunna dem computer dudes? > Don't matter if it be a white computer dude or a black computer dude; > it's like you be talkin' to a robot - RAM, DOS, undelete, MegaHertZ. > Ain't nobody understands. But dey keep talkin' anyway. 'Sup wif dat?" > Those involved in the lingual diversity movement believe that only by > enacting many different English languages, in addition to all the > foreign ones practiced here, can we all end up happily speaking the > same boring one, becoming a nation that is both unified in its > diversity, and diversified in its unity. Others say that makes no > sense at all. In any language. > > ----- End Included Message ----- From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Fri Jan 31 18:02:18 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:02:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Libel & the 1st Amendment (fwd) Message-ID: <199702010202.SAA29767@toad.com> Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 23:23:18 -0600 (CST) > From: ichudov at algebra.com > > I can give you an example. > > ``Jim Choate invented an improved bubble sort method, called BSAM.'' > > This is undoubtedly false since you likely did not invent any sorting > method. But you would not be able to get any damages (is that correct?) Under the present system? Yes, it would not be worth a lawyers time to process the appropriate paperwork unless I were a computer scientist and the statement was published in a reputable magazine by something like the ACM or IEEE. Under the system I propose you would be forced to publish a public recantation in the local press as well as paying the legal fees for the trial at least. Provided of course it was worth the cost of the bond to me. After all it is my reputation. The only person who should make decisions about how important my reputation is to me is me, most definitely not you or any other third party. I suspect you would not allow me to decide your reputation either. > When you say "should", what do you mean? That the current law will > hold you to a minimum standard of evidence? > Or you mean that it would be nice if it were so? Neither, the currrent requirements of the law are irrelevant. My premise is that such current laws are broke, why would I want to promote them? Answer, I wouldn't. As to 'nice', what is nice isn't an issue. What is necessary is the recognition that for a democratic society to exist in a world where business is done based on reputations by parties who may never make more contact than a email and EFT making statements about such reputations which are not backed by verifiable evidence should be discouraged strongly. > > A democratic society should have no tolerence for libel, slander, or other > > forms of lies. > > Why? And who decides what is a lie? This is almost too silly to even respond to. A lie is a statement which could be true but isn't. In the context of the current discussion this would mean that a statement made by one party about another party which was told to a third party and was not verifiable with evidence. Why should anyone tolerate a liar? Responsible and reasonable people don't tolerate liars. Who decides? The same group who decides now, the jury. > > In civil cases the plaintiff should place a bond, set at some percentage of > > the maximum permissible award, at the time the case is filed. This would at > > least cover the general costs of the court and limit nuisance cases. > > > > You can either oppose "specieocracy" and inequality of rich and > poor in libel litigation, or ask to place bonds that will make even > harder for the poor to sue, BUT NOT BOTH, if you want to remain logical. This is another clever attempt at a smoke screen. Nice try but 'Brrrrrttt', you loose the bet. I would suggest you don't play poker, your bluffs are truly amateurish. If the plaintiff pays up front or at the end is irrelevant. If the plaintiff loses they pay the cost of the court. If they win then the defendant pays the court costs, reimbursment of the bond, and the penalites awarded by the jury/court. The only reason to require anything up front is to act as a verification that the plaintiff can pay the court costs (which they get back if they win and must pay anyway if they loose) up front. The reason being that it would be possible without this for people to skip out on the court costs if they loose, which would cause another more expensive cost, a criminal trial, that the people in general would have to carry. The end result would be that the taxes we would have to pay would be higher just like your credit card costs are more expensive than they need to be because of fraud by other card holders. I would never attempt to speak for you but I pay too much tax now taking care of deadbeats and similar sorts. Further more, the bond would not have to be extravagant. If it were a simple case of libel with no punitive damages involved it would be resolved by a small claims court and might require no more than $25 - $50 as a bond. The point of the bond is to make the plaintiff think twice, not hinder them if that is what they truly feel is their due. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage at ssz.com From rshea at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 18:02:26 1997 From: rshea at netcom.com (rex) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:02:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: If guilty of a lesser crime, you can be sentenced for a greater Message-ID: <199702010202.SAA29775@toad.com> Black Unicorn wrote: >If you want to look at it a different way, if you are involved with a drug >offense and are not using a weapon, you'll get a lower sentence than a >full fledged drug crime. It's a step in the right direction - i.e. away >from manadatory sentencing of a flat time period for a crime regardless of >circumstances. But Putra got the same sentence she would have gotten had she been convicted on both charges. The fact that she was acquitted meant nothing. UNITED STATES v. VERNON WATTS UNITED STATES v. CHERYL PUTRA on petition for writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit No. 95-1906. Decided January 6, 1997 Per Curiam. In these two cases, two panels of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that sentencing courts could not consider conduct of the defendants underlying charges of which they had been acquitted. United States v. Watts, 67 F. 3d 790 (CA9 1995) (-Watts-); United States v. Putra, 78 F. 3d 1386 (CA9 1996) (-Putra-). [...] Because the panels' holdings conflict with the clear implications of 18 U. S. C. 3661, the Sentencing Guidelines, and this Court's decisions, particularly Witte v. United States, 515 U. S. ___ (1995), we grant the petition and reverse in both cases. [...] Justice Stevens, dissenting. The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 revolutionized the manner in which district courts sentence persons convicted of federal crimes. Burns v. United States, 501 U. S. 129, 132 (1991). The goals of rehabilitation and fairness served by individualized sentencing that formerly justified vesting judges with virtually unreviewable sentencing discretion have been replaced by the impersonal interest in uniformity and retribution. [...] II The issue of law raised by the sentencing of Cheryl Putra involved the identification of the offense level that determined the range within which the judge could exercise discretion. Because she was a first offender with no criminal history, that range was based entirely on the offense or offenses for which she was to be punished. She was found guilty of aiding and abetting the intended distribution of one ounce of cocaine on May 8, 1992, but not guilty of participating in a similar transaction involving five ounces of cocaine on May 9, 1992. United States v. Putra, 78 F. 3d 1386, 1387 (CA9 1996). If the guilty verdict provided the only basis for imposing punishment on Ms. Putra, the Guidelines would have required the judge to impose a sentence of no less than 15 months in prison and would have prohibited him from imposing a sentence longer than 21 months. If Putra had been found guilty of also participating in the 5 ounce transaction on May 9, 1992, the Guidelines would have required that both the minimum and the maximum sentences be increased; the range would have been between 27 and 33 months. As the District Court applied the Guidelines, precisely the same range resulted from the acquittal as would have been dictated by a conviction. Notwithstanding the absence of sufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the alleged offense on May 9 led to the imposition of a sentence six months longer than the maximum permitted for the only crime that provided any basis for punishment. In my judgment neither our prior cases nor the text of the statute warrants this perverse result. And the vigor of the debate among judges in the courts of appeals on this basic issue belies the ease with which the Court addresses it, without hearing oral argument or allowing the parties to fully brief the issues. [...] Even more than Williams, this Court, like all of the Circuits that have adopted the same approach as the District Courts in these cases, relies primarily on the misguided five-to-four decision in McMillan v. Pennsylvania, 477 U. S. 79 (1986). For the reasons stated in my dissent in that case, id., at 95-104, I continue to believe that it was incorrectly decided and that its holding should be reconsidered. Even accepting its holding that the Constitution does not require proof beyond a reasonable doubt to establish a sentencing factor that increases the minimum sentence without altering the maximum, however, there are at least two reasons why McMillan does not dictate the outcome of these cases. In McMillan, as in these cases, the defendant's minimum sentence was enhanced on the basis of a fact proved by a preponderance of the evidence. But in McMillan, the maximum was unchanged; the sentence actually imposed was within the range that would have been available to the judge even if the enhancing factor had not been proved. In these cases, however, the sentences actually imposed were higher than the Guidelines would have allowed without evidence of the additional offenses. The McMillan opinion pointedly noted that the Pennsylvania statute had not altered the maximum penalty for the crime committed and operated solely to limit the sentencing courts' discretion in selecting a penalty within the range already available to it without the special finding of visible possession of a firearm. Id., at 87-88. Given the Court's acknowledged inability to lay down any `bright line' test that would define the limits of its holding, id., at 91, and its apparent assumption that a sentencing factor should not be allowed to serve as a tail which wags the dog of the substantive offense, id., at 88, see also ante, at 7, n. 2, the holding should not be extended to allow a fact proved by only a preponderance to increase the entire range of penalties within which the sentencing judge may lawfully exercise discretion. [...] In my opinion the statute should be construed in the light of the traditional requirement that criminal charges must be sustained by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That requirement has always applied to charges involving multiple offenses as well as a single offense. Whether an allegation of criminal conduct is the sole basis for punishment or merely one of several bases for punishment, we should presume that Congress intended the new sentencing Guidelines that it authorized in 1984 to adhere to longstanding procedural requirements enshrined in our constitutional jurisprudence. The notion that a charge that cannot be sustained by proof beyond a reasonable doubt may give rise to the same punishment as if it had been so proved is repugnant to that jurisprudence. From ravage at einstein.ssz.com Fri Jan 31 18:31:40 1997 From: ravage at einstein.ssz.com (Jim Choate) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:31:40 -0800 (PST) Subject: Thoughts re moderation, filtering, and name changes In-Reply-To: <32EF9A5B.5CF1@sk.sympatico.ca> Message-ID: <32F2C633.44E4@einstein.ssz.com> Greg, I read your missive (cpunks.html). It was interesting and thoughtful, despite the lack of ASCII art. I thought that I would reply to it by private email, in order to be able to speak bluntly, without damaging some of the rather fragile egos on the list. On the list I do my best to refrain from personal insults toward others, but there sometimes comes a point where the mere facts of a matter tend to be insulting to others, despite attempts to tippy-toe around them. Your HTML post does, in fact, deal with some very important points in regard to the content of the list. So much so, that it points out one of the major reasons that I see the moderation/censorship process that has been implemented as a deceitful and shoddy treatment of CypherPunk list members. After years of reaping the rewards of his role of crypto-anarchist- privacy-freedom/of/speech champion (which he has every right to), John Gilmore decides to declare, "My machine--my list. I'm changing it." (He might as well have added, "Anyone who doesn't like it can go fuck themselves!") John Gilmore effectively said, "I 'AM' the cypherpunks." Despite the fact that he rarely posts to it and does not participate in the discussions. And exactly what was the purpose behind the changes? Any two imbeciles with a case of beer could have sat down in a single evening and hammered out a solution to the problems you have addressed. Instead, John chose to confiscate the subscribers by giving his 'new' list the cypherpunks name, instead of building a new list on its own merits. And he set it up so that anyone who wants to follow what is happening in the moderation/censorship process gets 'twice as much' crapola as before. The fact is, there is not one, single member who expressed a desire to continue receiving the Tim May crapola or the UCE/Spam crapola. But the process was set up so that those who choose not to receive the edited/moderated/censored list get this shit forwarded to them, by design of John and Sandy. As far as 'censoring' goes, 'people' are being censored, not 'content'. I, among others, am auto-botted to the flames and uncensored lists. My 'offense' appears to be questioning the New List Order. If John, in his 'moderation' announcement, had stated that he intended to automatically shit-can certain member's postings, he would have lost even what shaky respect he still maintains among people who are paying a modicum of attention to what is actually transpiring on the list. To tell the truth, my original concern with Sandy censoring the list was that he does not have a particularly good command of the English language, and he seems to have trouble grasping the concepts involved in moderation/censorship. I actually like Sandy, so I was hoping my forebodings would turn out to be incorrect, but they have not. I think he is in over his head and, as a result, his moderation is close to being a joke. This is not a 'casual' observation. I have read every single message since the start of moderation, and documented the censored/uncensored posts, as well as analyzing the headers, etc. There are more than a few obtuse things going on behind the scenes. I believe that your view of 60% on-topic but uninteresting is a figure fairly close to how more than a few list members view the situation, but no one seems to realize that they are each talking about a different 60%, which, taken together, encompasses the majority of the postings. Think of it this way--what if each member was allowed to cut-out the 60% that they personally found uninteresting? What do you think would be left? You seem to be one of the few list members who realizes what they gain by having a 'library' of posts that introduce them to information and perspectives that broaden their horizons. I would hate to lose access to your posts because another member cut them out as a part of the 60% that s/he found 'uninteresting'. From jeremey at veriweb.com Fri Jan 31 18:55:51 1997 From: jeremey at veriweb.com (Jeremey Barrett) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 18:55:51 -0800 (PST) Subject: pgpfingerd Message-ID: <199702010255.SAA01163@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For what it's worth, I wrote a very short fingerd that fetches _only_ a user's .pgpplan file, should it exist. Else it just exits. Someone may have already done this, so be it. This was mostly for my own use, but if anyone wants the code, feel free to use it. It's available from my home page ( http://www.veriweb.com/people/jeremey/ ). After calling getpwnam() on the username supplied, it calls setuid() with the uid of the user being fingered. It ignores any finger options and attempts to parse them out. It's possible I missed some. After setuid(), it attempts to open a file called .pgpplan in the directory (pw_dir) returned by getpwnam(). If this is not a _regular_ file, it exits, i.e. no symlinks. Then it shoves the file out over stdout (this assumes it was invoked by inetd). That's it. I've only compiled it on Linux and BSDI, but it doesn't do anything very odd, so it should compile fine on other Unix platforms. - -- =-----------------------------------------------------------------------= Jeremey Barrett VeriWeb Internet Corp. Senior Software Engineer http://www.veriweb.com/ PGP Key fingerprint = 3B 42 1E D4 4B 17 0D 80 DC 59 6F 59 04 C3 83 64 =-----------------------------------------------------------------------= -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAwUBMvKgyy/fy+vkqMxNAQHqKgQAqxKiAzcOUDx9ThN5D6OHwuyUE1WlCtXr EVjg0d19fhafiTGO3HwAFbk8zxtzs/YMtSJ4a5nbALQTUxVBF/749DboXU+IS37l urB7MjBb0mB7+4IDmmR/iFEJa/U/mlTWZiLZ7JOq2Y7GtuqDmGgN3Z/T+K0loQvl 7Qn1x8aHXlI= =RxZM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 31 19:10:17 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 19:10:17 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Security Question In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <0T0e2D26w165w@bwalk.dm.com> "Z.B." writes: > My computer went into the shop a few days ago, and I was unable to take > my PGP keys off it before it went in. What are the security risks here? > If the repairman chooses to snoop through the files, what would he be > able to do with my key pair? Will I need to revoke the key and make a > new one, or will I be relatively safe since he doesn't have my > passphrase? If the keys were protected with a passphrase, then it's unlikely that someone with access to the disk can use them without the passphrase. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 31 19:24:06 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 19:24:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Degaussing diskettes Message-ID: <199702010324.TAA00444@mailmasher.com> Dr.Dopehead L[ice] Vilus K[rust]OfTheMoment wears satin lingerie embroidered with pink swastikas, prancing around for his faggot, AIDS infected lovers. \|/ @ @ -oOO-(_)-OOo- Dr.Dopehead L[ice] Vilus K[rust]OfTheMoment From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Fri Jan 31 19:58:01 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 19:58:01 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ITAR] Zero-knowledge interactive proofs Message-ID: <19970201034747.28587.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Dr.Derisve L]oser[ Vampire K]unt[OfTheMinute is a pimply dweeb sitting at a computer chortling at his own imagined cleverness. .-._ {_}^ )o {\________//~` ( ) Dr.Derisve L]oser[ Vampire K]unt[OfTheMinute /||~~~~~||\ |_\\_ \\_\_ "' ""' ""'"' From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Fri Jan 31 19:58:02 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 19:58:02 -0800 (PST) Subject: Weak cryptoanarchy Message-ID: <19970201034749.28604.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Dimitri Vindictive K[rap]OTM is a pimply dweeb sitting at a computer chortling at his own imagined cleverness. |\_/| (0_0) Dimitri Vindictive K[rap]OTM ==(Y)== ---(u)---(u)--- From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 31 20:11:45 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:11:45 -0800 (PST) Subject: PGP Source code implementation Message-ID: <199702010411.UAA12376@mailmasher.com> Dainty Virus K[ankersore]OTM wears satin lingerie embroidered with pink swastikas, prancing around for his homosexual, AIDS infected lovers. ,/ \, ((__,-"""-,__)) `--)~ ~(--` .-'( )`-, Dainty Virus K[ankersore]OTM `~~`d\ /b`~~` | | (6___6) `---` From jya at pipeline.com Fri Jan 31 20:25:41 1997 From: jya at pipeline.com (John Young) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:25:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: CAST Message-ID: <199702010425.UAA03405@toad.com> Ted, Thanks for the URL correction on Carlisle Adam's CAST paper. I see that the Entrust site offers the paper in Word and Postscript formats; for those who may prefer an HTML version see a copy downloaded from the Nortel site at: http://jya.com/cast.html From tytso at MIT.EDU Fri Jan 31 20:26:23 1997 From: tytso at MIT.EDU (Theodore Y. Ts'o) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:26:23 -0800 (PST) Subject: CAST Message-ID: <199702010426.UAA03456@toad.com> Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 12:42:23 -0500 From: John Young For a paper on CAST see: http://www.nortel.com/entprods/entrust/cast.html "Constructing Symmetric Ciphers Using the CAST Design Procedure" That URL didn't work, but the following URL did.... http://www.entrust.com/library.htm Does anyone know what the intellectual property status of CAST is? - Ted From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 31 20:26:33 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:26:33 -0800 (PST) Subject: Key Security Question Message-ID: <199702010426.UAA03477@toad.com> "Z.B." writes: > My computer went into the shop a few days ago, and I was unable to take > my PGP keys off it before it went in. What are the security risks here? > If the repairman chooses to snoop through the files, what would he be > able to do with my key pair? Will I need to revoke the key and make a > new one, or will I be relatively safe since he doesn't have my > passphrase? If the keys were protected with a passphrase, then it's unlikely that someone with access to the disk can use them without the passphrase. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 31 20:26:48 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:26:48 -0800 (PST) Subject: Intelligence Update (fwd) In-Reply-To: <199701310745.XAA07140@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970131082753.006286c0@popd.ix.netcom.com> At 11:11 PM 1/30/97 -0800, you wrote: >>Note: According to a recently obtained DOJ surveillance training manual: >>"The typical range for the 28 ghz devices is six miles, the typical >>range of the 2.4 ghz is thirty miles, and the typical range for the >>1.7ghz is 44 miles." How sure are you about the quality of your sources here? I'd expect 1.7ghz and above equipment to require line of sight, and even a range of six miles seems really high for a very low power device - getting that as "typical" seems pretty unlikely. Could all of these figures have been 6, 30, and 44 _meters_ instead? :-) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From erehwon at c2.net Fri Jan 31 20:26:59 1997 From: erehwon at c2.net (William Knowles) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:26:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: PCS Encryption? Message-ID: <199702010426.UAA03503@toad.com> In light of recent events with the Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich having his cellular phone call recorded and given to the Democrats I went out and bought a Primeco digital phone which uses CDMA technology to scramble the calls and makes passive listening next to impossible. (Primeco is a PCS phone) I have been having one helluva a time trying to find more information on the encryption used with Primeco, I have spoken to customer service twice & the local rep told me that the the Chicago FBI asked Primeco to shut off a phone this week because they can't listen in on what is been said, To which the the Primceco guys reply, If the feds can't listen in then I shouldn't be worried. This only tells me that the Chicago FBI doesn't have the technology in town for now to listen in. Excuse me if this posting is a little off topic, But I have nearly looked everywhere on the WWW to no avail. Thanks in advance! William Knowles erehwon at c2.net -- William Knowles PGP mail welcome & prefered / KeyID 1024/2C34BCF9 PGP Fingerprint 55 0C 78 3C C9 C4 44 DE 5A 3C B4 60 9C 00 FB BD Finger for public key -- WW III is a guerilla information war, with no divison between military & civilian participation -- Marshall McLuhan From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 31 20:52:22 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:52:22 -0800 (PST) Subject: [FLAME] Making OCR'ed code transfer easier Message-ID: <199702010452.UAA22634@mailmasher.com> Dimmy Vulis K[ock]OfTheMinute prefers to have sex with little kids because his own penis is like that of a three-year-old. o_o ( ) Dimmy Vulis K[ock]OfTheMinute ( | | ) ' " " ` From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 31 20:53:14 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:53:14 -0800 (PST) Subject: [PGP] Libel/slander Message-ID: <199702010453.UAA22905@mailmasher.com> Drunkard Vilus will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking his own daughter's prepubescent body. (~\/~) /~'\ /`~\ _ _ `\ /'( ` ) ( `\/' ) `' `\ /' `\ /' Drunkard Vilus `\ /' `\/' ' From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 31 20:53:28 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:53:28 -0800 (PST) Subject: Liberty, lack of Message-ID: <199702010453.UAA23004@mailmasher.com> Debauchery L[atex] Vaginal does NOT eat pussy. He only eats asshole if it's got a big dick up in front. Whoever calls him bisexual is a fucking liar. He likes to suck cocks in front of an audience. /"\ |\./| | | | | |>*<| | | /'\| |/'\ /'\| | | | | %%%%% | |\ | | | | | \ | * * * * |> > Debauchery L[atex] Vaginal | / | / | / \ | |--/'''\--| | |--+= | | |--\.../--| From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Fri Jan 31 20:58:13 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:58:13 -0800 (PST) Subject: [URGENT] PGP Signatures Message-ID: <19970201044740.30069.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> When Dopefiend L[owdown] Vulis K[unt] Of The Moment's mother gave birth to him after fucking with a bunch of sailors, she didn't know who the father was but decided to tell him that he was a Russian as the Russian sailor was the one who satisfied her the most. ^ ^ (o o) Dopefiend L[owdown] Vulis K[unt] Of The Moment ( ) \___/ !_! From nobody at squirrel.owl.de Fri Jan 31 20:58:26 1997 From: nobody at squirrel.owl.de (Secret Squirrel) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 20:58:26 -0800 (PST) Subject: Reputations Message-ID: <19970201044950.30649.qmail@squirrel.owl.de> Dr.Dumbbell Volcano K>retinretin Dolt Vulis K[ancer] Of The Moment has been fired for stealing office supplies. ,/ \, ((__,-"""-,__)) `--)~ ~(--` .-'( )`-, Dolt Vulis K[ancer] Of The Moment `~~`d\ /b`~~` | | (6___6) `---` From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Fri Jan 31 21:18:18 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Rob) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 21:18:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Secret" Postal Device stolen Message-ID: <199702010540.AAA06359@unix.asb.com> On 31 Jan 1997 15:26:16 -0500, Jim Ray wrote: >from http://www.herald.com/dade/digdocs/021949.htm >Postal Service offers $25,000 reward for stolen . . . something >By ARNOLD MARKOWITZ Herald Staff Writer > U.S. mail carriers carry more than just the U.S. mail. >They carry something else so secret that nobody outside the >Postal Service knows about it -- except four crooks who steal >them from letter carriers on the streets of Miami. There's a >$25,000 reward for tips producing capture and conviction. - Nicaraguan cocaine shipments bound for Los Angeles - Coded messages from the grays - L.Ron Hoover's posthumous writings on appliantology From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Fri Jan 31 21:22:49 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Rob) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 21:22:49 -0800 (PST) Subject: It can be disabled (was Re: PGPMail Log File) Message-ID: <199702010545.AAA06450@unix.asb.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 31 Jan 1997 09:27:45 -0500, you wrote: >At 02:22 AM 1/31/97 +0000, "Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl'" >< WlkngOwl at unix.asb.comwrote: >> Is there a way to disable the \WINDOWS\PGPW_32.LOG? >> In subtle ways it's a security hole if left to accumulate over time, >> since it keeps records of which keys you encrypted messages to. >This is a damn good question. I do NOT have the "write to a log file" > option slected in the misc. tab and it STILL writes a log file. How DO >we disable this? It's disabled, with the exception of keeping when it was last run. Technically a 'security hole' but so minor I can live with it. Maybe your version (I'm using beta 11) has a problem, but mine's fine. I was just careless and didn't look closely (not something one should do with crypto...) Rob -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAgUBMvLTBQTNlSxdPy6ZAQEe4Qf7B1tIyBSZvdtg48lSZAnr4IOh9NbbrgvK RSoGF8UVGnfQWgItsiYIkA82WAqxBBMQaJuHBolkm8PTh7eb/Q3dd4Wz9BZdMp/g +aCRIM2MzfX2+SagyTw4r7L98XozfcUkhnSKcmJQDtrrq04Rlglt5Muf96jrW++p ltp4gXh4nawx75GZlGIS2XB223g5Rd9RSXAGER0gV1BtZKYt8uGkzeGL0OnsZnr+ VUgNVmXX2jeCn0essUX5WcKlSK2vATkoqv3UR1deEbP0Xdt/PTwjS/GZHrvnP5B1 zfOn7iV0CGZYXWpQAGO58HtW16vqC8wZ6lb5N7tdbBRcGX0B/cHc8A== =49OA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 31 21:27:18 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 21:27:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: Intelligence Update (fwd) Message-ID: <199702010527.VAA05255@toad.com> At 11:11 PM 1/30/97 -0800, you wrote: >>Note: According to a recently obtained DOJ surveillance training manual: >>"The typical range for the 28 ghz devices is six miles, the typical >>range of the 2.4 ghz is thirty miles, and the typical range for the >>1.7ghz is 44 miles." How sure are you about the quality of your sources here? I'd expect 1.7ghz and above equipment to require line of sight, and even a range of six miles seems really high for a very low power device - getting that as "typical" seems pretty unlikely. Could all of these figures have been 6, 30, and 44 _meters_ instead? :-) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 31 21:32:06 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 21:32:06 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list In-Reply-To: <199701301837.KAA10125@mail.pacifier.com> Message-ID: <32F2D4FF.3A84@gte.net> jim bell wrote: > At 09:05 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: > >I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the > >virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get > >out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those > >holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to provide > >something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, given > >advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter aggression and > >the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, well, the rest of > >us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better off when we do. > Your comparison with the fictional Gort, in the movie "The day the earth > stood still" is of course apt. It was only after I'd written most of the > essay that I realized that an AP-type system would function much as Gort did. There are some things that just go off in my mind like a light bulb coming on, and the realization that the system would take care of itself was one of those things. > Occasionally we (CP) see a spoof where somebody claims to have developed a > software program to "replace the judicial system" or something like that. > Well, the problem with such a claim (aside from the obvious and enormous > AI-type difficulties) is that the current system contains numerous biases. > Writing a program to replace the legal system would presumably require that > these biases be measured (and admitted-to!) and implemented into a > well-defined system. There is also a great deal of disinformation in the system, which leads to a misperception on the public's part about just what those biases might be. Examples that come to mind are the OKC bombing and the OJ murders. In both cases, grand juries composed of middle class people (all or almost all White in the Simpson case) would not indict based on the evidence they were given, and so they were dissolved and an excuse was made up to cover someone's butt. Now some of the fallout is blowing in in the form of revelations about the FBI crime lab. > What we'd discover is that the current system only barely resembles the > guarantees in the US Constitution. At that point, there would be an argument > between those who will insist that the Constitution be followed, and those > who believe that the current de-facto system, however biased, be maintained > as-is. I don't see any reason why we can't develop programs to do certain levels of preliminary analysis in these cases, much like the programs which have been around for years on PC's, i.e., Mind Prober, Decision Analyst, and so on. I gotta believe that teams of people who prepare these cases are using this stuff anyway, albeit discretely. If it's brought out into the open, and the public can look at case facts that have been processed thru multiple software sites, it would have to be a helluva lot better than Joe Schmucko's byline in the L.A. Times, for example. From dlv at bwalk.dm.com Fri Jan 31 22:10:16 1997 From: dlv at bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 22:10:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: UNSCRIBE In-Reply-To: <199702010155.RAA29605@toad.com> Message-ID: Toto writes: > XaViUs at pe.net wrote: > > > > UNSCRIBE > > Your message has been received by the CypherPunks list, and we will > shortly be sending a rabbi and a surgeon to UNSCRIBE you. > In the meantime, please try to keep your foreskin cleansed and > hygenic, in order to prevent infection. Toto, The guy who actually cuts off the foreskin is called "mohel", not rabbi. Once there was a very old mohel whose hands were shaky. He wanted to buy an insurance policy in case he cut off too much. His insurance broker shopped around and said: "I found this great insurance policy, but there's good news and bad news. Good news is, you get a million dollar policy for only 20 bucks a year. Bad news is, there's a two inch deductible." ObModeratorComment: please don't buy Stronghold or any other product from C2. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 31 22:12:25 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 22:12:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: David E. Smith / Known Flamer In-Reply-To: <199701310211.SAA01422@toad.com> Message-ID: <32F2DE81.A71@gte.net> Toto wrote: > David E. Smith wrote: > > My understanding was that the moderator is supposed to ONLY > > filter out ads and utterly-content-free messages. > That seems to be a very common misunderstanding--one which will > remain without question on the censored list, since they have > chosen to remain behind the ElectroMagnetic Curtain. You'll recall that Sandfort (as Logos) ranted without letup about decorum, decorum, ... ad nauseam, which, now that I look back on it, is a *very* handy tool for controlling the list. Logic does not interfere with decorum, despite the implication of the nym Logos. > > (Mind you, I took the smart out and subbed to cp-unedited, > > so I'm in no place to judge.) > You're in a far better place to judge than those who have > chosen to remain spoon-fed their world-view. I just hope your judgement isn't skewed when you don't get some of the mail, i.e., when the pony breaks down and can't run for awhile. > > Aha, a good point to be brought up: Sandy, are you autofiltering > > anyone based on user name, or on certain keywords? Seems to > > defeat the purpose of having a _human_ moderator. > You realize, of course, that your question is moot, since this > post of yours was already thrown in the crapper/flame-list. > It seems that questioning the process is a 'flame'. The List Lord made it clear "In The Beginning" that some posts would probably be irretrievably lost due to unavoidable "mistakes". Think "FBI Crime Lab". You get the picture. From ichudov at algebra.com Fri Jan 31 22:21:30 1997 From: ichudov at algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 22:21:30 -0800 (PST) Subject: David E. Smith / Known Flamer In-Reply-To: <32F2DE81.A71@gte.net> Message-ID: <199702010618.AAA08230@manifold.algebra.com> Dale Thorn wrote: > > The List Lord made it clear "In The Beginning" that some posts would > probably be irretrievably lost due to unavoidable "mistakes". > Think "FBI Crime Lab". You get the picture. > Remember, Dale, posts really do get lost due to unavoidable mistakes. Shit happens, and it certainly happens with all moderators whom I know. - Igor. From nobody at huge.cajones.com Fri Jan 31 22:39:21 1997 From: nobody at huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 22:39:21 -0800 (PST) Subject: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Secure checksums Message-ID: <199702010639.WAA10088@mailmasher.com> In a jerk-off competition Tim May finishes second, third and fifth. ,/ \, ((__,-,,,-,__)), `--)~ ~(--` .-'( )`-, `~~`d\ /b`~~` | | (6___6) `---` From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 31 22:42:09 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 22:42:09 -0800 (PST) Subject: David E. Smith / Known Flamer In-Reply-To: <199702010618.AAA08230@manifold.algebra.com> Message-ID: <32F2E564.5611@gte.net> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > The List Lord made it clear "In The Beginning" that some posts would > > probably be irretrievably lost due to unavoidable "mistakes". > > Think "FBI Crime Lab". You get the picture. > Remember, Dale, posts really do get lost due to unavoidable mistakes. > Shit happens, and it certainly happens with all moderators whom I know. I was *not* speaking of posts headed for the "moderated" list, I was speaking of posts headed for the un-"moderated" list that would get lost due to "mistakes". Now I can understand how a censor could flub something going to a moderated list, but why the un-moderated list? From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 31 22:58:42 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 22:58:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags In-Reply-To: <199701311357.FAA14264@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970131222916.0064e230@popd.ix.netcom.com> Sure, it's available. For most governments, though, even DES is enough to threaten their dominance, though 40-bit is pretty much a joke. The main impact of US 56-bit products would be that they make it easier to get crypto built in to unavoidable Microsoft applications*, [*If the Borg had any sense....] as opposed to the totally useless crypto in MS Word, etc.; users can obviously also use free-world crypto software also, but you usually have to explicitly go obtain and install that. With Netscape, even wimpy 40-bit crypto is a threat, since almost no country will block you from using it, and since 128-bit products are readily available overseas, though you also have to do nonzero work to get them. Since the two products are interoperable (at the wimpy level), it's easy to upgrade, and the 40-bit version also works with SafePassage. At 11:50 AM 1/31/97 -0800, sameer wrote: >> > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export allowance. >> > They said it was going to undermine their national security." >> >> On this point, the other governments are correct. >> It really _is_ tougher to maintain a nation-state when your >> former subjects can have private conversations with each other >> and with other governments' former subjects...... >> And even 56 bits is a start. > > Full strength crypto is already available worldwide. It makes >not one iota of difference. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 31 22:58:57 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 22:58:57 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fwd:[Yet another -onics..] [NOISE][POTENTIAL HUMOR] In-Reply-To: <199702010202.SAA29766@toad.com> Message-ID: <3.0.1.32.19970131225212.0064dc00@popd.ix.netcom.com> We have to stop this tragic corruption of the English language, to protect our childen's delicate ears and aesthetic sensibilities. Why, a mere few months ago, I encountered a child of no more than 10 singing along to "You Can Build A Mainframe From The Things You Find At Home" - corrupted by the adults in his environment into praising equipment that should never have been built by mankind and should be allowed to lie still, undiscovered for the rest of history. And this poor child knew all the words. Shocking. Our public schools have clearly failed to educate him correctly. >> ***************************** >> "GEEKONICS" IS JUST A BEGINNING >> by John Woestendiek >> Philadelphia Inquirer >> Wed., January 8, 1997 >> ***************************** ..... >> Controversial and widely misunderstood, the Geekonics movement was >> spawned in California's Silicon Valley, where many children have grown >> up in households headed by computer technicians, programmers, engineers >> and scientists who have lost ability to speak plain English and have >> inadvertently passed on their high-tech vernacular to their children. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 23:17:27 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:17:27 -0800 (PST) Subject: Intelligence Update (fwd) Message-ID: >At 11:11 PM 1/30/97 -0800, you wrote: >>>Note: According to a recently obtained DOJ surveillance training manual: >>>"The typical range for the 28 ghz devices is six miles, the typical >>>range of the 2.4 ghz is thirty miles, and the typical range for the >>>1.7ghz is 44 miles." > >How sure are you about the quality of your sources here? >I'd expect 1.7ghz and above equipment to require line of sight, >and even a range of six miles seems really high for a very low power >device - getting that as "typical" seems pretty unlikely. >Could all of these figures have been 6, 30, and 44 _meters_ instead? :-) While these claims may be for links under near ideal conditions, Hams routinely make very long distace links at 900, 2400 and 5700 MHz during contests using less than 1 Watt. Also, our deep space probes operate many links to earth in this spectral region using low power transmitters. Of course they have 200 ft. antennas (e.g., Goldstone) at the receiveing end with cryogenic reciever front-ends. Links do become increasingly line-of-sight above 1 GHz this is radio not visual (i.e., shots through trees. etc.) and there is increasingly the ability to utilize reflection ("billboard" shots) advantageously. As frequency increases path loss also increases. Fortunately, as frequencies increase antenna gain also increases. In fact, by holding antenna dimensions constant (for an arbitrary antenna design, e.g., parabolic) gain increases with frequency in direct proportion to increasing path loss, thus cancelling it out. There are other factors, such as required S/N or bit error rate for the particular application, reciever sensitivity and noise floor, and background noise levels, which directly affect link margins (transmit power - path loss - reciever sensitivity; all in dB) and thus viability of a link. Above 1 GHz terrestrial noise, including that produced by man, declines rapidly at the moment. However, as more UHF communication devices and microprocessors operating at 100s of MHz proliferate that noise floor is sure to rise. --Steve From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Fri Jan 31 23:40:42 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Rob) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:40:42 -0800 (PST) Subject: "Secret" Postal Device stolen Message-ID: <199702010740.XAA08867@toad.com> On 31 Jan 1997 15:26:16 -0500, Jim Ray wrote: >from http://www.herald.com/dade/digdocs/021949.htm >Postal Service offers $25,000 reward for stolen . . . something >By ARNOLD MARKOWITZ Herald Staff Writer > U.S. mail carriers carry more than just the U.S. mail. >They carry something else so secret that nobody outside the >Postal Service knows about it -- except four crooks who steal >them from letter carriers on the streets of Miami. There's a >$25,000 reward for tips producing capture and conviction. - Nicaraguan cocaine shipments bound for Los Angeles - Coded messages from the grays - L.Ron Hoover's posthumous writings on appliantology From wlkngowl at unix.asb.com Fri Jan 31 23:41:10 1997 From: wlkngowl at unix.asb.com (Rob) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:41:10 -0800 (PST) Subject: It can be disabled (was Re: PGPMail Log File) Message-ID: <199702010741.XAA08937@toad.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 31 Jan 1997 09:27:45 -0500, you wrote: >At 02:22 AM 1/31/97 +0000, "Robert Rothenburg 'Walking-Owl'" >< WlkngOwl at unix.asb.comwrote: >> Is there a way to disable the \WINDOWS\PGPW_32.LOG? >> In subtle ways it's a security hole if left to accumulate over time, >> since it keeps records of which keys you encrypted messages to. >This is a damn good question. I do NOT have the "write to a log file" > option slected in the misc. tab and it STILL writes a log file. How DO >we disable this? It's disabled, with the exception of keeping when it was last run. Technically a 'security hole' but so minor I can live with it. Maybe your version (I'm using beta 11) has a problem, but mine's fine. I was just careless and didn't look closely (not something one should do with crypto...) Rob -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAgUBMvLTBQTNlSxdPy6ZAQEe4Qf7B1tIyBSZvdtg48lSZAnr4IOh9NbbrgvK RSoGF8UVGnfQWgItsiYIkA82WAqxBBMQaJuHBolkm8PTh7eb/Q3dd4Wz9BZdMp/g +aCRIM2MzfX2+SagyTw4r7L98XozfcUkhnSKcmJQDtrrq04Rlglt5Muf96jrW++p ltp4gXh4nawx75GZlGIS2XB223g5Rd9RSXAGER0gV1BtZKYt8uGkzeGL0OnsZnr+ VUgNVmXX2jeCn0essUX5WcKlSK2vATkoqv3UR1deEbP0Xdt/PTwjS/GZHrvnP5B1 zfOn7iV0CGZYXWpQAGO58HtW16vqC8wZ6lb5N7tdbBRcGX0B/cHc8A== =49OA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----- "The word to kill ain't dirty | Robert Rothenburg (WlkngOwl at unix.asb.com) I used it in the last line | http://www.asb.com/usr/wlkngowl/ but use a short word for lovin' | Se habla PGP: Reply with the subject and dad you wind up doin' time." | 'send pgp-key' for my public key. From dthorn at gte.net Fri Jan 31 23:47:16 1997 From: dthorn at gte.net (Dale Thorn) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:47:16 -0800 (PST) Subject: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list Message-ID: <199702010747.XAA09284@toad.com> jim bell wrote: > At 09:05 PM 1/28/97 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: > >I dare say that the downside of this is much less pleasant than the > >virtual anarchy (in the bad sense) we suffer now. If the police get > >out of control, A.P. will arrive just in time to plug a few of those > >holes, so to speak. Ideally, future robotics should be able to provide > >something like Gort (sp?) to take the place of human officers, given > >advances in the kind of pattern matching needed to deter aggression and > >the like. Those who don't make it past the robots, well, the rest of > >us can learn to behave, and we'll be much better off when we do. > Your comparison with the fictional Gort, in the movie "The day the earth > stood still" is of course apt. It was only after I'd written most of the > essay that I realized that an AP-type system would function much as Gort did. There are some things that just go off in my mind like a light bulb coming on, and the realization that the system would take care of itself was one of those things. > Occasionally we (CP) see a spoof where somebody claims to have developed a > software program to "replace the judicial system" or something like that. > Well, the problem with such a claim (aside from the obvious and enormous > AI-type difficulties) is that the current system contains numerous biases. > Writing a program to replace the legal system would presumably require that > these biases be measured (and admitted-to!) and implemented into a > well-defined system. There is also a great deal of disinformation in the system, which leads to a misperception on the public's part about just what those biases might be. Examples that come to mind are the OKC bombing and the OJ murders. In both cases, grand juries composed of middle class people (all or almost all White in the Simpson case) would not indict based on the evidence they were given, and so they were dissolved and an excuse was made up to cover someone's butt. Now some of the fallout is blowing in in the form of revelations about the FBI crime lab. > What we'd discover is that the current system only barely resembles the > guarantees in the US Constitution. At that point, there would be an argument > between those who will insist that the Constitution be followed, and those > who believe that the current de-facto system, however biased, be maintained > as-is. I don't see any reason why we can't develop programs to do certain levels of preliminary analysis in these cases, much like the programs which have been around for years on PC's, i.e., Mind Prober, Decision Analyst, and so on. I gotta believe that teams of people who prepare these cases are using this stuff anyway, albeit discretely. If it's brought out into the open, and the public can look at case facts that have been processed thru multiple software sites, it would have to be a helluva lot better than Joe Schmucko's byline in the L.A. Times, for example. From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 31 23:55:41 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:55:41 -0800 (PST) Subject: Fwd:[Yet another -onics..] [NOISE][POTENTIAL HUMOR] Message-ID: <199702010755.XAA09517@toad.com> We have to stop this tragic corruption of the English language, to protect our childen's delicate ears and aesthetic sensibilities. Why, a mere few months ago, I encountered a child of no more than 10 singing along to "You Can Build A Mainframe From The Things You Find At Home" - corrupted by the adults in his environment into praising equipment that should never have been built by mankind and should be allowed to lie still, undiscovered for the rest of history. And this poor child knew all the words. Shocking. Our public schools have clearly failed to educate him correctly. >> ***************************** >> "GEEKONICS" IS JUST A BEGINNING >> by John Woestendiek >> Philadelphia Inquirer >> Wed., January 8, 1997 >> ***************************** ..... >> Controversial and widely misunderstood, the Geekonics movement was >> spawned in California's Silicon Valley, where many children have grown >> up in households headed by computer technicians, programmers, engineers >> and scientists who have lost ability to speak plain English and have >> inadvertently passed on their high-tech vernacular to their children. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From stewarts at ix.netcom.com Fri Jan 31 23:55:43 1997 From: stewarts at ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:55:43 -0800 (PST) Subject: Cats Out of Bags Message-ID: <199702010755.XAA09518@toad.com> Sure, it's available. For most governments, though, even DES is enough to threaten their dominance, though 40-bit is pretty much a joke. The main impact of US 56-bit products would be that they make it easier to get crypto built in to unavoidable Microsoft applications*, [*If the Borg had any sense....] as opposed to the totally useless crypto in MS Word, etc.; users can obviously also use free-world crypto software also, but you usually have to explicitly go obtain and install that. With Netscape, even wimpy 40-bit crypto is a threat, since almost no country will block you from using it, and since 128-bit products are readily available overseas, though you also have to do nonzero work to get them. Since the two products are interoperable (at the wimpy level), it's easy to upgrade, and the 40-bit version also works with SafePassage. At 11:50 AM 1/31/97 -0800, sameer wrote: >> > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export allowance. >> > They said it was going to undermine their national security." >> >> On this point, the other governments are correct. >> It really _is_ tougher to maintain a nation-state when your >> former subjects can have private conversations with each other >> and with other governments' former subjects...... >> And even 56 bits is a start. > > Full strength crypto is already available worldwide. It makes >not one iota of difference. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts at ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.) From azur at netcom.com Fri Jan 31 23:55:52 1997 From: azur at netcom.com (Steve Schear) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:55:52 -0800 (PST) Subject: Intelligence Update (fwd) Message-ID: <199702010755.XAA09534@toad.com> >At 11:11 PM 1/30/97 -0800, you wrote: >>>Note: According to a recently obtained DOJ surveillance training manual: >>>"The typical range for the 28 ghz devices is six miles, the typical >>>range of the 2.4 ghz is thirty miles, and the typical range for the >>>1.7ghz is 44 miles." > >How sure are you about the quality of your sources here? >I'd expect 1.7ghz and above equipment to require line of sight, >and even a range of six miles seems really high for a very low power >device - getting that as "typical" seems pretty unlikely. >Could all of these figures have been 6, 30, and 44 _meters_ instead? :-) While these claims may be for links under near ideal conditions, Hams routinely make very long distace links at 900, 2400 and 5700 MHz during contests using less than 1 Watt. Also, our deep space probes operate many links to earth in this spectral region using low power transmitters. Of course they have 200 ft. antennas (e.g., Goldstone) at the receiveing end with cryogenic reciever front-ends. Links do become increasingly line-of-sight above 1 GHz this is radio not visual (i.e., shots through trees. etc.) and there is increasingly the ability to utilize reflection ("billboard" shots) advantageously. As frequency increases path loss also increases. Fortunately, as frequencies increase antenna gain also increases. In fact, by holding antenna dimensions constant (for an arbitrary antenna design, e.g., parabolic) gain increases with frequency in direct proportion to increasing path loss, thus cancelling it out. There are other factors, such as required S/N or bit error rate for the particular application, reciever sensitivity and noise floor, and background noise levels, which directly affect link margins (transmit power - path loss - reciever sensitivity; all in dB) and thus viability of a link. Above 1 GHz terrestrial noise, including that produced by man, declines rapidly at the moment. However, as more UHF communication devices and microprocessors operating at 100s of MHz proliferate that noise floor is sure to rise. --Steve From sandfort at crl.com Fri Jan 31 23:58:39 1997 From: sandfort at crl.com (Sandy Sandfort) Date: Fri, 31 Jan 1997 23:58:39 -0800 (PST) Subject: David E. Smith / Known Flamer In-Reply-To: <32F2E564.5611@gte.net> Message-ID: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Fri, 31 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > I was *not* speaking of posts headed for the "moderated" list, I was > speaking of posts headed for the un-"moderated" list that would get > lost due to "mistakes". > > Now I can understand how a censor could flub something going to a > moderated list, but why the un-moderated list? Apparently, Dale does not understand the how the list is moderated. When someone posts to Cypherpunks, it automatically goes to the unedited list. I am subscribed to the unedited list. When I read the unedited list, I forward each message I see there to either the flames list or the moderated list. I have no control over the unedited list. It goes out to everyone else at the same time it goes out to me. I don't have a clue as to what Dale is talking about. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~